William H Bonney
Registered User
I think I explained myself well enough: they went with both dubious NCAA strategy AND made odd choices in the "veteran" slots. Therefore zero sense. I chose, however, not to discuss the first part because it's obviously a policy decision, whatever. They decided on the "young and hungry", so be it. The 2nd part, however, seems much more cut and dry. Player A is better than player B and that's all there is to it.
If a guy who succeeded in every major European league like Gunderson falls under the same umbrella of "middling pro player" as someone like Warsofsky who is like 3rd D on a mid-table DEL team, what can I tell you. I guess middling means different things to us.
I get that you believe the NCAA direction to be a dubious choice but that doesn't mean it makes zero sense.
Player A is better than Player B isn't cut and dry. That's all there is to it.
Gunderson's passport doesn't inherently make him better. Warsofsky had more success than Gunderson in the AHL and actually earned NHL time. Does that make him better? The answer is no but it's the same logic. And Warsofsky's success has been on the same ice size as the Olympics.
Gunderson is a middling pro just like Warsofsky. Could they have gone with one over the other? Sure. But you're acting like we selected Jack Johnson again while leaving home great players.