View Single Post
10-01-2012, 01:27 PM
Tim Wallach
Registered User
Tim Wallach's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,689
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
Gibson is just more developed than Campbell is at the same age, Gibson is consistent, always good, Campbell was more raw, a lot more inconsistent, but always had more than a handful of games where he stood up and looked like an amazing goalie.

Campbell's raw talent is better, more projectibility. It's not about who's better now, it's about who's better when they're both starting goalies. In baseball, a 22 year old college prospect is almost always the better player than the 17 highschool phenom when drafted, but it's about what they do when they've reached the big leagues. Gibson is a great prospect but Campbell is always talked about that projectibility.

And for the Windsor fan who seems to insinuate because Ellis got 100 points he's better than Murphy, this is a prime example of way you don't scout with stats.
The point is valid about guys who are more polished and have had better coaching and development up until this point. However, I think "projectibility" is just a complicated way of saying that someone somewhere saw something in Campbell that they figured could be honed into the realm of the elite. But if Gibson's talent is already proven to be elite without nearly as much honing needed, isn't that a safer bet to succeed?

Projecting goalies at 18 years old has always been a crap shoot. Lots of guys who were considered raw but with lots of upside ended up flopping big time. I hope Campbell does develop and does end up a top-end guy, but there's certainly no proof or strong reasoning at this point to suggest he'll be better than Gibson.

Tim Wallach is offline