Monk
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2008
- 7,569
- 5,483
That's a fair point. They know more about the injury than the general public, and have a better idea of future risks and healing timeline. That said, it is still possible they took on more risk than most would stomach.
Since you asked, I informed my risk with the knowledge of what early injuries have done to players before, the delay that large amounts of missed development time cause, and the specific skill levels of the other options available. I am not an expert on the human body, nor am I an NHL decision maker, so I did not need to go farther than this very basic analysis to make my personal rankings which were shared only for my benefit and the enjoyment of HF Wild. Had I known more I may have raised Lindstrom up in my rankings or, conversely, moved him down even further.
I really like Lindstrom, and I thought he was one of the most intriguing prospects with his size, speed, strength, puck skill, and shot. I would have had him somewhere around 3-6th overall on my list if not for the injury. I don't think dropping him ~5 spots is unreasonably low.
"just because something works later out doesn't mean it wasn't too big of a risk to take at the time"
Just seems a little weird to me that you might assume the CBJ did the wrong thing (ie too much risk) even if it works out for them in the end, while not actually knowing how much risk they knew/believed to be taking on.
I understand your logic as it pertains to what you, not an NHL decision maker, would do.