Thread: Prospect Info: Prospect Index 2012-2013
View Single Post
Old
01-11-2013, 04:06 PM
  #816
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reacher Gilt View Post
Don't know about that, when there are so many why don't we have one? And when they are not valuable why did we get that first for Paul Gaustad?
I don't know why teams make the decisions they do, so I can't answer why the Sabres don't have one or why the Predators were dumb enough to give up a first for Gaustad.
However, there are options on the market every year, whether it's free agency or trade, and they never cost much.

A better question to ask would be how many teams set out to draft their 4C of the future?
I'd guess "not many" would be the answer and it's for a variety of reasons.
Teams just don't covet guys that play 10-12 minutes a night as much as they do ones that play 20 or 30 (or if you're a goalie, the whole game).
If you're counting on a guy to just accept his role and do his job and make a minimal amount of mistakes, which is what you want from your depth guys, you're more likely to get that from a veteran than a kid.
There's always the experience factor that older players bring too (many Cup contenders and winners have their character guys, castaways, and old guys that have had to reinvent their game to keep an NHL job rather than a 20 something doing the job).

Plus, you have to look at a players value just as an asset.
Even if your team is full of talent and you have no need for an additional top six/top four/starter or in the future, those type of prospects still have big value.
Everyone loves a scoring forward, big minute defenseman, or starting goaltender prospect.
The same can't really be said for depth prospects.
I'd much rather have too much talent in an organization rather than not enough.

jfb392 is offline