1OApick
Registered User
- Jun 29, 2016
- 945
- 746
Few weeks ago I was at restaurant on different table with one his last year coach and he was drunk. He critized Slafs hockey iq with pretty harsh words in public.
Exactly, it really makes no sense why people are surprised he needs more time. Maybe if he was more dominant in Liiga I'd understand.Just reminding everyone that he scored 17 points in 49 games in Liiga last season, so I think the most logical thing to do is to let him work on his offensive game in AHL.
You think that poster is Ian Moran?It's called a floor press moran
Give him 9 games then send him down for the year. Same route as Rantanen should work well for him.Just reminding everyone that he scored 17 points in 49 games in Liiga last season, so I think the most logical thing to do is to let him work on his offensive game in AHL.
Few weeks ago I was at restaurant on different table with one his last year coach and he was drunk.
Joel Armia regen?
That guy also ripped Stutzle called the DEL a beer league and said Amirov is a superior prospect. He sucks.You think that poster is Ian Moran?
Bingo. He needs time he is a big player, the Slafkovsky hot takes are just too much. This past draft simply didnt have very many elite talents at the top end. He has the highest upside but he isnt getting there over night.It’s so annoying how people make harsh and firm judgements on him (good or bad) after one exhibition game. It’s such a clear sign that those people lack the ability to reason
Regens aren't created until the player retiresJoel Armia regen?
my bRegens aren't created until the player retires
This statement is disputable.This past draft simply didnt have very many elite talents at the top end. He has the highest upside but he isnt getting there over night.
Pretty obvious when you watched the top guys last year. His package is tantalizing but its going to take time.This statement is disputable.
I dont think its obvious whatsoever. I think if you even polled this forum a majority of people wouldnt list him as the highest ceiling.Pretty obvious when you watched the top guys last year. His package is tantalizing but its going to take time.
Well most of this forum didnt watch him or Wright. It was blatantly obvious when discussing the players leading up to the draft. There was a reason he went first. The real professionals were watching. There was a reason Wright dropped to 4th too. Frankly most people that post here cant identify prospects based on viewings, they only look at statistics.I dont think its obvious whatsoever. I think if you even polled this forum a majority of people wouldnt list him as the highest ceiling.
Ceiling is like impossible to argue because if he doesnt reach whatever ceiling then you can always just say "oh well he didnt reach his ceiling." But if you asked most people who will be the best player from the draft, Slafkovsky or the field, I dont think many people take Slafkovsky.
Even setting aside the fact that scouts can make mistakes. One team picked him first. Other teams could easily have had anyone else, not just Wright, above him. The rationale for picking him first was not disclosed. So even Montreal could have thought that, say Nemec had a higher ceiling, but was less likely to reach it. I understand you believe in him but I wouldnt call it obvious.Well most of this forum didnt watch him or Wright. It was blatantly obvious when discussing the players leading up to the draft. There was a reason he went first. The real professionals were watching. There was a reason Wright dropped to 4th too. Frankly most people that post here cant identify prospects based on viewings, they only look at statistics.
It's most likely he starys with the team but a good season would be between 35-45 points as a rookie.
He isn't a world beater 1st overall. We have to remember in most drafts he was probably going in the 2-4 range. Many of those start in the NHL but aren't super productive in D+1
They can make mistakes but they would make a far more educated guess than a poster from a random message board. Especially ones that for the most part didnt play the sport or were exposed to it at an elite level one way or another.Even setting aside the fact that scouts can make mistakes. One team picked him first. Other teams could easily have had anyone else, not just Wright, above him. The rationale for picking him first was not disclosed. So even Montreal could have thought that, say Nemec had a higher ceiling, but was less likely to reach it. I understand you believe in him but I wouldnt call it obvious.
He shouldn't be in the NHL this year, but if he is he's sure as **** not going to get 35-45 points. 20 - 25 is more realistic. IMO no one from this years draft belongs in the NHL this season, so I don't mean this as a slight, like all the other top players this year he still has a lot to work on before he's NHL ready.It's most likely he starys with the team but a good season would be between 35-45 points as a rookie.
He isn't a world beater 1st overall. We have to remember in most drafts he was probably going in the 2-4 range. Many of those start in the NHL but aren't super productive in D+1
If he plays a full season, 30-35 seems more likely. Could be lower than that.
He shouldn't be in the NHL this year, but if he is he's sure as **** not going to get 35-45 points. 20 - 25 is more realistic. IMO no one from this years draft belongs in the NHL this season, so I don't mean this as a slight, like all the other top players this year he still has a lot to work on before he's NHL ready.
Devils would have taken Slafkovsky at 2 if he was available. Re : Resch. Idk for Arizona.Even setting aside the fact that scouts can make mistakes. One team picked him first. Other teams could easily have had anyone else, not just Wright, above him. The rationale for picking him first was not disclosed. So even Montreal could have thought that, say Nemec had a higher ceiling, but was less likely to reach it. I understand you believe in him but I wouldnt call it obvious.