AlternateSideParking
Registered User
- Dec 11, 2005
- 21,599
- 5,134
He's a '94. What're the question marks?
Finally some skill, but a 20-year old PP specialist that only gets 15 minutes per game at that age?
Much better players were available, but we had to pick one that was 6'2'' didn't we?
When we pick small guys, people complain that they have no size. When we pick big guys, people complain that they have no skill. When we have no depth in our bottom 6, people complain that we don't develop 3rd and 4th line players.
There are no players left that don't have something wrong with their game. We aren't going to find a 6'2" guy with blazing speed, high hockey IQ, high motor and high skill in the 5th round.
When we pick small guys, people complain that they have no size. When we pick big guys, people complain that they have no skill. When we have no depth in our bottom 6, people complain that we don't develop 3rd and 4th line players.
There are no players left that don't have something wrong with their game. We aren't going to find a 6'2" guy with blazing speed, high hockey IQ, high motor and high skill in the 5th round.
#48 still available.
No idea why he's dropping. People doing a **** job scouting the ECAC again.
Who are you referring to?
Two big wingers - one a sniper, the other a bruiser
Two goalies - major organizational need
One crease clearing dman - not a need but still a good pick.
Its a weak center draft. They're doing well. Sather's thinking rather than reacting.
Started the draft with 4 picks, got a 5th and then flipped two in to 4.
Not bad.