Ozmodiar
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 6,164
- 7,446
Already answered. Here you go:How many is "too many"?
What defines "smaller players"?
I'm talking about under 6 feet, not weight.
Already answered. Here you go:How many is "too many"?
What defines "smaller players"?
I'm talking about under 6 feet, not weight.
Tampa wasn't about skill only. look at their defense and supporting cast to Point and Kucherov.
I'm talking about under 6 feet, not weight.
Exactly. Example is Alex Newhook who is 5'11 but has incredible core strength.Tampa didn't do shit until they addressed their depth and grit issues. Many fans forget how long it took them to win. It was a combo of their top end players maturing and adding the right pieces around them. Lately, they have depth issues again and their D was horrible last season.
Talking about Height without Weight/Strength is a meaningless conversation
So… we should draft the most skilled, highest upside players and worry about Moar Big in other facets of team building. Agreed.Tampa didn't do shit until they addressed their depth and grit issues. Many fans forget how long it took them to win. It was a combo of their top end players maturing and adding the right pieces around them. Lately, they have depth issues again and their D was horrible last season.
So… we should draft the most skilled, highest upside players and worry about Moar Big in other facets of team building. Agreed.
Exactly. Example is Alex Newhook who is 5'11 but has incredible core strength.
Ok, so small is under 6'. Even if he's 210Already answered. Here you go:
Tampa didn't do shit until they addressed their depth and grit issues. Many fans forget how long it took them to win. It was a combo of their top end players maturing and adding the right pieces around them. Lately, they have depth issues again and their D was horrible last season.
Talking about Height without Weight/Strength is a meaningless conversation
Height is important in today's game even without talking about strength and weight. A big part of a height advantage in today's game is taking away time and space with reach.
Yeah that 5'11 Crosby kid is too small, will never make it. Same with Nick Suzuki.Ok, so small is under 6'. Even if he's 210
But how many is too many?
Just want to make sure I understand the argument.
yes. One more takeaway than Caufield last season.Stick reach is a factor among many yes. Someone like Slaf is great at it. He causes a lot of turnovers and interceptions.
yes. One more takeaway than Caufield last season.
(Suzuki led forwards by a wide margin)
If they can get a top 6 forward by other means, I’m not against them drafting Parekh. They do lack a consensus number 1 defenceman. At least as of today. Yes, maybe someone steps up, but so far, the jury is still out.Would be really interesting if HuGo and the scouts were to choose Parekh:
Guhle - Parekh
Hutson - Reinbacher
Xhekaj - Mailloux
Harris, Kovacevic
Matheson, Savard, Struble, Barron trade bait. Engstrom the wild card.
I just provided a stat. Straight facts.If you have to look up the stats to figure that out, you really have not watched the games. Slaf's active stick does cause a lot of turnovers. Sometimes, the turnover happens as a result of his forecheck but he don't get the credit for it.
What are you trying to say? Slaf is no better at it vs Caufield? Is that what you really think?
Anyways, seems to be some cranky posters lately about side conversations that don't apply to the thread. Is this another?
I just provided a stat. Straight facts.
Now who’s cranky? lol
Yeah that 5'11 Crosby kid is too small, will never make it. Same with Nick Suzuki.
If they can get a top 6 forward by other means, I’m not against them drafting Parekh. They do lack a consensus number 1 defenceman. At least as of today. Yes, maybe someone steps up, but so far, the jury is still out.
Save some energy for next year, when we draft no "worse" than top 8.I’ve got mock draft fatigue
No more!
Yeah that 5'11 Crosby kid is too small, will never make it. Same with Nick Suzuki.
Maybe. I admit I’m point watching as I haven’t seen them play. Parekh’s totals are pretty damn good. I think no matter what, half the fans will be disappointed with whoever they pickI have a hard time believing there is that many top pairing guys in this draft. First you see Dickinson, then others say it's Levshunov...etc. Personally, I see a lot of top 4D.
When I look at the forwards vs the D, I see a lot of top 6F vs top 4D which equal chances of some turning into top line forwards or top pairing D.
So if we draft Parekh, we think he can be a #1 but if we draft Iggy, he can't be a top line forward? I think lots of fans are falling into this trap with all that D talk.
Maybe. I admit I’m point watching as I haven’t seen them play. Parekh’s totals are pretty damn good. I think no matter what, half the fans will be disappointed with whoever they pick
Nah, you just need to ask Dr Recchi.Huh? I thought everyone was an MD here...