View Single Post
06-10-2012, 04:45 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 10,647
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by BUX7PHX View Post
My argument is that in his draft year, Gormley was viewed as a top 10 pick and slid to us. In Yandle's case, he was passed up 100+ times by organizations. This included having mofre impressive point totals than Gormley. So what gives? The answeris probably as simple as while talent level is probably comparable, scouts felt there were more holes in Yandle's game at the time. Whether that is an aptitude or attitude or both thing, the development curve for Gormley is likely to produce a better player for the future. Yandle has worked on addressing some of the deficiencies in his game, but that doesn't mean he is immune to those..
This is a strange tangent to your argument. Yandle was in prep school hockey hence his lack of exposure (as opposed to Gormley's publicity). He went to the Q immediately following the draft and dominated the league from the start, winning Defenseman of the Year.

So based on a draft that happened 7 years ago you'd consider Yandle to be deficient and yet he accomplished so much immediately afterwards. Nothing about that analysis makes sense.

Gwyddbwyll is offline   Reply With Quote