I am not a fan of Brook's personality, especially his sense of entitlement, but he is a pretty good reporter, especially in these times when they are quite rare. He came up in a time without any analytics, and while an old mentality appears in some of his reporting he has worked quite hard to understand the newer parts of the game as well. For this, he should be given credit.
It's clear his interpretation of A prospect is far different from yours. Chytil and Miller are unlikely to be game-breakers. They may turn into very good, top line players, but it seems rather obvious to me that Brooks was referring to game-breaking talents, not necessarily generational, but someone who you can build your team around for a decade. In that sense, I can't say I fully disagree with him. Kravtsov might become that guy, but we are undoubtedly still lacking someone who projects to be a can't-miss, sure fire, perennial all-star.
You can argue Chytil, Miller and Kravtsov could turn into that, but they are not sure things, far from it, especially Miller who has a lot of tools to be excited about, but is still a ways off from the NHL. Hughes, Kakko, Cozens, these are the kinds of guys that change the trajectory of a franchise and, in my opinion, is who he is referring to.
