Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Athletic ability, at the elite level, is a commodity with a short shelf-life.  Anybody good enough to pursue pro sports should do so at the earliest point possible.  College / Junior is all well and good, but an athlete is only ever one catastrophic injury away from having the door closed forever.  If you can play, and earn as much as you can, do it.  If the individual is not mature enough to handle it, the flameout happens regardless.  How many of us know people who lasted one year in college max?   

 

I can't understand questioning any kid whose is demonstrably capable from doing what's best for him, career-wise.  Any team, or school for that matter, would come at it from the opposite angle. 

Posted (edited)

I can't find anything that suggests he didn't finish his high school requirements.

Oh, I have no facts! I just thought that was Pi's point - as opposed to a "college is for everyone" point. Someone said it best .... He and his family made their decision .... I'm down.

Edited by N'eo
Posted

Oh, I have no facts! I just thought that was Pi's point - as opposed to a "college is for everyone" point.

 

I know.  I was simply using your post to add context to mine.

Posted

I'm convinced. So I'm lighting a candle in prayer that the Sabres avoid winning the lottery. This Matthews kid has bad news written all over him. And I do mean ALL over.

 

Manziel? Psssh. Kid stuff.

 

#hideyowife #hideyokids

Posted

To be fair, McKenzie says Laine is the clear consensus over Puljujarvi but then says seven of ten scouts had him over Puljujarvi...

...what?  :huh:

 

I still like Pujmyjarvi, because of his IQ and speed. Laine is bigger with the better shot, but I'm a sucker for the smart guys on the ice. 

So they describe Laine as being the consensus #2 and being a pure goal scorer.    Looks like something we need alongside Samson. 

Puljujarvi the one with the better overall game.

Pure goal scorer like Corey Perry is, or like Evander Kane/Vanek are?

Posted

I think Laine's shot is the best shot to get drafted since Stamkos, and Puljujarvi's lack of finish bothers me a little, relative to Laine's. I'd obviously still love either but I'd take Laine at 2 if we picked there.

Thanks, for the insight on these two. The only thing I was able to see is Laine has a wicked slapper and Puljujarvi has the speed that you look for. Everything else seemed pretty even. Who is the more physical between the two?

Posted

Why settle for just one? Let's just trade McGinn, Legwand's negotiating rights and Catenacci for a top-3 pick.

 

For this team, I think I'd rather have Laine than Puljujarvi because outside of Jack, we don't have any high end finishers. Reinhart and O'Reilly are better distributors than shooters, Kane is a volume scorer, then we have a bunch of garbage collectors. We really need a pure scorer in our top-6. That said, going for the all around game and skating that Puljujarvi brings certainly isn't a bad idea in today's NHL.

Posted

All I want is one of the Finns. But can't decide which one I like more. I will say this though, after watching highlight videos of the Finnish league those gold helmets are ridiculous.  luderus.

 

Need to channel your inner Rob Ray!

Posted (edited)

Oh, I have no facts! I just thought that was Pi's point - as opposed to a "college is for everyone" point. Someone said it best .... He and his family made their decision .... I'm down.

 

Yes, thank you.  College isn't for everyone.

 

My point is that if I'm the GM with #1 overall pick, I'm going to spend some extra time studying the reasoning behind his decision to play in Europe.   Is he motivated by money?   Does he have dreams of winning a Stanley Cup?  Or is he just motivated by money?    The decision to go play for money at such a young age raises those questions.     Maybe he is motivated by money and doesn't have Stanley Cup dreams since he grew up in the desert.    That's OK, I'm not saying he's a bad kid... although we don't know enough about him to make that judgement, his decision to chase the $$$ at a young age raises those questions.    

 

I would've liked to see him finish his studies and play one year of college.   Why didn't he do that?   Because of where he's from?   Or because he values money more than anything else?    Will his play drop off after his he signs a large contract?   Or is he motivated by winning?

 

His Mom is mexican.

Edited by pi2000
Posted

Yes, thank you.  College isn't for everyone.

 

My point is that if I'm the GM with #1 overall pick, I'm going to spend some extra time studying the reasoning behind his decision to play in Europe.   Is he motivated by money?   Does he have dreams of winning a Stanley Cup?  Or is he just motivated by money?    The decision to go play for money at such a young age raises those questions.     Maybe he is motivated by money and doesn't have Stanley Cup dreams since he grew up in the desert.    That's OK, I'm not saying he's a bad kid... although we don't know enough about him to make that judgement, his decision to chase the $$$ at a young age raises those questions.    

 

I would've liked to see him finish his studies and play one year of college.   Why didn't he do that?   Because of where he's from?   Or because he values money more than anything else?    Will his play drop off after his he signs a large contract?   Or is he motivated by winning?

 

His Mom is mexican.

 

There are a lot of scenarios, but if you tell some kid, "you can either play for essentially free and hopefully not get broken", or "you can play for good money against (probably) better competition and hopefully not get broken", the choice isn't going to be that hard for many. The primary argument against this is, "but that's not what everyone else does", be that either CHL or NCAA.

 

Bold: and that matters how?

Posted
MattPie, on 09 Feb 2016 - 1:01 PM, said:

Bold: and that matters how?

 

TrueBlueGED, on 08 Feb 2016 - 10:41 PM, said:

You crazy kids. Talk about taking the bait :P

 

We've been trolled.

 

 

Posted

There are a lot of scenarios, but if you tell some kid, "you can either play for essentially free and hopefully not get broken", or "you can play for good money against (probably) better competition and hopefully not get broken", the choice isn't going to be that hard for many. The primary argument against this is, "but that's not what everyone else does", be that either CHL or NCAA.

 

Bold: and that matters how?

 

Look, I'm not saying he made the wrong decision.   My point is that his decision is unique and it raises questions that need to be answered.    99.9% of hockey phenoms grow up in areas where they dream of playing major junior or college hockey.    Did he choose Europe because of where he's from? Or is he just chasing the money?   Those are questions that Jack didn't need to answer.

 

What's his Mom and Dad like?   What do they value?   Does that influence his decision making?    

Posted

Look, I'm not saying he made the wrong decision.   My point is that his decision is unique and it raises questions that need to be answered.    99.9% of hockey phenoms grow up in areas where they dream of playing major junior or college hockey.    Did he choose Europe because of where he's from? Or is he just chasing the money?   Those are questions that Jack didn't need to answer.

 

What's his Mom and Dad like?   What do they value?   Does that influence his decision making?    

I'm pretty sure that's the same vetting process for every single draft pick.  Especially all first rounders.

Posted

Thanks, for the insight on these two. The only thing I was able to see is Laine has a wicked slapper and Puljujarvi has the speed that you look for. Everything else seemed pretty even. Who is the more physical between the two?

 

 

there is no comparison here: Laine is a physical force, just ask team Canada at the WJC as he destroyed them.

Posted

Why settle for just one? Let's just trade McGinn, Legwand's negotiating rights and Catenacci for a top-3 pick.

 

For this team, I think I'd rather have Laine than Puljujarvi because outside of Jack, we don't have any high end finishers. Reinhart and O'Reilly are better distributors than shooters, Kane is a volume scorer, then we have a bunch of garbage collectors. We really need a pure scorer in our top-6. That said, going for the all around game and skating that Puljujarvi brings certainly isn't a bad idea in today's NHL.

 

Good points. Although I will say that even though Jack is a high end finisher, his best asset is still his playmaking. That is why pairing him with a real finisher like Laine would be such an ideal match. Puljujarvi too, really, as he obviously does have good finishing ability as well, just maybe not quite as much as Laine.

Posted

Bryce Harper and Auston Matthews' circumstances couldn't be further apart. Harper got his GED early so he could play college ball early and be eligible for the MLB draft sooner

This was a good catch, sorry I missed it. Honestly I didn't know much outside of Harper other than he fast-tracked his education. Either way, he forewent some level of education to play professional ball faster and make more money. 

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...