Proof that first rounders aren't that valuable
View Single Post
02-28-2006, 04:55 PM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Originally Posted by
you'll see that x% of the first rounders become serviceable NHLers. Then x-y% of the second rounders. Then x-y-z% for the third rounders. And so on. It's obvious that first rounders have a better chance of being NHL superstars, or even NHLers; I think there are facts that would support that. Heck, out of the Rangers' 18 skaters, 1/3 are first round picks (interestingly enough, there are a fair amount of third rounders (about 5 or six, with a couple seconds, a fourth, an 8th and a couple non-drafted guys).
That's true. I am not suggesting trading a first rounder for a third rounder.
However, I wouldn't mind if the Rangers deal their first for a pair of second rounders and another mid-round (3-6 round) pick (assuming they don't use it for a veteran to help their playoff run). That would give them 3 stabs at it, and second round still has a lot of good players (Dubi and this year's pair are good prospects). Norstrom, Weight, McCabe, etc were all drafted in the second round. True, second rounders are usually even worse than first rounders. But if you can get several picks, and use them on highly skilled, offensive players who may lack size (Savard), speed (Robitaille when he was drafted), defense (McCabe), have a bad shot and cannot finish the opportunities they create (believe it or not, but Prucha was always good at getting in position to score, but had a bad shot, so he wasted a lot of opportunities. Kudos to him for working hard and making his deficiency into his strength), or are simply unknown (Chara).
These players probably also won't make it, but if you get 3-4 of them, some of them will. We started the season with 3 skilled, but risky players. Fed-Fed is now known to be garbage. Hossa is a borderline NHLer. But Prucha is a star. That's what I like to see. Get a few of these players and see who pans out.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Hfbk2006