Jump to content

6th Overall pick: Pavel Zacha


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Whatever it is, it has to be about 4" taller to accommodate his "high hair".He has worn #13, wouldn't it be something if the new regime allowed him to wear that number.

I want Triumph to write a book about all the ways of the NHL. I'd read that sh!t all day! Always great insight.

We picked him exactly where he was ranked, he is a devils fan, and wants to be here. What is the problem?

Would've liked a player where the first thing people talked about was skill, not size, but OK.

 

I think it's more an issue with Devils' management that that's the first thing they talk about.  Some of his goals are ultra-skilled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a guy who is supremely skilled and just happens to have good size. Can't knock the pick. We will clearly have to wait on him a couple years so Shero will still have to pull off a few moves to hold up the forwards group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would've liked a player where the first thing people talked about was skill, not size, but OK.

from what I've read people seem to really compliment his shot and hands. seems like the real question mark is his defensive intensity and cheating/leaving the zone early (which should be fixed fairly quickly in this organization)

I know some would have preferred Barzal here, but honest question- doesn't the fact that he fell to 16 say something about the relative value of the 2 players?

Link to post
Share on other sites

from what I've read people seem to really compliment his shot and hands. seems like the real question mark is his defensive intensity and cheating/leaving the zone early (which should be fixed fairly quickly in this organization)

I know some would have preferred Barzal here, but honest question- doesn't the fact that he fell to 16 say something about the relative value of the 2 players?

 

maybe but god knows where Zacha would have been picked say we didnt pick him

Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe but god knows where Zacha would have been picked say we didnt pick him

.

Flyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't kick Shero too much for making sure he got the guy he wanted.  I am a little worried about his production but he has all the skills and attributes for a guy picked this high.  But I'd still say:  Would it have killed us to trade back two spots when you know one of those picks would be Provorov?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy with the pick; like others have said he's a big skilled kid who evidently loves Elias and anyone who loves Elias is OK in my book :) Here's hoping he turns into a bigger, stronger, faster Patti in the long run!

Edited by jim777
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't kick Shero too much for making sure he got the guy he wanted.  I am a little worried about his production but he has all the skills and attributes for a guy picked this high.  But I'd still say:  Would it have killed us to trade back two spots when you know one of those picks would be Provorov?

 

The trade back was off once Carolina took Hanifin, Shero explained basically what happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if hanifin was there you pick him 

 

if anyone has vid of the slew foot i want to see if it was a bad call or blatent or based on how he skates wide and glide.

Edited by lazer
Link to post
Share on other sites

Love that he's got some serious speed along with that size. Also the kids got a laser of a shot, and I've read that his one timer is excellent as well. I did like Barzal a lot but I think Zacha can be that dynamic forward we've been looking for eventually.

Edited by njd3b1ink
Link to post
Share on other sites

if hanifin was there you pick him

if anyone has vid of the slew foot i want to see if it was a bad call or blatent or based on how he skates wide and glide.

I'm confused at your post. Hanifin was drafted 5th.
Link to post
Share on other sites

What were the pre draft rankings like in 2003?

 

Parise was rated 9th among NA skaters.  NA skaters ranked below him who were taken above him:  Jeff Carter, Hugh Jessiman, Steve Bernier, Eric Fehr, Brent Seabrook.  That isn't really the point - the point is that guys who slide in the draft sometimes slide for good reasons and sometimes slide for ones that don't seem to make sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parise was rated 9th among NA skaters.  NA skaters ranked below him who were taken above him:  Jeff Carter, Hugh Jessiman, Steve Bernier, Eric Fehr, Brent Seabrook.  That isn't really the point - the point is that guys who slide in the draft sometimes slide for good reasons and sometimes slide for ones that don't seem to make sense.

right, Barzal might well be better but my point yesterday was more about asset management. To take Barzal at 6 when he could have been drafted at 15 would have been poor asset management (even though the pick itself might have been solid). If Shero traded back and took him fine but as you said there might not have been any takers.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Parise was so good..etc.  Teams know more, which sometimes causes them to know less.

 

This comment is stupid.  Why don't you just make it the full cliché of not seeing the forest through the trees?  GMs have a staff of scouts to help parse out the information they get to try and PROJECT what that prospect will be.  That information isn't things other people wrote or a youtube highlight, it's actually based on organizational structures that have actually seen them play and interviewed them.  The reason people drop is because the team didn't see the prospect as growing into an NHL player as much as another player.  Parise is smaller than all of those guys you rattled off; maybe the teams that passed on him realized you can't teach size.  That could be the same thing that happened to Barzal.  But don't try devaluing a lot of people's work by saying it caused paralysis by analysis. 

 

Drafting prospects isn't like video games where you get an overall and a potential.  There's more to it than that.  Barzal can be Parise or Angelo Esposito or anything in-between on the list of players that dropped in the draft.  But just because teams passed on any of those three is because they are trying to project what an 18 can be at 25.  That's not knowing less, it's trying to predict the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This comment is stupid.  Why don't you just make it the full cliché of not seeing the forest through the trees?  GMs have a staff of scouts to help parse out the information they get to try and PROJECT what that prospect will be.  That information isn't things other people wrote or a youtube highlight, it's actually based on organizational structures that have actually seen them play and interviewed them.  The reason people drop is because the team didn't see the prospect as growing into an NHL player as much as another player.  Parise is smaller than all of those guys you rattled off; maybe the teams that passed on him realized you can't teach size.  That could be the same thing that happened to Barzal.  But don't try devaluing a lot of people's work by saying it caused paralysis by analysis. 

 

Drafting prospects isn't like video games where you get an overall and a potential.  There's more to it than that.  Barzal can be Parise or Angelo Esposito or anything in-between on the list of players that dropped in the draft.  But just because teams passed on any of those three is because they are trying to project what an 18 can be at 25.  That's not knowing less, it's trying to predict the future.

 

Your argument is an argument from authority - the problem is that the draft doesn't get to have that authority.  Teams are simply not that great at drafting - if you draft based on numbers that are context-adjusted, you do better than these teams who draft on all sorts of other information.  Yes, teams get to have a 20 minute interview which they think determines a lot, which to me is ridiculous, but hey, it's their world.  Barzal may not be a great player and he may not even be an NHLer, but I've lost the ability to respect most teams' ability to see through the bullsh!t.  

 

You can't teach size is one of the stupidest cliches in hockey, and your justification being that for Parise dropping is silly.  Shorter players have succeeded plenty in the NHL and they will continue to do so - you can't teach the kind of puck skills Barzal has, either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.