View Single Post
09-06-2012, 03:40 PM
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Grace Personified
Mike Farkas's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,316
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by piqued View Post
Thanks for the additional insight.

In R. Smith's defense he's put on a ton of weight since being drafted (over 190 lbs now) and continues to get stronger. He's never going to have Guptill's frame, but I don't think that should be the deciding factor in ranking prospects. Otherwise Larsen would've never been highly ranked for example.

When you say "one trick pony", is that referring to the way he behaves on the ice or just the area of his game his excels at? If you're going to be a one-trick-pony, goal-scoring winger isn't a bad thing to have as your trick, no?

Re: stats, I only brought that up because their situations are very similar and made a point of emphasizing what happened at the same age. Obviously A. Smith putting up huge numbers as an older player in a weaker league isn't the same thing.
Just quick hits here to follow-up

- He has put on weight, and he still looks small on the ice and still can get knocked around. Not the worst thing in the world, but head-to-head with Guptill, the latter has a significant advantage and skill-wise, I think Guptill is/will be better on that front as well.

- I mean, a goal-scoring winger is a valuable trick to be sure. However, Guptill can score goals in the same way as Reilly does and then there's a plus. Guptill can score goals in dirty areas, he goes to the front of the net and can swing with the big trees down there, he can work off the cycle and he's probably better one on one, so he can make more room for himself. Smith might be better finding open spots in the defense, but I'll take Guptill's skillset overall. Which isn't a knock on Reilly.

- Re: Stats. Your point was well taken, I'm not a huge stats guy was where I was going with it. You do a great job keeping tabs on the prospects here on the stats tables that you make, anyone can go by that and take a stab at who's good and who's not. In retrospect, the need to bring up Austin wasn't necessary really on my part - especially without elaboration. It's not part of the discussion at hand.

Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote