What's the minimum a first overall pick has to become to not be labelled a disappointment?

[895]

A "disappointment", not a bust. Let's be very clear on that.

For me personally, anything short of a franchise player is a disappointment. Someone on the John Tavares, Rick Nash, Ilya Kovalchuk tier. Someone like RNH, who is a good 2C and once hit 100 points when all the stars aligned, is still considered a disappointment to me. This is a first overall pick, someone who is supposed to alter the course of your franchise.

A guy like Lafreniere still has time to become more but is quite clearly on course to become a disappointment. Slaf had a slow start and is looking much better lately but I'm not sure he can ever become a franchise player either. Maybe tops out at a 70 point power forward.

 

[wmupreds]

Too general, depends on the draft

 

[Fatass]

Is this a Lafreniere vs Slafkovsky thread?

 

[BLNY]

It really depends on the depth and quality of the draft year. You're hoping to land a top line/top pair player. FWIW, I'd say Hamrlik was that for the first half of his career. From Calgary on, in his 30s, he became a steady, minute munching, all situations, player.

 

[895]

It really depends on the depth and quality of the draft year. You're hoping to land a top line/top pair player. FWIW, I'd say Hamrlik was that for the first half of his career. From Calgary on, in his 30s, he became a steady, minute munching, all situations, player.

You're right I goofed on Hamrlik, He should be moved to the Erik Johnson/RNH tier at least.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

First liner , top 2 dman on a team

 

[ESH]

It really just depends on the player themselves. Not every 1st overall is created equal.

I think the most general way to not be a disappointment would be if they do end up becoming the best player of their draft class.

 

[DemidovSaveUs]

I think anytime you endure the suffering required to get the first overall pick, you’re disappointed if it doesn’t result in a true franchise defining player. Again, not a bust by any means, but it’s fair to be disappointed if you draft a guy first overall and he isn’t that caliber of guy.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

Anything less than a first liner/pair. Yes it's still great to have a 2C or top-4 D or whatever...but not when you're drafting first overall.

 

[missionAvs]

Given your groupings and definitions, I think anything short of a franchise player is a disappointment, not bust, for a 1st overall. A guy like RNH is a disappointment while a guy like Tavares is not IMO. That said, RNH is not a bust while a guy like Yakupov is.

 

[um]

It's hard not to get your hopes up when you get the #1 overall pick. Anything short of a franchise player is a disappointment.

It's especially disappointing when you watch the #1 picks around you turn into superstars, and you're left with your 2C. Yeah, it sucks.

 

[Frank Drebin]

I think at minimum you’re hoping for a very good first line player or #1d.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Most people are saying "First Liner/Top Pairing" but even the examples in the poll options you could argue are disappointments relative to their fans expectations. At first overall I'd hope whoever is drafted would be a cornerstone for my team for the next 10-15 years. Hall had one great year, I'm not sure Ekblad was ever really GREAT.

 

[AhosDatsyukian]

Anything less than a franchise player at 1st overall would be a disappointment to me. Sure there are drafts without any clear franchise-caliber prospects and you could have a player taken 1st overall who isn't a disappointment compared to their expectations as a prospect. But that would still be a disappointing 1st overall pick, just the reasoning being the disappointment being bad timing of when the team "earned" that pick.

 

[Rockomax]

Hamrlik not even in the Top 4 D category?

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

may be harsh, but if you're not franchise level or spend multiple seasons playing at that level you're a disappointment as a 1OA pick

 

[wetcoast]

Too general, depends on the draft

That's fair but I took the middle option as a #1 pick should at least be a top line player of top patring Dman, unless there is a generational guy blocking him.

 

[Canovin]

Franchise player. That's what people would associate the 1st overall with. Anything below that is a disappointment. But as years went on, people started to lower the bar due to frequent disappointments

 

[Toby91ca]

Too general, depends on the draft

100%

 

[Three On Zero]

Top 6 / Top 4.

 

[ESH]

Given your groupings and definitions, I think anything short of a franchise player is a disappointment, not bust, for a 1st overall. A guy like RNH is a disappointment while a guy like Tavares is not IMO. That said, RNH is not a bust while a guy like Yakupov is.

The thing is that Tavares had way higher expectations than Nugent-Hopkins

 

[tarheelhockey]

I think anytime you endure the suffering required to get the first overall pick, you’re disappointed if it doesn’t result in a true franchise defining player. Again, not a bust by any means, but it’s fair to be disappointed if you draft a guy first overall and he isn’t that caliber of guy.

Exactly. You slog through a whole nightmare season, plus years of development time, just for him to be a second-tier player on his own team? That’s crushing.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Hamrlik not even in the Top 4 D category?

He's at least a 2D I'd think

 

[Kingfan1967]

1OA should only be compared to others in their draft class , if they top out at as weak 1C but they are the best player from their draft, are they really a disappointment?

 

[Canovin]

Exactly. You slog through a whole nightmare season, plus years of development time, just for him to be a second-tier player on his own team? That’s crushing.

With the 1st overall pick, we are proud to select our 2nd liner.