View Single Post
12-30-2012, 11:13 PM
Le Golie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,903
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by TheBunk View Post
Actually, garret, my point was it took me all of ten minutes to find 26 players who played three or more years at a post-secondary institution. And yes, I know not all of them finished but many did. The point is a lot of players will follow through on their eduction and my guess is Trouba will.

By down-playing many members of that list you are not doing them any justice at all. Just because someone was a late rounder doesn't make them a top prospect. I can remember just after the likes of Zetterberg and Lundqist got drafted (and both late) and were on the radar for high end talent within the year. What you are arguing is the learning arch for each player compared to Trouba's projection. What I am arguing is that there are many players do opt to stay in post-secondary to secure an end-game after hockey.
As garret9 said, my entire point was that it is almost unheard of amongst top prospects. I know there are a ton of players in the NHL today who spent 3+ years in college, almost all of them were not good enough to play at a higher level until their senior year or after graduating. There is nothing wrong with late bloomers who probably work a lot harder than more gifted players to battle their way into the NHL, but they are not who I'm talking about and they are apples and oranges versus to guys like Trouba, E. Johnson, J. Johnson, Toews, Turris, Van Reimsdyk, Kessel, etc., etc., etc.

Last edited by Le Golie: 12-30-2012 at 11:19 PM.
Le Golie is offline