i'm just curious... from which point on do you see a first rounder as a successfull pick? a 40 goal campaign once in his career? a steady 30 goal scorer? or just a skilled two way player who works hard every night (like a mike johnson)? a guy like samsonov is none of these, yet he is a first round pick and isn't looked at like a complete bust.
Depends on the player, depends on the draft. Getting out of the 1999 first round with *anything* was going to be basically a success. Getting Kostitsyn - even if he does eventually come on board as a 20+-goal guy might still end up looking a bit disappointing considering how the 2003 draft class is looking so far. And it depends too on what latitude you're picking from in the draft... the expectations that will follow a top-5 pick like Carey Price will be much higher than those placed on the generic late-1st rounders, where in many years just getting a decent plugger who makes his pension cutoff in the NHL will be an adequate pick.
Depends on the player, depends on the draft. Getting out of the 1999 first round with *anything* was going to be basically a success. Getting Kostitsyn - even if he does eventually come on board as a 20+-goal guy might still end up looking a bit disappointing considering how the 2003 draft class is looking so far. And it depends too on what latitude you're picking from in the draft... the expectations that will follow a top-5 pick like Carey Price will be much higher than those placed on the generic late-1st rounders, where in many years just getting a decent plugger who makes his pension cutoff in the NHL will be an adequate pick.
Wise answer . I could add that an easy criteria would be to compare the prospect with the two picks above and the two picks below in his draft (although this does not work for the top 5 picks) in terms of points, +/- , games played and ice time.
Wise answer . I could add that an easy criteria would be to compare the prospect with the two picks above and the two picks below in his draft (although this does not work for the top 5 picks) in terms of points, +/- , games played and ice time.
I don't know if I can agree with that. Each teams has his own players list on draft day so you don't care that much about the two players drafted before and after the pick. A bad decision will always be bad and a good decision will always be good.
And Blind Gardian was right on every point. I would had that most of the time,
You are expecting a decent NHL player with a top 10 pick
You are hoping a decent NHL player with a pick between 11 and 20
You are happy if you manage to get something with a pick between 21 and 30
The average team's draft is that 1,5 players is going to play in a regular base with the selective team .
So you can hope that your first choice is the one that will make it . You could also hope that he will be a top 6 forwards or a top 4 d-man . If not , you can hope a top gritty defensive forward .
All those things are also depending of how depth is the draft , and what is the selection rank of your team .
About Samsonov , he 's probably the " ,5 " part of the 1,5 average number it of players
I'm a little more forgivable with skaters, but highly drafted goalies had better turn out, IMO. I remember how Calgary traded up to get Trevor Kidd in '90. Poor New Jersey was stuck drafting some schmuck named Brodeur...
Hopefully Price = Brodeur...or, at very least, dependable starter.
I don't think it's fair to compare Price to Brodeur in any capacity. As far as I'm concerned, you can't use a player as a comparable if he owns, or is 90% likely to own a major record. One such as career wins, per se.
__________________
This content is hosted here with the objections of the poster.
I don't think it's fair to compare Price to Brodeur in any capacity. As far as I'm concerned, you can't use a player as a comparable if he owns, or is 90% likely to own a major record. One such as career wins, per se.
Of course not. If Price turns out to be anything like Brodeur, that would be incredible, the point is, I just hope he pans out as a starter for for the Habs.
i'm just curious... from which point on do you see a first rounder as a successfull pick? a 40 goal campaign once in his career? a steady 30 goal scorer? or just a skilled two way player who works hard every night (like a mike johnson)? a guy like samsonov is none of these, yet he is a first round pick and isn't looked at like a complete bust.
PS: this is not a samsonov bashing thread
a guy who fits your projected role. Whether its a guy like chipchura who I'm sure the habs hope to groom in one of the better 2 way centers in the league or a guy like Kostitsyn who the habs probably had projected as an offensive first line winger.
Its not necessarily all about goals. There's plenty of 2 way forwards that go in the 1st round. Especially in the latter picks of the 1st round.
to me, a succeful first round pick, is when the guy gets to be a valuable NHL player. When you can say he has a role and he can fullfill it. So anytime the guy makes the NHL and gets to be a starter on a team I think i'D be happy.
to me, a succeful first round pick, is when the guy gets to be a valuable NHL player. When you can say he has a role and he can fullfill it. So anytime the guy makes the NHL and gets to be a starter on a team I think i'D be happy.
i agree with you totaly. If the pick works and that player is in the starting roster then IMO that was a success.
IMO the draft is a huge huge gamble, a lottery of sorts. you have a list of players you want to pick, but when your pick time comes up, and that list has shortened, thats where the gamble/hopefullness comes into play.
like i say IMO, i may be off in left field here also
. I could add that an easy criteria would be to compare the prospect with the two picks above and the two picks below in his draft (although this does not work for the top 5 picks) in terms of points, +/- , games played and ice time.
