Evil Little
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2014
- 6,311
- 2,739
If we looked at him now with our homerism dialed back just a bit just how good is he really? I keep getting the sense here that people are deliberately restraining themselves a little. Comparisons to Bure and Mogilny aren't very restrained but then I will see projections of him on our 2nd or even 3rd line when he arrives. I guess I am contradicting myself in a way but I do get a strange vibe of people not wanting to get carried away. It is like they are saying he will be like Bure, Selanne or Mogilny in style but at a lower level. Most here seem to agree that he was a steal at 9th and we should have finished 6th and drafted him there. Any 'realistic' chance that he should have been higher than 6th? I'm not asking what people might think is his low probability ceiling. That is obviously very high. I am asking what is his likely level? PPG? Higher? Calder? Hart? Ross? None of those?
I think there's a notion--true or not--that he never made it to the top five in part because of:
-size, which is, as Garret has dubbed it, a market inefficiency
-he's not "from Ontaria and he doesn't use Dougie Gilmore's number...you kids out there....!"
Further, and more specifically to Ehlers:
-the fact that he'd only played one CHL season
-since-debunked perceptions of his point totals being inflated (or just sheltered) by Drouin
-the fact that he was a sharp riser; would he have gone even higher in the rankings had the draft not taken place when it did, even on the same body of work?
Would he be a top-five pick if the draft were held tomorrow? Not sure (frankly, I don't think any of them have done anything to fall out). I'm confident that he wouldn't be ninth, though.
(Thanks Benning.)