View Single Post
Old
01-15-2013, 01:24 PM
  #65
Halpysback
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 7,442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IkeaMonkey View Post
Except if Erik Johnson didn't get attacked by a golf cart, he would probably be that player everyone pegged him as.

And with Jones, I personally see all those gifts. The kid has a cannon of a shot and his passing is even better. The huge knack on him is his weight and lack of physicality.
He'd be better physically no doubt but you can't fix stupid. Whether his physical gifts would be so great as to completely nullify his comparatively low hockey IQ is another thing.

As far as Jones, we heard all the same with Hedman and Larsson (and Johnson) being the best D prospect in the last 10 years.

Defensemen experience the most developmental change the most from juniors to majors of any other position. You may be 80% sure of what you're getting with a top 5 picked F but only 60% sure with a top 5 selected D (pulled the numbers out of my *** but you get the idea). A top pick spent on D is effectively less valuable than a top pick spent on a forward because of this uncertainty. You can put together an exceptional defensive core with mid 1st-mid 3rd round picks. Look at where Lidstrom, Chara, Weber, Carlson, Subban were drafted. If you do a skill level to draft status plot for top pairing D you'll see a ton of them selected late. Alzner is great but McDonaugh and Subban can lay claim to being better or at level from that same draft. Only jackpot top D in recent memory was the 2008 draft but that was an outlier.

Only way I spend a top 10 pick on a defenseman is if his hockey sense is completely out of this world, like OEL, Doughty or Pietrangelo. Pass on the Hedmans and Reinharts and Cowens and Hamiltons and get those types later in the 1st/2nd. Pittsburgh has a pretty good first round model except when they went full retard and picked Pouliot 7th overall.


Last edited by Halpysback: 01-15-2013 at 01:29 PM.
Halpysback is offline   Reply With Quote