Here's a question: Why is it taken as an article of faith that Campbell has "franchise" potential? That was only said of him by the front office immediately after they drafted him as their explanation/justification for the pick. Then the guy behind the pick got fired. Is that the only place that people are getting the "franchise" player label from, or is that their own impression too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaverSports
And people will laugh at me now, but in two years, I bet anyone willing to take my bet that Devin Shore will be up there with any of them.
I won't laugh at you for that. I think it's a good prediction. Shore is definitely on my list.
Here's a question: Why is it taken as an article of faith that Campbell has "franchise" potential? That was only said of him by the front office immediately after they drafted him as their explanation/justification for the pick. Then the guy behind the pick got fired. Is that the only place that people are getting the "franchise" player label from, or is that their own impression too?
Just because it probably wasn't the best pick doesn't mean Campbell isn't what they said he was. Dallas probably should have taken Fowler, he fit a need better and was a lot safer, however Campbell still has elite potential. He's crazy talented, there was only 3 players in that draft who had definite top 5/10 potential for their positions in that draft. The first two were the top 2 picks, and the other was Campbell.
Dallas probably should have taken Fowler, he fit a need better and was a lot safer, however Campbell still has elite potential.
When teams draft for need they reach and end up taking busts. You always take the best player available, then you can always trade that player later on for a position you need at that point. Fowler safer then Campbell? I don't see that, Campbell was always regarded as one of the "safest" picks in the draft.
I don't think it's possible for a goalie to be a safe pick.
If Campbell was at a different position, with his talent level and work ethic and mental makeup, he'd still be a safe pick.
High pick goalies that fail will either flame out and explode violently due to injuries like DiPietro or LeClaire, or they just aren't that good in the first place. Campbell has no injury history of note, has stellar work ethic, and is talented enough that he puts up better numbers in terrible defensive systems than his counterparts.
He's a safe pick because he plays really really well behind a competent defense. Against high talent kids.
When teams draft for need they reach and end up taking busts. You always take the best player available, then you can always trade that player later on for a position you need at that point. Fowler safer then Campbell? I don't see that, Campbell was always regarded as one of the "safest" picks in the draft.
You draft for need when the gap between two players is not large.
And I don't remember ever hearing that Campbell was one of the safest picks in the draft. Goalies are never safe because so much can happen. Injuries are a much larger concern, goalies are always raw, they always need seasoning. Anything can happen in the 3-8 years it takes goalies to make the NHL.
Fowler would definitely be a top 4 defensemen in the NHL, just a question if he could be better than that. Campbell may never play in the NHL, that was never a guarentee.
I don't think you're that far off with that description. IF Dallas had drafted him, I think he would have gone back to the OHL.
I concur. But then we would have had another Vishnevskiy issue on our hands (One dimensional offensive D)... and we may not have traded for Goligoski... (Neal and Niskanen may have been traded for other assets)
I concur. But then we would have had another Vishnevskiy issue on our hands (One dimensional offensive D)... and we may not have traded for Goligoski... (Neal and Niskanen may have been traded for other assets)
I think that Neal still would have been traded even if Dallas had drafted Fowler. Dallas desperately needed defensive help that season and the creditors wanted the team to make the playoffs in order to make money. They couldn't wait for Fowler to develop. Neal was the most valuable roster player that could realistically be moved.
The only thing that really bothers me about the Campbell pick is that taking goalies in the first round is a huge risk. Passing on Kulikov in order to draft Glennie is the decision that really bothers me.
I don't think Fowler is the player Ducks fans claim he is, but he's already better defensively than MAB and if he took the liberties MAB did he could score at a better pace.
I don't think Fowler is the player Ducks fans claim he is, but he's already better defensively than MAB and if he took the liberties MAB did he could score at a better pace.
I really can't imagine how anyone could be worse defensively than Fowler.
My issue was more with the snotty comment to HullFan though than to the likelihood of Ryder being traded.
Regular knight in shining armour.
I guess I should have used a winky face emoticon or something to note the lighthearted nature of my post. Of all the posters here to be lecturing on tact you're not exactly in my top 10 but hey, whatever makes you feel better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigG44
Furthermore ... it's not one example. Mike Ribeiro is a more useful piece than Cody Eakin right this moment.
Not an in-season trade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambassador Of Fun
......
Yeah, I thought that was amusing too.
Grossman was having a down year and we managed to get a 2nd and 3rd round pick. A useful but not great defensive defenseman isn't the same as a goal-scoring winger. This one example notwithstanding, I will be shocked if any of our prospects makes any of the veterans "available." If anything they will just make the team deeper for the stretch run.
The point being that the Grossman trade wasn't going to really effect the team's ability to make the playoffs; trading a productive scoring winger just because you have another productive scoring winger would negatively impact the team's ability to compete for/in the playoffs.
My choice for top prospect is Chiasson, although this spot is more up for debate than in many recent years. Piqued pretty much nailed all the reasons why on the first page and I agree with pretty much everything he said.
I want to make a case for Eakin at, if not number one, a higher level than most seemingly have him
I may be underrating Chiasson and Faksa but I don't consider either first line material offensively, I think they are 2nd/3rd liners who can contribute offensively but strengths are elsewhere
I also think that describes Eakin, he plays hard every night, forechecks and back checks well, and has underrated offensive skills in my opinion
The Caps utilized him in a checking role but I think given the opportunity he could be a solid second liner
Basically I think his offensive ceiling is similar to Chaissons and Faksa's and he has a decent chance of making the team this year
I haven't decided if he's my number one because I think that potential wise both Campbell and Oleksiak could be blue chippers however in my opinion he should definitely be in the top 5 and of the comments so far most have him much lower
I want to make a case for Eakin at, if not number one, a higher level than most seemingly have him
I may be underrating Chiasson and Faksa but I don't consider either first line material offensively, I think they are 2nd/3rd liners who can contribute offensively but strengths are elsewhere
I also think that describes Eakin, he plays hard every night, forechecks and back checks well, and has underrated offensive skills in my opinion
The Caps utilized him in a checking role but I think given the opportunity he could be a solid second liner
Basically I think his offensive ceiling is similar to Chaissons and Faksa's and he has a decent chance of making the team this year
I haven't decided if he's my number one because I think that potential wise both Campbell and Oleksiak could be blue chippers however in my opinion he should definitely be in the top 5 and of the comments so far most have him much lower
Eakin really doesn't have an offensive ceiling close to Chaisson or Faksa. Eakin, fifty points tops probably. Faksa and Chiasson can be be 60+ point players, maybe 70 in a career season.
Eakin really doesn't have an offensive ceiling close to Chaisson or Faksa. Eakin, fifty points tops probably. Faksa and Chiasson can be be 60+ point players, maybe 70 in a career season.
I dunno about 70, only 20 players had that many points this year... but 60 points is a realistic possibility, that being said I'd still probably take Eakin based on the fact that he is probably an everyday NHLer as early as this year and is more likely to get 50 than the other two are to get 60; and that he'll immediately have one of the higher compete levels on the team
He's the kind of player that quickly becomes a fan favourite and the kind of player that championship teams have
I dunno about 70, only 20 players had that many points this year... but 60 points is a realistic possibility, that being said I'd still probably take Eakin based on the fact that he is probably an everyday NHLer as early as this year and is more likely to get 50 than the other two are to get 60; and that he'll immediately have one of the higher compete levels on the team
He's the kind of player that quickly becomes a fan favourite and the kind of player that championship teams have
The only argument I can see for Eakin being ranked higher than Faksa is NHL readiness. The things that Eakin is supposed to be good at Faksa is supposed to be better, almost across the board. Then you add in the size difference and it's pretty easy for me to put Faksa higher than Eakin.
We'll see in a few years but if everything pans out Faksa will probably be the 2nd line center while Eakin either plays 3rd line pivot or 2nd line wing.
I may be underrating Chiasson and Faksa but I don't consider either first line material offensively, I think they are 2nd/3rd liners who can contribute offensively but strengths are elsewhere.
I think you're underrating Chiasson. At absolute worst he's a high level 3rd liner. If he falls short of full potential he's a good 2nd liner. Then there's the possibility that he is a high level two-way 1st line winger. If he can be that guy who can play tight defense and chip in 25-25-50pts with Benn and Loui then we could have that 1st line set for the foreseeable future.
Here's a question: Why is it taken as an article of faith that Campbell has "franchise" potential? That was only said of him by the front office immediately after they drafted him as their explanation/justification for the pick. Then the guy behind the pick got fired. Is that the only place that people are getting the "franchise" player label from, or is that their own impression too?
Only place? Everyone that's even talked about the draft or Campbell has noted his potential is of the franchise variety.
