I don't consider myself a Glennie apologist either. I just think most people have entirely unrealistic expectations about a bottom 5 pick in the Top 10:
2004
7 - Rostizlav Olesz
8 - Alexandre Picard
9 - Ladislav Smid
10 - Boris Valabik
2005
7 - Jack Skille
8 - Devin Setoguchi
9 - Brian Lee
10 - Luc Bourdon
2006
7 - Kyle Okposo
8 - Peter Mueller
9 - James Sheppard
10 - Michael Frolik
That's a pretty ridiculous statement ... and a ridiculously large scale.
Looking at how successful picks below him (our own included) have already been (and are likely going to be), it'll take a lot for him to be a good pick in my book.
90 points probably is a bit high. 70 is probably more of what it'll take.
Be pissed all you want about being scared of Russians, but Glennie is a successful pick if he just becomes a complimentary player in the Top 6 scoring 50 or 60 points.
Most people taken in his position never even accomplish that.
It's funny, too, because whenever I see people saying that guys who will probably go around 6th-14th are going to be top line forwards or top pairing D-men, I just laugh. They're not. Most will be lucky to be top 6 forwards or top 4 D-men.
But there's something about Glennie I just don't like. Not him as a person, but him being picked at 8th.
I'll take my statements back, though. You've brought up some great points.
Looking at how successful picks below him (our own included) have already been (and are likely going to be), it'll take a lot for him to be a good pick in my book.
90 points probably is a bit high. 70 is probably more of what it'll take.
That's nonsense ... Kulikov is the only guy taken in Glennie's range with success, and Glennie was a minor reach at best since he was consider mostly an early teen's pick (most often projected at 10). It's the nature of the draft which is highly unpredictable. You don't get too many first line forwards scoring 70 points in Glennie's range.
Guys develop at different paces ... there's a reason players fall to the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round (and virtually ever other team has passed them over at least once). They don't become legitimate reasons 3 years later that your 1st round pick sucks. Those players are success stories on their own. They don't represent your 1st round pick in any way.
The fact of the matter is people incorrectly assume/pretend a Top 10 pick in the NHL draft is a sure thing ... .this isn't the NFL because these aren't 22 to 25 year old men. They're 18 year old teenagers that aren't even close to a finished product.
It's funny, too, because whenever I see people saying that guys who will probably go around 6th-14th are going to be top line forwards or top pairing D-men, I just laugh. They're not. Most will be lucky to be top 6 forwards or top 4 D-men.
But there's something about Glennie I just don't like. Not him as a person, but him being picked at 8th.
I'll take my statements back, though. You've brought up some great points.
That I can get on board with. The pick seemed strange. I bring it up all the time ... but if I could get one straight answer from GMJN ... 100% honesty ... it would be, "Why the hell did you pick Glennie when you never even talked to the kid?"
I don't know why ... but that just blows my mind, especially when you consider how much they scouted and interacted with Alex Chiasson and Reilly Smith.
Plus .. as far as not liking him ... Twitter does that guy no favors. He comes off as immature. Right or wrong, Campbell, Oleksiak, and other prospects on Twitter definitely seem to be much more professional.
That's nonsense ... Kulikov is the only guy taken in Glennie's range with success, and Glennie was a minor reach at best since he was consider mostly an early teen's pick (most often projected at 10). It's the nature of the draft which is highly unpredictable. You don't get too many first line forwards scoring 70 points in Glennie's range.
Guys develop at different paces ... there's a reason players fall to the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round (and virtually ever other team has passed them over at least once). They don't become legitimate reasons 3 years later that your 1st round pick sucks. Those players are success stories on their own. They don't represent your 1st round pick in any way.
The fact of the matter is people incorrectly assume/pretend a Top 10 pick in the NHL draft is a sure thing ... .this isn't the NFL because these aren't 22 to 25 year old men. They're 18 year old teenagers that aren't even close to a finished product.
Well Cowen has had some success too but the point stands. There really arent many guys taken after Glennie who have made any NHL impact. People were pissed we passed on MSP but look whats happened to him. I think we did pretty well overall in 2009 getting several players who will be NHLers.
Bottom line though ... is I honestly agree with you about not being the biggest Glennie fan. I just don't agree with the unrealistic expectations of some fans.
Overall ... Picking 6th to 10th blows. That's the nicest way I can put it. You're a bad team that needs help, but you're still basically buying a $1 scratch off like everyone else behind you. Can't miss players rarely exist out of the Top 2 or 3. They're teenagers after all.
It was just so off the board. And it was the first draft I ever really got into, so I guess it's just a letdown to know that the first Stars' pick I ever watched has had less of a career than our 5th round pick that year. There's a lot more than just a bad pick in this to me.
It just makes absolutely no sense.
To be fair, there are quite a few players who don't really come across that way on Twitter. Modano's anything but professional. I honestly didn't know he had one, I'll have to check it out.
Yeah it is true that Cowen is a good defensive D already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc
Well Cowen has had some success too but the point stands. There really arent many guys taken after Glennie who have made any NHL impact. People were pissed we passed on MSP but look whats happened to him. I think we did pretty well overall in 2009 getting several players who will be NHLers.
.. and that's the way, IMO, you have to look at a draft. In 2009, it's definitely shaping up that they may have drafted 4 Top 9 forwards. That's damn impressive. Plus ... they all are somewhat skilled ... it's just a matter of how much that skill translates. That's tough to say about Dallas picks in the past. They're typically the safe pick with no skill.
That I can get on board with. The pick seemed strange. I bring it up all the time ... but if I could get one straight answer from GMJN ... 100% honesty ... it would be, "Why the hell did you pick Glennie when you never even talked to the kid?"
I don't know why ... but that just blows my mind, especially when you consider how much they scouted and interacted with Alex Chiasson and Reilly Smith.
Plus .. as far as not liking him ... Twitter does that guy no favors. He comes off as immature. Right or wrong, Campbell, Oleksiak, and other prospects on Twitter definitely seem to be much more professional.
Hopefully his answer explained the look on his face when they showed him as they were about to pick him. His twitter account definitely makes him come off as immature and perhaps just not as into hockey as some other guys.
To be fair, there are quite a few players who don't really come across that way on Twitter. Modano's anything but professional. I honestly didn't know he had one, I'll have to check it out.
Modano has also always pretty much been a tool though so I expect that out of him. Plus, he was one of the best talents this team has ever had.
I don't think Glennie will ever get by on talent alone, and maturity goes a long way to help a guy reach his potential.
However ... again he's just turning 21 years old ... it's wrong to be too harsh about a little immaturity at that age. Still ... it's one of the things that I've noticed about him.
Yeah it is true that Cowen is a good defensive D already.
.. and that's the way, IMO, you have to look at a draft. In 2009, it's definitely shaping up that they may have drafted 4 Top 9 forwards. That's damn impressive. Plus ... they all are somewhat skilled ... it's just a matter of how much that skill translates. That's tough to say about Dallas picks in the past. They're typically the safe pick with no skill.
It was just so off the board. And it was the first draft I ever really got into, so I guess it's just a letdown to know that the first Stars' pick I ever watched has had less of a career than our 5th round pick that year. There's a lot more than just a bad pick in this to me.
It just makes absolutely no sense.
To be fair, there are quite a few players who don't really come across that way on Twitter. Modano's anything but professional. I honestly didn't know he had one, I'll have to check it out.
I really dont think it was all that off the board. Most people had him in the 10-15 range. Thats really not that much of a reach.
Modanos retired and yes he seems to tweet about hockey more than Glennie does. Glennie always seems to be talking about his buddies or something completely unidentifiable.
Modano has also always pretty much been a tool though so I expect that out of him. Plus, he was one of the best talents this team has ever had.
I don't think Glennie will ever get by on talent alone, and maturity goes a long way to help a guy reach his potential.
However ... again he's just turning 21 years old ... it's wrong to be too harsh about a little immaturity at that age. Still ... it's one of the things that I've noticed about him.
The immaturity wouldn't be as big of an issue if he weren't such a high profile player. And it doesn't help when Campbell and Oleksiak are pretty much exactly what you want in that situation.
Yeah it is true that Cowen is a good defensive D already.
.. and that's the way, IMO, you have to look at a draft. In 2009, it's definitely shaping up that they may have drafted 4 Top 9 forwards. That's damn impressive. Plus ... they all are somewhat skilled ... it's just a matter of how much that skill translates. That's tough to say about Dallas picks in the past. They're typically the safe pick with no skill.
4 top 9, possibly even 4 top 6 and McKenzie could very well turn into a solid 4th line guy.
The immaturity wouldn't be as big of an issue if he weren't such a high profile player. And it doesn't help when Campbell and Oleksiak are pretty much exactly what you want in that situation.
Yeah that's true ... personality wise ... I don't know that you could build two better prospects. That's why in the end, I feel like they'll do anything to succeed.
I just don't get that impression from Glennie.
This might be minor ... or stupid to some people ... but I love when Campbell says last year that he's going to try and steal an AHL job. That's a ridiculous goal ... you know there's almost no way they are going to not send him back for a 2nd year in the OHL ... but the kid is passionate and fiercely competitive.
After his one game in the NHL, Glennie says he hopes to get back here again. It seems insignificant ... I get that ... but I think mindset is important.
Yeah that's true ... personality wise ... I don't know that you could build two better prospects. That's why in the end, I feel like they'll do anything to succeed.
I just don't get that impression from Glennie.
This might be minor ... or stupid to some people ... but I love when Campbell says last year that he's going to try and steal an AHL job. That's a ridiculous goal ... you know there's almost no way they are going to not send him back for a 2nd year in the OHL ... but the kid is passionate and fiercely competitive.
After his one game in the NHL, Glennie says he hopes to get back here again. It seems insignificant ... I get that ... but I think mindset is important.
I get the same impression about Glennie. If they had spent a ton of time with him I suspect they would not have drafted him at 8.
I don't disagree with the sentiment about Glennie at all, but judging his maturity based on how he uses twitter is a little silly. Glennie seems to use twitter more as a communication tool with fellow buddies (Guptill does the same thing). Campbell/Oleksiak seem to use it in a team-prescribed way, possibly stemming from a directive from their junior teams this year.
Well, stuff on twitter IS out there. I wouldn't make a final call on someone based on how they use it but it seemed to confirm Modano's doucheyness so it's not exactly inaccurate in some cases. While I haven't seen Glennie's I wouldn't make too much of it but at the same time I wouldn't throw it out as a character barometer entirely.
Overall ... Picking 6th to 10th blows. That's the nicest way I can put it. You're a bad team that needs help, but you're still basically buying a $1 scratch off like everyone else behind you.
Not really. Reducing it to a scratch-off is disingenuous. It's a continuum of probability of success. Each pick has a better chance at turning into a good NHLer than the following pick.
The Stars had one of their best chances in franchise history at landing such a player at 8th overall. Ultimately it's not a huge deal if they continue to clean up in the later rounds with their other chances. It just figures to be hard to sustain that method of salvaging drafts. Happily they seem to have halted that trend with Oleksiak.
Not really. Reducing it to a scratch-off is disingenuous. It's a continuum of probability of success. Each pick has a better chance at turning into a good NHLer than the following pick.
The Stars had one of their best chances in franchise history at landing such a player at 8th overall. Ultimately it's not a huge deal if they continue to clean up in the later rounds with their other chances. It just figures to be hard to sustain that method of salvaging drafts. Happily they seem to have halted that trend with Oleksiak.
I concur. I just don't see the point of mucking up on your 1st round picks year after year and hope to salvage from a few late-round gems. Glennie and Campbell, as of now, are poor round 1 draft picks for the Stars, IMO.
