View Single Post
Old
07-27-2013, 10:11 PM
  #453
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DekeLikeYouMeanIt View Post
This isn't about you and what you defend. This is about the players he quoted. Most of these were drafted to be stars/very high picks. Kopitar's quality of competition was slightly lower than the USHL today. And he was 17-18 when he ripped the junior league so I don't know how the Sedin comment affects this. It's not unusual for good draft-year players to be good in U20 Sweden.
Well, you asked me where I was when he slid. I said I liked him and would have taken him at #5. Kopitar was a young 17 year old. Being a rookie in the U20 he was more comparable to a 16 year old player born in January. Sure some unknown players lit up the U20 in Sweden but not many did it at 16. Granted Kopitar was actually 17 his profile is more similar to a 16 year old player. Like I mentionned about Hurley earlier. Hurley is more comparable to McCarron last year than this year's McCarron.

Even though the U20 in Sweden isn't the CHL, it's still fairly close to the USHL (even back then). Kopitar lit up the league accordingly. McCarron did not. At this point, I consider McCarron a project for that reason. Comparables for McCarron would be players like Lucic, and a host of other players who actually did not develop to become the scoring type. Not players like Staal, Nash, Spezza and so on were all great offensive players already.

Mathletic is online now