View Single Post
07-11-2013, 02:03 PM
Checked out
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hiking
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,856
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Cerebral View Post
He wasn't really a "strange" pick - he actually fell to us in the draft and was projected as a top 5 by many scouting services.

However, the question mark with Paajarvi was always the toolbox. He had/has a lot of raw skills but he's never been able to find a way to successfully use them.

Even in his rookie season where he played quite well at times, I remember questioning his top-end offensive upside. He just doesn't look like a comfortable offensive player when he crosses the blueline and I don't know if he ever will. He might end up being a 40 point player simply based on the tools he possesses but I honestly think Stalberg is his top-end upside.

When I say strange pick I don't mean we went out of the accepted box to make that pick. MPS had been prioritized on playing well in international high profile games. I'm referring to the latter. That a kid that looked good in those games never looked anything like it outside of those games. This kind of pick for some reasons seduces scouts. Maybe they figure the kid had more of a big game big competition potential.

What I get surprised at is how many scouts can make so much about a very limited set of games and ignore the players career otherwise.

There is something in Paajarvi, in the way he scores, that suggests he's a premium talent so if you look at that the player appears sublime at times. The big issue is Paajarvi has rarely gained any confidence in his lunchbucket.

Replacement* is offline   Reply With Quote