stempniaksen
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2008
- 11,167
- 4,492
Why “almost all high draft picks”?
Aside from who?
Dahlin for sure. BT is right there though.
Why “almost all high draft picks”?
Aside from who?
Spezza (34) and Michalek (35) in 2011-2012.I jsut want him to score 30. When was the last time we had a player score 30+? Michalek?
I liked certain things about Tkachuk. His physicality and compete were amazing. I liked his hockey sense a lot but didn’t think it was elite. I saw skill and speed but didn’t think it was amazing. The hockey sense part was my major error. His hockey IQ isn’t just very good, it’s elite. He and his brother, Matthew Tkachuk, have incredible instincts and see the game at the highest level.
...
...I was viewing the world too narrowly. I let Tkachuk’s statistics and a simplistic view of what a top prospect should look like alter my view of what was a top player.
Pronman's recent article, "Prospects I was wrong about, the 2018 edition", mentions Tkachuk. It's on the Athletic:
Pronman: Prospects I was wrong about, the 2018 edition
If you don't have a subscription, you should still be able to get 5 free articles a month. (Though IMO the site's worth the annual subscription fee)
Anyway, the part I found interesting about his Tkachuk analysis:
I'd say that Brady has a very unique skillset. Not just because of his "character", but because of his technical abilities on the ice. His ability to drive the net and make plays happen down low and in tight around the net are outstanding. This is absolutely a 'skill'. yet some people around here will try to say this is character/intangibles in a derogatory way. Now is character/intangibles a driving factor behind this unique skillset? Absolutely. But some people seem to struggle wraping their head around this. It's not a simple skill vs character black and white comparison.
Considering we had both Hoffman and Stone on the same team, you would think it would help people understand the difference between a player with more shooting/skating/puckhandling "skill" and a player that is undeniably more effective overall due to having a complete package that isn't driven by the traditional shooting/skating/puckhandling "skills". Stone and Hoffman were basically at polar opposites of that spectrum.
Because character and intangibles drive a certain skillset that makes them a better hockey player, period. Like I said earlier in the thread, the latest trend in hockey is dominated by pace, possession and net drive. The character and intangibles they're referring to are essential factors in that skillset. All that matters at the end of the day is the fact that we're drafting the player that can help us win the most. Not the player that is most likely to win a skills competition.
I tried to argue this before the season started, but everyone attacked me and called me stupid:
How can you not like this kid
It's kind of sad that even though this has turned into a great pick there are still so many who can't come to like this guy. How can there only be two or three of us that like this?
pretty much everyone here that disliked the pick have come here and said how wrong they were.. the 'haters' are always quick to admit theyre wrong.. its the relentless apologists that basically never eat crow when its their turn.
It's kind of sad that even though this has turned into a great pick there are still so many who can't come to like this guy. How can there only be two or three of us that like this?
Whenever I get upset or mad on here, it's out of genuine desire for the team to succeed. That's more important than me being "right". So ya, I'm always happy to be wrong if it means our team benefits from it (i.e. Brady).Being proven wrong on the internet can be a mortal wound to some, especially to those who spent months trying to convince everyone just how pedestrian this kid was going to be. Crow should be especially delicious when it means one of our prospects is panning out In my opinion.
This kid is dynamite, that Letang tackle and neck flip was something else...
pretty much everyone here that disliked the pick have come here and said how wrong they were.. the 'haters' are always quick to admit theyre wrong.. its the relentless apologists that basically never eat crow when its their turn.
Whenever I get upset or mad on here, it's out of genuine desire for the team to succeed. That's more important than me being "right". So ya, I'm always happy to be wrong if it means our team benefits from it (i.e. Brady).
What gets me is that some people would rather the team be worse off just so that they can be right. That concept is so crazy to me.
A lot of people were in that thread happily eating crow for BT, it was great to see, not because I was a poster who loved the pick from the get-go, but because of how happy and positive people were about one of our young players. The atmosphere was great and the sentiment was virtually unanimous!
These chances were going in for Brady earlier on. Things even out and they will start going in again if he keeps getting these kinds of chances.
One thing worse than a person who is always jumping on somebody for getting a past opinion wrong, is a person who has to constantly tell everyone else how they got 1 thing right from months in the past.
Well done, nobody cares. I was happy with the pick, you don't see me having to remind everybody every 2nd day about it.
It’s worse, being a braggart is a trait that isn’t appreciated by anybody in the world. Not to mention liking a draft pick isn’t much of a personal accomplishment and certainly something not worth repeating ad nauseam. And I’m not interested in getting in an argument over this, that is my straight opinion on the matter and no offense is intended by it.No, that isn’t worse, it’s clearly better, unless you’re a miserable sod, and then yes, anything good is worse.
Imagine the same standard applied to those harping endlessly about each aspect of the organization though. Wouldn’t that be something.
And hey, thanks for reminding us that you liked the pick from the start...
No, that isn’t worse, it’s clearly better, unless you’re a miserable sod, and then yes, anything good is worse.
Imagine the same standard applied to those harping endlessly about each aspect of the organization though. Wouldn’t that be something.
And hey, thanks for reminding us that you liked the pick from the start...
It’s worse, being a braggart is a trait that isn’t appreciated by anybody in the world. Not to mention liking a draft pick isn’t much of a personal accomplishment and certainly something not worth repeating as nauseam.
The reason I mentioned my opinion on the draft pick was to give perspective.
As for the standard regarding harping, that is completely unrelated to my point and I’ll just leave it at that.