HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The OFFICIAL 2011 NHL Draft Thread (7PM 6/24 on VS)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-13-2011, 05:02 PM
  #76
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Like I said before, the odds of a first rounder drafted outside the top 8-12 picks becoming a second liner are only 10-20%. And most of these 10-20% were high-risk, high-reward guys like Hossa, rather than safe, all-around players like Malhotra.

If we are to pull a first or second liner, we have to go high-risk, high-reward. That high-risk is not just words. It has to be something: size, injury, very raw ability (Jessiman, Kreider), attitude problems, horrible defense.

There has to be a reason, a real reason why a true talent would slip to #15 in a weak draft.

Nobody wants someone with a distinct flaw, but it's the only realistic way we get an impact player. Like I said, there has to be a reason a kid slips to #15 in a weak draft and that reason has to be either his talent or his risk level. I prefer high risk to limited talent.

Beacon is offline  
Old
06-13-2011, 05:35 PM
  #77
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
I already posted here the numbers from 1990 to 2003. Let me add 2004 and 2005, even though it may be too early to judge.

2004 Draft:

Outside of legendary picks Ovechkin and Malkin who went 1 and 2, there were 15 forwards drafted. Only 4 of them scored 150+ points so far, and Wolski was one of them, and he's not exactly a star.

140 points in the 7 years since the draft comes out to, let's say, 3 years to make the NHL, 20 points in the rookie season and then 40 points for 3 more years. Not exactly superstar numbers there. Wolski has 246 points, so that gives you some understanding of what kind of a powerhouse someone with just 140 points is.

And yet, outside of the top 2 picks, the odds of a forward hitting 140 over the last 7 years are only 26.7%.

Interestingly, Enver Lisin scored 42 points in his NHL career before being run out. That is better than 40% of first round forwards drafted after Ovechkin and Malkin.

Outside of those two who were #1 and #2, only Zajac and maybe Stafford could be regarded as impact forwards.

=============================

2005 Draft:

The first two picks were Cindy Crosby and Bobby Ryan. After them, 14 forwards were drafted.

Only one guy scored 160 points or more. Four more players scored 100+ points. Only 2 players ever average at least 0.6 ppg in any season. Legitimately only Kopitar can be seen as an impact player among the forwards.

=============================

So out of the 29 forwards drafted in 2004 and 2005 outside of the top-2 in each draft, only 2 or 3 became impact players. The odds are thus 10.3% or 6.9%.

Why is this important? Because you should not buy into the hype. You should know that those "nice, big, all-around guys" have an overwhelming chance of being role players.

The only way to draft a star at #15 in a weak draft is to take a risk on someone whose obvious flaw - and not raw talent - caused him to drop. Otherwise, you are almost definitely drafting another Prust.


Last edited by Beacon: 06-13-2011 at 05:54 PM.
Beacon is offline  
Old
06-13-2011, 05:46 PM
  #78
White Plains Batman
Faceoffs? Faceoffs!!
 
White Plains Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post

The only way to draft a star at #15 in a weak draft is to take a risk on someone whose obvious flaw - and not raw talent - caused him to drop. Otherwise, you are almost definitely drafting another Prust.

Sounds like Puempel to me.

White Plains Batman is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 10:07 AM
  #79
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Plains Batman View Post
Sounds like Puempel to me.
Hell yea! ive been rooting to draft this kid @15 for awhile now. He has SCARY offensive skills and potential. Yes he got hurt but hes 18 and will be healthy again. Everyone talks about how his season wasnt as good as his rookie year, but you have to remmember he played about 20+ fewer games than last year and still beat his rookie pts totals. He plays for a HORRIBLE petersborough team and is constantly defended against by the opposing teams top players. I know he is an all offensive player but he is becoming more aggressive in wanting and taking the puck himself rather than waiting for it to come to him. He isnt defensive savvy but he can learn that. what we need is a guy with HIGH offensive potential and he is defiantly it.

If we pass on him, i think well be kicking ourselves in the face a couple of years down the road.

Chalfdiggity3 is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 10:11 AM
  #80
DrSutton*
Given Up
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,093
vCash: 500
Good article on NHL.com about Puempel. Says that he met with 28 teams, most asked about the hip but nobody gave him a hard time about it or told him it was no big deal.

DrSutton* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 10:30 AM
  #81
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,865
vCash: 500
Scheifele. Armia. Miller. McNeill.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 10:38 AM
  #82
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
Hell yea! ive been rooting to draft this kid @15 for awhile now. He has SCARY offensive skills and potential. Yes he got hurt but hes 18 and will be healthy again. Everyone talks about how his season wasnt as good as his rookie year, but you have to remmember he played about 20+ fewer games than last year and still beat his rookie pts totals. He plays for a HORRIBLE petersborough team and is constantly defended against by the opposing teams top players. I know he is an all offensive player but he is becoming more aggressive in wanting and taking the puck himself rather than waiting for it to come to him. He isnt defensive savvy but he can learn that. what we need is a guy with HIGH offensive potential and he is defiantly it.

If we pass on him, i think well be kicking ourselves in the face a couple of years down the road.

Agreed. He could be a total bust, but what would be our other option, to draft a hyped up player who in reality will almost definitely be a bottom-6 scrub?

If we drafted MP or RG and he goes bust, and we realize we could have drafted another Malhotra, nobody will be terribly upset.

But if we draft another Malhotra, and MP or RG becomes an All Star, and we will still continue to lack scoring (maybe even more so because Gabby will be gone by the time 2011 draftees develop), we most definitely will be kicking ourselves.

That said, there are multiple high risk, high reward players available in the second, and if we could turn our #1 into 3-4 second rounders, we would be better off than just selecting MP or RG.

Beacon is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 10:49 AM
  #83
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
Hell yea! ive been rooting to draft this kid @15 for awhile now. He has SCARY offensive skills and potential. Yes he got hurt but hes 18 and will be healthy again. Everyone talks about how his season wasnt as good as his rookie year, but you have to remmember he played about 20+ fewer games than last year and still beat his rookie pts totals. He plays for a HORRIBLE petersborough team and is constantly defended against by the opposing teams top players. I know he is an all offensive player but he is becoming more aggressive in wanting and taking the puck himself rather than waiting for it to come to him. He isnt defensive savvy but he can learn that. what we need is a guy with HIGH offensive potential and he is defiantly it.

If we pass on him, i think well be kicking ourselves in the face a couple of years down the road.
He played 59 games his rookie year, and 55 this year. Not sure how that math works out.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 10:58 AM
  #84
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
He played 59 games his rookie year, and 55 this year. Not sure how that math works out.
Haha true sorry i was just figuring that they played 80 games in their season. Anyone he played 4 less games and still ended up with more pts than he did in his rookie year.

The kid has undeniable offensive talent and since our cupboard is full of prospects and young players who are going to fill up our 2nd-4th line. We need players who have all-star like potential on offense. Puempel has that ability and then some. To put up those type of pts on a team as HORRIBLE as Petersborough and to be constantly game planned against, must mean your something special.

I agree he doesnt have the all around game as most of the players do but then again most of those players will end up being Manny Malholtra's in this league. We need to take a chance on a high end pick.

Ranger i agree with you that we should go high risk/high reward with these picks in this draft but i dont agree with moving out of the 1st round and getting multiple 2nd round picks. There are no players that i see that have the same talent level on offense such as Puempel and Grimaldi that will be around in the 2nd round. Id much rather take my chances with who is available @ 15

Chalfdiggity3 is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:21 AM
  #85
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
Haha true sorry i was just figuring that they played 80 games in their season. Anyone he played 4 less games and still ended up with more pts than he did in his rookie year.

The kid has undeniable offensive talent and since our cupboard is full of prospects and young players who are going to fill up our 2nd-4th line. We need players who have all-star like potential on offense. Puempel has that ability and then some. To put up those type of pts on a team as HORRIBLE as Petersborough and to be constantly game planned against, must mean your something special.

I agree he doesnt have the all around game as most of the players do but then again most of those players will end up being Manny Malholtra's in this league. We need to take a chance on a high end pick.

Ranger i agree with you that we should go high risk/high reward with these picks in this draft but i dont agree with moving out of the 1st round and getting multiple 2nd round picks. There are no players that i see that have the same talent level on offense such as Puempel and Grimaldi that will be around in the 2nd round. Id much rather take my chances with who is available @ 15
I understand he had a hip injury, but he's been known as a guy who doesn't show up every night. That's an issue with me. In addition, where is this Manny Malhotra stuff coming from? Just because a player has a commitment to both sides of the puck doesn't mean he's destined to be a grinder.

I get the gist of what you're saying: Bad team, lots of potential, etc, etc. However, those same points are the exact reasons I'd take Mark Scheifele ahead of Puempel 10 times out of 10. The worst team in the CHL, and he still managed well over a point per game. He's gritty, quick, strong, and has a projectable frame. He plays both sides of the puck, and has 1st line center upside.

I know everyone loves a guy who can score from the top of the circles, but honestly I'm not in love with anything else about Puempel's game. Couple that with the fact we have a fair number of shooters in the organization (Thomas, Kreider, Grachev) already, and I just can't put Puempel that high on my list. Game breaking wingers at #15? My list starts with Nick Jensen.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 11:39 AM
  #86
Chalfdiggity3
Registered User
 
Chalfdiggity3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I understand he had a hip injury, but he's been known as a guy who doesn't show up every night. That's an issue with me. In addition, where is this Manny Malhotra stuff coming from? Just because a player has a commitment to both sides of the puck doesn't mean he's destined to be a grinder.

I get the gist of what you're saying: Bad team, lots of potential, etc, etc. However, those same points are the exact reasons I'd take Mark Scheifele ahead of Puempel 10 times out of 10. The worst team in the CHL, and he still managed well over a point per game. He's gritty, quick, strong, and has a projectable frame. He plays both sides of the puck, and has 1st line center upside.

I know everyone loves a guy who can score from the top of the circles, but honestly I'm not in love with anything else about Puempel's game. Couple that with the fact we have a fair number of shooters in the organization (Thomas, Kreider, Grachev) already, and I just can't put Puempel that high on my list. Game breaking wingers at #15? My list starts with Nick Jensen.

I bring up the manny Malholtra comparison because none of the players who i see being around at our pick to have the potential of anything of a top line player. I see alot of 3rd line players, otherwise this draft wouldnt be so top heavy.

we desperatley need guys who can score..(thomas hasnt proved anything yet, Kreider is back at BC, and Grachev is not going to be that scoring option anymore like we thought) There is nothing wrong with having to many scorers. My problem is we have enough safe prospect talent that will grow into being a 2nd-4th line player for us.

Nick Jensen i admit i dont know much about but the fact remains that he doesnt seem to have the high end potential on offense like Puempel or Grimaldi does.

Chalfdiggity3 is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:13 PM
  #87
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
I already posted here the numbers from 1990 to 2003. Let me add 2004 and 2005, even though it may be too early to judge.

2004 Draft:

Outside of legendary picks Ovechkin and Malkin who went 1 and 2, there were 15 forwards drafted. Only 4 of them scored 150+ points so far, and Wolski was one of them, and he's not exactly a star.

140 points in the 7 years since the draft comes out to, let's say, 3 years to make the NHL, 20 points in the rookie season and then 40 points for 3 more years. Not exactly superstar numbers there. Wolski has 246 points, so that gives you some understanding of what kind of a powerhouse someone with just 140 points is.

And yet, outside of the top 2 picks, the odds of a forward hitting 140 over the last 7 years are only 26.7%.

Interestingly, Enver Lisin scored 42 points in his NHL career before being run out. That is better than 40% of first round forwards drafted after Ovechkin and Malkin.

Outside of those two who were #1 and #2, only Zajac and maybe Stafford could be regarded as impact forwards.

=============================

2005 Draft:

The first two picks were Cindy Crosby and Bobby Ryan. After them, 14 forwards were drafted.

Only one guy scored 160 points or more. Four more players scored 100+ points. Only 2 players ever average at least 0.6 ppg in any season. Legitimately only Kopitar can be seen as an impact player among the forwards.

=============================

So out of the 29 forwards drafted in 2004 and 2005 outside of the top-2 in each draft, only 2 or 3 became impact players. The odds are thus 10.3% or 6.9%.

Why is this important? Because you should not buy into the hype. You should know that those "nice, big, all-around guys" have an overwhelming chance of being role players.

The only way to draft a star at #15 in a weak draft is to take a risk on someone whose obvious flaw - and not raw talent - caused him to drop. Otherwise, you are almost definitely drafting another Prust.
None of this helps make a case to draft a 5-6, 160 payer.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:14 PM
  #88
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalfdiggity3 View Post
I bring up the manny Malholtra comparison because none of the players who i see being around at our pick to have the potential of anything of a top line player. I see alot of 3rd line players, otherwise this draft wouldnt be so top heavy.
I seriously disagree with this. There's quite a few players who have solid, if not very high potential that should be around at #15. The issue is whether or not they realize that potential. I'm not sure Puempel is any different.

Quote:
we desperatley need guys who can score..(thomas hasnt proved anything yet, Kreider is back at BC, and Grachev is not going to be that scoring option anymore like we thought) There is nothing wrong with having to many scorers. My problem is we have enough safe prospect talent that will grow into being a 2nd-4th line player for us.
We desperately need guys who can generate offense. That extends far beyond guys with nice wrist shots. I listed those players because they're in the system and they project to fill the scoring void that, at least in theory, Puempel would. All three of them are closer to being NHL ready than Puempel, so how is he going to fill that "desperate" need?

Who says Grachev is "not going to be that scoring option like we thought?" He's 21, not 31.

Quote:
Nick Jensen i admit i dont know much about but the fact remains that he doesnt seem to have the high end potential on offense like Puempel or Grimaldi does.
How can you make such generalizations about the draft class (i.e. the Malhotra stuff) when you haven't seen a guy like Jensen play? I'm not trying to be an ass about it, but there are quite a few guys in the 12-30 range that have very good offensive upside.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:22 PM
  #89
NYR425
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 385
vCash: 500
The more I research this draft the more I like JT Miller. I don't know why, but I am liking this kid more and more.... What are your thoughts...

NYR425 is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:33 PM
  #90
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR425 View Post
The more I research this draft the more I like JT Miller. I don't know why, but I am liking this kid more and more.... What are your thoughts...
I like him, too.

He has a lot of potential.

He already mentioned if his drafting team wanted him to forego NCAA and go CHL that he would.

However, not totally sure a kid with his size would benefit in the CHL as much as he would playing against older players in the NCAA.

Like Kreider, the CHL would not have been a good choice. He's bigger and faster then most kids in the QMJHL. Plowing through 16 year olds would not have done anything for Kreider's development, it didnt for Grachev in the OHL, and im not sure it would for Miller, either.

If we aren't trading up into the top 10, and all our first choices are off the board, and we aren't using #15 in a package for a proven player... drafting a kid like Miller wouldn't be a bad pick.

Miller or Biggs.


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 06-14-2011 at 12:38 PM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:42 PM
  #91
bobbop
Henrik's Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 4,835
vCash: 500
When I watch guys like Milan Lucic and Derek Stepan I am reminded that most scouts say after the top 6-8-10 (your choice) picks, it's all pretty even.

bobbop is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:48 PM
  #92
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
None of this helps make a case to draft a 5-6, 160 payer.
The point is this: the vast majority of players drafted around #15 are mediocre role players. That's because there isn't enough top-shelf talent to drop all the way to #15.

But there are some exceptions. There are kids who are as talented as top-3 or top-5 draftees, but have another flaw. That flaw is usually size, but could be injury, very raw ability or discipline problems.

This major flaw unrelated to the player's ability would be the reason he fell to #15. He still has top-3 talent, he just does not have the size.

A player like that can become an impact player. But a solid, all-around guy who fell to #15 because he lacks the talent of top-5 guys will never be a star, barring some unexpected late-bloom development.

Fans buy into hype and want to be believe that they can pull an impact forward at #15 without going high-risk on someone who is small (RG) or injured (MP). So they will buy into the hype that McNeill and Scheifele have a high likelihood of being top-6 forwards, when the reality is that they will be lucky to be on par with Malhotra.

Beacon is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 12:57 PM
  #93
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
The point is this: the vast majority of players drafted around #15 are mediocre role players. That's because there isn't enough top-shelf talent to drop all the way to #15.

But there are some exceptions. There are kids who are as talented as top-3 or top-5 draftees, but have another flaw. That flaw is usually size, but could be injury, very raw ability or discipline problems.

This major flaw unrelated to the player's ability would be the reason he fell to #15. He still has top-3 talent, he just does not have the size.

A player like that can become an impact player. But a solid, all-around guy who fell to #15 because he lacks the talent of top-5 guys will never be a star, barring some unexpected late-bloom development.

Fans buy into hype and want to be believe that they can pull an impact forward at #15 without going high-risk on someone who is small (RG) or injured (MP). So they will buy into the hype that McNeill and Scheifele have a high likelihood of being top-6 forwards, when the reality is that they will be lucky to be on par with Malhotra.
Not making a better case for Grimaldi.

Simply put, you do not draft 5-6, 160 players in the first round, especially not at #15.

Taking a risk on a player that already has the body and physical tools to be a Pro hockey player is far more conducive then drafting a player with the body of a child.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:01 PM
  #94
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Not making a better case for Grimaldi.

Simply put, you do not draft 5-6, 160 players in the first round, especially not at #15.

Taking a risk on a player that already has the body and physical tools to be a Pro hockey player is far more conducive then drafting a player with the body of a child.

Except that is no risk at all. That is Malhotra. And with that, you get what you get.

Don't you think all the GMs know that it's good to draft a big guy? So why did such a player slip down to #15? You just choose to ignore the obvious logic of the results of past drafts: very few players available at #15 become impact players, and 80% of the time, they are NOT even second-third line tweeners.

That's because those who slip to #15 generally don't have the talent for it. The exception to it are players who have an obvious flaw other than their talent.

If the reason Player A slipped to #15 is his low talent and the reason Player B slipped to #15 is his small size, which one of them do you think has a higher chance of being an impact player? Sure, Player A has a higher chance of cracking the NHL and becoming another Fedotenko, but who has a higher chance of becoming another Theo Fleury?


Last edited by Beacon: 06-14-2011 at 01:08 PM.
Beacon is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:26 PM
  #95
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Sorry. But not everyone is Malhotra.

Sorry, Kreider is not Malhotra.

There is no argument to be made that would make it smart to draft 5-6, 160 Grimaldi.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:30 PM
  #96
The Dark Passenger
HFNYR Blues GM
 
The Dark Passenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vermont -> Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Don't know if it has been posted here. But here is the HF staff mock.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...ff_mock_draft/

Quote:
15


New York Rangers


Tyler Biggs, Team USA, USHL


RW


Coming off a strong combine performance, Biggs is a strong, talented winger who also brings toughness and character.
That would be a disaster if the draft went like that. I'd rather take Puempel at that spot or trade down.

The Dark Passenger is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:49 PM
  #97
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Why would it be a disaster.

Biggs is a bigger more skilled version of Callahan.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:56 PM
  #98
The Dark Passenger
HFNYR Blues GM
 
The Dark Passenger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vermont -> Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Why would it be a disaster.

Biggs is a bigger more skilled version of Callahan.
Because our main targets (Scheifele, McNeil, Armia, Zib) are all gone and I don't see the offensive impact in Biggs, who tops out at a 2nd liner at best.

The Dark Passenger is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 01:58 PM
  #99
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupersonicMonkey View Post
Sorry. But not everyone is Malhotra.

Sorry, Kreider is not Malhotra.

There is no argument to be made that would make it smart to draft 5-6, 160 Grimaldi.
Kreider was not Malhotra, he was essentially Jessiman. Not the same type of player, but the same type of draft pick: a lot of good things (size, skating, shooting), but extremely, extremely raw. In fact, I would say that Kreider was more raw than Jessiman.

But Kreider made great strides forward, so now everyone forgot about just how raw he was.

Again, this backs up my argument: you don't draft players whose flaw responsible for them falling out of the top-5 is their limited potential. You draft players whose flaw is being raw, being small or something else unrelated to pure skill.

Beacon is offline  
Old
06-14-2011, 02:32 PM
  #100
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by t3hg00se View Post
Yeah I haven't seen NFL players that religious.
Tim Teebow is ULTRA religious. During the NFL combines (before he was drafted obviously..) in the lockerroom he was saying lets all put our heads down and pray to god and someone said **** and everyone started laughing.

Garfinkel1 is online now  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:49 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.