Erie Otters 2022-23 Off-Season Thread (Part 2)

[NOA]

I like our 1st rnd pick - can’t help but wonder do we have enough firepower up front though ??

Potentially? If you look at the current final 4, Ldn/Barrie only have 3 forwards at a PPG, NB with 4. Sarnia has the most firepower but it’s nowhere near Erie in 2016-17 or LDN in 2015-16. It depends on the cycle and league at the time in which you are going for a run. This year, you don’t need as much firepower as other seasons

They could have enough to be middle of the pack if Terrance/Spence and imports can take off. Bressette/Fimis can be nice complimentary pieces and get maybe around 60 points. But you need Terrance, Spence, and who you take 1 overall in the import to take big leaps. It’s common to see players double or even triple their production so it’s realistic but still just being hopeful that Terrance can get around 40g/40a and Spence around 30g/50a. If they get that production from those 2 next year, combined with a star import forward, than 2024-25 should be interesting

 

[OHL4Life]

Exactly my point. I’ve said for about 2 years now that they need to get bigger. Never once said it wasn’t an issue. I was one of the first to start ranting my concerns and said last offseason that they needed to get down to a lower number of players that were 5’10 or below but that it would take 2 years to reverse the trend because you can’t just release all your players or trade them for big bodies. And here we are a full offseason later and they pretty much, slowly but surely, have started to get bigger and by 2024-25, it won’t be an issue. Exactly how I mapped it. It might not even be an issue next year depending on Saganiuk, Artichuk, Edwards status.

But the bottom line is you still don’t have talent. If you had the same size but swapped T. Raddysh for Alfano, McKegg for Terrance, and Burakovsky for Molnar - you win more games last year because you have more talent, more high end talent. Their primary issue is they have lacked high end talent and when they had their most high end talent during the rebuild (2019-20) they were a middle of the pack team despite still being small. If Terrance/Spence and a few others step up, they will win more. If they don’t develop, they will still lose next year regardless of their size

i know nothing about the coaches or style of play, but i like to think im pretty goo with scouting and never liked the drafts they had the last 3/4 years. low talent, low size/compete.

 

[Moroz]

Very interesting discussion on what the Otters have in the way of talent and what the Otters overall approach should be going forward. However, are we overlooking an elephant in the room, i.e., goaltending?

I think we can fairly say that the goaltending situation has been totally mishandled for several years now. This is what we had last year:

oalies
Player Name	GP	Min	GA	GAA	W	L	T	Svs	Pct	EN	SO
Marshall Nicholls	6	293	17	3.48	1	3	1	113	0.869	2	0
Kyle Downey	26	1360	86	3.79	8	14	0	587	0.872	4	0
Jacob Gibbons	5	226	15	3.98	1	3	0	86	0.851	0	0
Nolan LaLonde	41	2211	151	4.10	11	20	6	990	0.868	7	1

This is historically bad, even taking into account the poor defense in front of these guys.

Given his past two years' performance, I do not think it reasonable to expect even OHL average goaltending from LaLonde. Perhaps he will surprise, but hoping he will surprise is not a sound plan.

Likewise, I do not think Downey is the answer, and how realistic would it be to expect Gibbons to step into the role of a No. 1 as a rookie?

I do not have any solutions, and maybe we do not have the assets to trade for even an OHL average goaltender. So, perhaps, for better or worse, we are going to live or die with LaLonde/Gibbons. Nonetheless, it does worry me that all of the efforts to improve the forward ranks and the defense will be undone by less than average goaltending.

Thoughts?

 

[NOA]

Very interesting discussion on what the Otters have in the way of talent and what the Otters overall approach should be going forward. However, are we overlooking an elephant in the room, i.e., goaltending?

I think we can fairly say that the goaltending situation has been totally mishandled for several years now. This is what we had last year:

Player Name	GP	Min	GA	GAA	W	L	T	Svs	Pct	EN	SO
oalies
Marshall Nicholls	6	293	17	3.48	1	3	1	113	0.869	2	0
Kyle Downey	26	1360	86	3.79	8	14	0	587	0.872	4	0
Jacob Gibbons	5	226	15	3.98	1	3	0	86	0.851	0	0
Nolan LaLonde	41	2211	151	4.10	11	20	6	990	0.868	7	1

This is historically bad, even taking into account the poor defense in front of these guys.

Given his past two years' performance, I do not think it reasonable to expect even OHL average goaltending from LaLonde. Perhaps he will surprise, but hoping he will surprise is not a sound plan.

Likewise, I do not think Downey is the answer, and how realistic would it be to expect Gibbons to step into the role of a No. 1 as a rookie?

I do not have any solutions, and maybe we do not have the assets to trade for even an OHL average goaltender. So, perhaps, for better or worse, we are going to live or die with LaLonde/Gibbons. Nonetheless, it does worry me that all of the efforts to improve the forward ranks and the defense will be undone by less than average goaltending.

Thoughts?

Don’t we think this just goes back to coaching/development? It’s not for a lack of assets or trying by Erie - they spent top resources in recent years on Lalonde, Gibbons and prior to that on Lawr and even Campbell as an American recruit. Yet they have all failed. They tried in the import with Kolosov but COVID killed that. Lalonde signed an as an NHL FA after a few FA camp invites and at just 18 years old. So no doubt the talent is there yet the team can’t develop or coach it. How Shane Clifford is still here as the goalie coach is beyond me but again another cheap, irresponsible move by JW. He’s just as much to blame as DB at this point.

Agree the goaltending issues are a major problem and have been throughout the franchise history, even with McDavid. Erie hasn’t had a top tier guy since Janus/Disher years. It’s just been one disappointment after another

 

[Kingpin794]

Very interesting discussion on what the Otters have in the way of talent and what the Otters overall approach should be going forward. However, are we overlooking an elephant in the room, i.e., goaltending?

I think we can fairly say that the goaltending situation has been totally mishandled for several years now. This is what we had last year:

Player Name	GP	Min	GA	GAA	W	L	T	Svs	Pct	EN	SO
oalies
Marshall Nicholls	6	293	17	3.48	1	3	1	113	0.869	2	0
Kyle Downey	26	1360	86	3.79	8	14	0	587	0.872	4	0
Jacob Gibbons	5	226	15	3.98	1	3	0	86	0.851	0	0
Nolan LaLonde	41	2211	151	4.10	11	20	6	990	0.868	7	1

This is historically bad, even taking into account the poor defense in front of these guys.

Given his past two years' performance, I do not think it reasonable to expect even OHL average goaltending from LaLonde. Perhaps he will surprise, but hoping he will surprise is not a sound plan.

Likewise, I do not think Downey is the answer, and how realistic would it be to expect Gibbons to step into the role of a No. 1 as a rookie?

I do not have any solutions, and maybe we do not have the assets to trade for even an OHL average goaltender. So, perhaps, for better or worse, we are going to live or die with LaLonde/Gibbons. Nonetheless, it does worry me that all of the efforts to improve the forward ranks and the defense will be undone by less than average goaltending.

Thoughts?

Doesn’t matter who the goalie is if the team in front of them is no good. A great goalie isn’t going to bring a bad team up from the bottom. However a good team can make bad goalies look good.

 

[Mata]

Very interesting discussion on what the Otters have in the way of talent and what the Otters overall approach should be going forward. However, are we overlooking an elephant in the room, i.e., goaltending?

I think we can fairly say that the goaltending situation has been totally mishandled for several years now. This is what we had last year:

oalies
Player Name	GP	Min	GA	GAA	W	L	T	Svs	Pct	EN	SO
Marshall Nicholls	6	293	17	3.48	1	3	1	113	0.869	2	0
Kyle Downey	26	1360	86	3.79	8	14	0	587	0.872	4	0
Jacob Gibbons	5	226	15	3.98	1	3	0	86	0.851	0	0
Nolan LaLonde	41	2211	151	4.10	11	20	6	990	0.868	7	1

This is historically bad, even taking into account the poor defense in front of these guys.

Given his past two years' performance, I do not think it reasonable to expect even OHL average goaltending from LaLonde. Perhaps he will surprise, but hoping he will surprise is not a sound plan.

Likewise, I do not think Downey is the answer, and how realistic would it be to expect Gibbons to step into the role of a No. 1 as a rookie?

I do not have any solutions, and maybe we do not have the assets to trade for even an OHL average goaltender. So, perhaps, for better or worse, we are going to live or die with LaLonde/Gibbons. Nonetheless, it does worry me that all of the efforts to improve the forward ranks and the defense will be undone by less than average goaltending.

Thoughts?

I think the issue starts at the top.

GM has been consistently horrendous. Sure drafting hasn't been great, coaching has been pretty bad, goaltending has below average, defense is bad, we've mostly been on the losing side of trades, and offensively we can't hold our weight. Our development of players seems to be below average.

So, where does it start for me, the top. The culture needs to change and it starts by getting rid if Dave Brown. First his vision was to go small and skilled, it failed. Then we happen to land Spence, he goes all in on trades giving away valuable draft capital for marginal returns. Follow that up with coaching staff unable to develop kids for 2 HC cycles now. Scouting, are we really hitting the mark? We whiffed horribly on Logan Sawyer last season and right now our second looks like a stretch. Let's not even get into imports and how we chased away Cjeka only to go import free until Sopa at 5'3 was going to resurrect our season.

Sturdy Stan Butler is coming in, but promises only 2 years.

Erie has an identity crisis that begins and ends with Dave Brown. The only way, IMO, to get over the hump is to ditch 100% the old guard completely once and for all.

If we don't show signs of improvement this season then we've wasted almost every talent that came through with the lone exception to this point being Drysdale. That just doesn't cut it and we are letting these kids down.

 

[Mata]

Very interesting discussion on what the Otters have in the way of talent and what the Otters overall approach should be going forward. However, are we overlooking an elephant in the room, i.e., goaltending?

I think we can fairly say that the goaltending situation has been totally mishandled for several years now. This is what we had last year:

Player Name	GP	Min	GA	GAA	W	L	T	Svs	Pct	EN	SO
oalies
Marshall Nicholls	6	293	17	3.48	1	3	1	113	0.869	2	0
Kyle Downey	26	1360	86	3.79	8	14	0	587	0.872	4	0
Jacob Gibbons	5	226	15	3.98	1	3	0	86	0.851	0	0
Nolan LaLonde	41	2211	151	4.10	11	20	6	990	0.868	7	1

This is historically bad, even taking into account the poor defense in front of these guys.

Given his past two years' performance, I do not think it reasonable to expect even OHL average goaltending from LaLonde. Perhaps he will surprise, but hoping he will surprise is not a sound plan.

Likewise, I do not think Downey is the answer, and how realistic would it be to expect Gibbons to step into the role of a No. 1 as a rookie?

I do not have any solutions, and maybe we do not have the assets to trade for even an OHL average goaltender. So, perhaps, for better or worse, we are going to live or die with LaLonde/Gibbons. Nonetheless, it does worry me that all of the efforts to improve the forward ranks and the defense will be undone by less than average goaltending.

Thoughts?

Also, what's the news on Molanr. Rumors over here are he has to go back home to face some fallout from the fight before he came over. I get it's his draft season and he's of decent talent, but his character is in serious question.

 

[DubCee21]

Doesn’t matter who the goalie is if the team in front of them is no good. A great goalie isn’t going to bring a bad team up from the bottom. However a good team can make bad goalies look good.

A great goalie can absolutely bring a team from the bottom. Carey Price is a prime example of this. Montreal had no business making the playoffs for the better part of a decade but he single handedly put them there several times.

 

[OttersFan]

Very interesting discussion on what the Otters have in the way of talent and what the Otters overall approach should be going forward. However, are we overlooking an elephant in the room, i.e., goaltending?

I think we can fairly say that the goaltending situation has been totally mishandled for several years now. This is what we had last year:

Player Name	GP	Min	GA	GAA	W	L	T	Svs	Pct	EN	SO
oalies
Marshall Nicholls	6	293	17	3.48	1	3	1	113	0.869	2	0
Kyle Downey	26	1360	86	3.79	8	14	0	587	0.872	4	0
Jacob Gibbons	5	226	15	3.98	1	3	0	86	0.851	0	0
Nolan LaLonde	41	2211	151	4.10	11	20	6	990	0.868	7	1

This is historically bad, even taking into account the poor defense in front of these guys.

Given his past two years' performance, I do not think it reasonable to expect even OHL average goaltending from LaLonde. Perhaps he will surprise, but hoping he will surprise is not a sound plan.

Likewise, I do not think Downey is the answer, and how realistic would it be to expect Gibbons to step into the role of a No. 1 as a rookie?

I do not have any solutions, and maybe we do not have the assets to trade for even an OHL average goaltender. So, perhaps, for better or worse, we are going to live or die with LaLonde/Gibbons. Nonetheless, it does worry me that all of the efforts to improve the forward ranks and the defense will be undone by less than average goaltending.

Thoughts?

I think it’ll be anyones battle to lose. I think we give Fletcher a chance. Gibbons should get the chance, but it’s hard to say which way they’ll turn. Maybe we need a new goalie coach on top of all other needs.

 

[Kingpin794]

A great goalie can absolutely bring a team from the bottom. Carey Price is a prime example of this. Montreal had no business making the playoffs for the better part of a decade but he single handedly put them there several times.

That’s in pro hockey. The gap between 90% of the teams isn’t as large as juniors so a good goalie can make more of a difference there. I’m speaking strictly in terms of junior hockey.

 

[NOA]

A great goalie can absolutely bring a team from the bottom. Carey Price is a prime example of this. Montreal had no business making the playoffs for the better part of a decade but he single handedly put them there several times.

Windsor in 2017-18 a prime example in the OHL, with Dipietro carrying that team. It does happen in the OHL too. And I’ll give Lalonde and the goalies somewhat of a pass because of the play in front of them but .868%??? That’s just as much on him as anyone. In 2007-08, Erie won 18 games. They were horrible. Janus had a .892%. So yes, good to great goalies can still put up some decent numbers with a bad roster

And if it starts at the top for blame then it starts with JW. Again, he still is allowing DB in this spot. DB isn’t going to fire himself. You all want to blame and blame DB, and for good reason, but at this point it should be redirected to his boss who is keeping him employed. Not sure how for some of you JW escapes blame but this is becoming a Sherry Bassin situation with incompetence.

 

[Kingpin794]

Windsor in 2017-18 a prime example in the OHL, with Dipietro carrying that team. It does happen in the OHL too. And I’ll give Lalonde and the goalies somewhat of a pass because of the play in front of them but .868%??? That’s just as much on him as anyone. In 2007-08, Erie won 18 games. They were horrible. Janus had a .892%. So yes, good to great goalies can still put up some decent numbers with a bad roster

And if it starts at the top for blame then it starts with JW. Again, he still is allowing DB in this spot. DB isn’t going to fire himself. You all want to blame and blame DB, and for good reason, but at this point it should be redirected to his boss who is keeping him employed. Not sure how for some of you JW escapes blame but this is becoming a Sherry Bassin situation with incompetence.

Let’s take a deeper look at Janus on a bad team vs Lalonde on a bad team.

Back in 2007-2008, of the goalies that played at least 40 games, the average SV% of the top ten goalies was 0.915. Janus’ differential was 0.023. This past season the top goalies averaged a SV% of 0.900. Lalonde had a differential of 0.032. That’s about the same performance as Janus relative to his peers. Overall, it’s more difficult for goalies to put up great numbers in the OHL now a days. It’s a speed skill game that favors offense.

 

[NOA]

Let’s take a deeper look at Janus on a bad team vs Lalonde on a bad team.

Back in 2007-2008, of the goalies that played at least 40 games, the average SV% of the top ten goalies was 0.915. Janus’ differential was 0.023. This past season the top goalies averaged a SV% of 0.900. Lalonde had a differential of 0.032. That’s about the same performance as Janus relative to his peers. Overall, it’s more difficult for goalies to put up great numbers in the OHL now a days. It’s a speed skill game that favors offense.

Fair point but still a slight difference when compared to peers. Janus outperformed. No matter how you slice it, Lalonde was bad regardless of the team in front of him. Flores managed .891 on the worst team in the league…

Nobody was expecting Lalonde to carry the roster but imo being around .880-.885, which is still poor, would have been fair expectations

 

[Kingpin794]

Fair point but still a slight difference when compared to peers. Janus outperformed. No matter how you slice it, Lalonde was bad regardless of the team in front of him. Flores managed .891 on the worst team in the league…

Nobody was expecting Lalonde to carry the roster but imo being around .880-.885, which is still poor, would have been fair expectations

Yes Flores performed very well for Niagara and they still were the worst team. I hope they build something up there otherwise it won’t matter if Flores keeps over performing.

I would hazard a guess that Lalonde is around the 0.880-0.890 mark next season if he’s playing on a playoff team. Whether that be for Erie or someone else.

 

[ohloutsider]

Fair point but still a slight difference when compared to peers. Janus outperformed. No matter how you slice it, Lalonde was bad regardless of the team in front of him. Flores managed .891 on the worst team in the league…

Nobody was expecting Lalonde to carry the roster but imo being around .880-.885, which is still poor, would have been fair expectations

Is Lalonde an OA this year?

 

[7D442]

Is Lalonde an OA this year?

No -

someone in the organization is obsessed w Shane Clifford and LaLonde though ..London’s 3-4 th traded off tenders do better than our top guys .. it’s a huge glaring weakness - let’s not kid ourselves

 

[ohloutsider]

No -

someone in the organization is obsessed w Shane Clifford and LaLonde though ..London’s 3-4 th traded off tenders do better than our top guys .. it’s a huge glaring weakness - let’s not kid ourselves

Ok thanks, I had visions of them using an OA spot for a goalie. Unless they are Brochu like not a good use of assets. They did that last year in Windsor and did not really work out.

Edit- sorry forgot to add my 2 cents on the size issue. IMHO it is all about skill in the OHL. If a smaller player is much more skilled then that is the one you pick. If a big player and a smaller player have the same skill level then you take the bigger player. Having said that the best teams have a mix of small and large players but all come with high skill potential. Where Erie fails is picking or not getting the skilled players that will report.

 

[Mata]

Ok thanks, I had visions of them using an OA spot for a goalie. Unless they are Brochu like not a good use of assets. They did that last year in Windsor and did not really work out.

Edit- sorry forgot to add my 2 cents on the size issue. IMHO it is all about skill in the OHL. If a smaller player is much more skilled then that is the one you pick. If a big player and a smaller player have the same skill level then you take the bigger player. Having said that the best teams have a mix of small and large players but all come with high skill potential. Where Erie fails is picking or not getting the skilled players that will report.

The problem becomes larger players generally take an extra year or two to develop where small kids have to rely on the skill early. If you have too many small skill players, such as Erie, they just get tossed around like rag dolls as they have for the past several seasons.

In a perfect world the 6 footer who develops slower is overall a better investment than the 5'6 player who likely is near their ceiling but ahead of the curve in year 1 and maybe 2.

Edit: And it's all a moot point until Erie can develop kids which has proven to be a huge shortfall in the past several seasons as well

 

[NOA]

In a perfect world the 6 footer who develops slower is overall a better investment than the 5'6 player who likely is near their ceiling but ahead of the curve in year 1 and maybe 2.

This is literally the opposite of how most development goes… the smaller player is the one that takes a year or two or has a slower development to reach their ceiling. See Connor Brown, Golod, Maksimovich. Neumann, the list goes on. Most smaller players that have success start out a little bit behind because they have to learn to adapt their game or get stronger. The big guy is the one who lights it up in junior because they have double the size on their opponents and then they get to the next level and realize oh wait, I’m just normal size.

I cannot stress this enough - This is why Erie drafted small players. It wasn’t an intentional strategy to get small, it wasn’t a bias against big players, it wasn’t because they felt the smaller players are better. They simply tried to accumulate the most skill possible, with limited resources, and their plan was presumably to figure out the rest later. We can debate the approach and certainly it didn’t work for them but it’s pretty obvious why they did it. If they hit on some of these smaller players, at minimum they would have had a talented team that was small but with the ability to flip some of those assets for more size. And we really don’t know the extent of how good/bad the approach was when there is a huge asterisk that it was doomed to fail by the horrible coaching hires and other asset management issues. Even the idea of saying they just drafted the wrong small players can not necessarily be proven because who is to say Erie wouldn’t have screwed up those that found succcess on other teams had Erie have drafted them instead. Facts are that Lockhart/Saganiuk had some hype when we drafted them. Lucas Ross was a big school D1 commit. I mean it wasn’t like they took low level skill. At the time of the picks, we all had hope because of the talent those players possessed. Scouts/media did not question the size of the team or the potential, they mostly amplified the hype because of the talent Erie was starting to accumulate. They all had hype attached to them. Now 20/20 we want to say these were dumb picks and idk, I just think we at least have to acknowledge that there was so much crap going on these last few years that the development of every single player was compromised regardless of size

 

[Mata]

*delete*

 

[Mata]

This is literally the opposite of how most development goes… the smaller player is the one that takes a year or two or has a slower development to reach their ceiling. See Connor Brown, Golod, Maksimovich. Neumann, the list goes on. Most smaller players that have success start out a little bit behind because they have to learn to adapt their game or get stronger. The big guy is the one who lights it up in junior because they have double the size on their opponents and then they get to the next level and realize oh wait, I’m just normal size.

I cannot stress this enough - This is why Erie drafted small players. It wasn’t an intentional strategy to get small, it wasn’t a bias against big players, it wasn’t because they felt the smaller players are better. They simply tried to accumulate the most skill possible, with limited resources, and their plan was presumably to figure out the rest later. We can debate the approach and certainly it didn’t work for them but it’s pretty obvious why they did it. If they hit on some of these smaller players, at minimum they would have had a talented team that was small but with the ability to flip some of those assets for more size. And we really don’t know the extent of how good/bad the approach was when there is a huge asterisk that it was doomed to fail by the horrible coaching hires and other asset management issues. Even the idea of saying they just drafted the wrong small players can not necessarily be proven because who is to say Erie wouldn’t have screwed up those that found succcess on other teams had Erie have drafted them instead. Facts are that Lockhart/Saganiuk had some hype when we drafted them. Lucas Ross was a big school D1 commit. I mean it wasn’t like they took low level skill. At the time of the picks, we all had hope because of the talent those players possessed. Scouts/media did not question the size of the team or the potential, they mostly amplified the hype because of the talent Erie was starting to accumulate. They all had hype attached to them. Now 20/20 we want to say these were dumb picks and idk, I just think we at least have to acknowledge that there was so much crap going on these last few years that the development of every single player was compromised regardless of size

Golod is 5'11

Not small, so thanks for giving me credence to taking longer to develop!

*high five*

D'Amato is a perfect tall player who took longer to develop as well!

If Alfano keeps going, he would be another to add to the list.

Conversely, Saganiuk was suited for the league ahead of time and has lost time or not really gained a lot. Ross also has slowed over time as evident by not making the roster.

Lockhart may be slightly different as he had poor coaching and then lit it up this past season and Sproule I think could be lumped into bad coaching, though I consider him to be on the larger side > 5'10

 

[dirty12]

The problem becomes larger players generally take an extra year or two to develop where small kids have to rely on the skill early. If you have too many small skill players, such as Erie, they just get tossed around like rag dolls as they have for the past several seasons.

In a perfect world the 6 footer who develops slower is overall a better investment than the 5'6 player who likely is near their ceiling but ahead of the curve in year 1 and maybe 2.

Edit: And it's all a moot point until Erie can develop kids which has proven to be a huge shortfall in the past several seasons as well

>5’7”-5’9” is small. <5’7”-5’5” and 140-150 lbs is very small. 5’10”-6’ is normal for draft year. I don’t see how Lockhart then 5’ 7.5” could develop normally when the next picks were Sagniuk & Bresette, then bring in Ross & Signoretti the next year. It’s only my opinion, but I think if having two very small players, one had better be 19-20.

 

[Mata]

>5’7”-5’9” is small. <5’7”-5’5” and 140-150 lbs is very small. 5’10”-6’ is normal for draft year. I don’t see how Lockhart then 5’ 7.5” could develop normally when the next picks were Sagniuk & Bresette, then bring in Ross & Signoretti the next year. It’s only my opinion, but I think if having two very small players, one had better be 19-20.

I think Lockhart came in with a much higher ceiling than Saganiuk, Bresette, and Ross/Signoretti but I don't think he developed remotely close to how he was scouted/projected. I actually had higher hopes for him and unfortunately he was rather pedestrian other than he was a very flashy player (fast and great hands) showing signs of brilliance, just never consistently. Perhaps he just wasn't meant to lead a line like Erie needed him to?

He did well in Peterborough, which is awesome but we have to ask, why not here

 

[dirty12]

I think Lockhart came in with a much higher ceiling than Saganiuk, Bresette, and Ross/Signoretti but I don't think he developed remotely close to how he was scouted/projected. I actually had higher hopes for him and unfortunately he was rather pedestrian other than he was a very flashy player (fast and great hands) showing signs of brilliance, just never consistently. Perhaps he just wasn't meant to lead a line like Erie needed him to?

Lockhart is very good complimentary player for the Petes, but I’m not sure he could effectively lead a top line for any team.

He did well in Peterborough, which is awesome but we have to ask, why not here

Lockhart joined a vet laden Petes team at 19 that now have 7 NHL drafted and/or signed forwards. Last year at 18, Lockhart was one of the Otters 7 forwards 5’6”-5’9” in addition to a 5’10” 155 lb rookie.

 

[Guy In Burlington]

Golod is 5'11

Not small, so thanks for giving me credence to taking longer to develop!

*high five*

D'Amato is a perfect tall player who took longer to develop as well!

If Alfano keeps going, he would be another to add to the list.

Conversely, Saganiuk was suited for the league ahead of time and has lost time or not really gained a lot. Ross also has slowed over time as evident by not making the roster.

Lockhart may be slightly different as he had poor coaching and then lit it up this past season and Sproule I think could be lumped into bad coaching, though I consider him to be on the larger side > 5'10

I never did see Sproule play in Erie but saw enough of him when he played his minor midget year in Grey-Bruce. I always thought he was just a guy, who just happened to catch fire one weekend in the playoff tournament. And then all of a sudden he goes in the first round.

Was his lack of development due to coaching, or that he wasn’t really at a first round level to begin with? Wouldn’t be the first time a guy caught lightning in a bottle and got drafted higher than he should have.

I’m genuinely asking, not trying to suggest anything.