GM Hockey

You are not connected. Please login or register

GM Hockey » The other NHL teams » General Hockey talk » 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch

2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch

Go to page : Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 36 ... 67  Next

Go down  Message [Page 6 of 67]

762011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 4:18 am

Flo The Action


Franchise Player
Franchise Player


my money is on Strome if we pick at 6, slight attitude problem or not. I haven't heard much about this attitude problem from the stuff i've read and i'm not gonna put much stock in hearsay from a few posters on forums. If i did then everyone in this frakin draft has his issues one way or another.
the kid is... well exactly that, a kid. plenty of time to straighten him out.

Obviously this could change depending on if anyone falls down in the draft.

772011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:20 am

Guest


Guest
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

782011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:21 am

Ev


Franchise Player
Franchise Player
5 minutes may have been an exaggeration. Make it 20-30 minutes, and you're good.

792011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:23 am

Guest


Guest
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:let's for a second say that they think strome has some attitude issues.
once they suit him up for some pre-season games that should straighten him out a little bit.IMO. Sure i've heard what he said as far as him liking the spotlight so on and so on. he's a little cocky for sure. I don't see it as a huge red flag.
If he'd walk into there and say i'm the best player in this draft take me... then i'd say he's a little high and mighty.

when it comes down to it i think if you're going to judge a guy from these micro moments then you're out to lunch. what we know and have seen is but a grain of sand within the bigger picture the organisation is seeing.
alot of assumptions are being formed with little facts

They do interviews for a reason dude. You're not out to lunch if you judge a guy from a 5 minute sit-down.

Yep, 5 minutes is more than enough time to judge someone's character. Laugh1 Facepalm

Sometimes you say things that I assume are a joke, but are completely devoid of smilies to denote that you are kidding.

No I am not kidding at all. You ever hear of JOB INTERVIEWS? They judge you in 5-30 mintues time, however long it takes to interview you. It's no different in the NHL. Kirk Muller apparently doesn't interview well, hence why he is without a HC job right now. At the combine, Seth Ambroz did not impress in his interviews, further cementing the fact that he doesn't have great character.

You can easily judge somebody by talking to them for 5-10 minutes.

You said 5 minutes. Nice backtrack. As I said to stempy, a job interviewer for a regular job is more concerned with qualifications first and foremost.

And btw, not being able to communicate well in an interview doesn't necessarily mean his character is questionable. It's two totally separate things. I can't believe this Dung has to be explained to you. Laughing3

802011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:27 am

Ev

Ev
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:let's for a second say that they think strome has some attitude issues.
once they suit him up for some pre-season games that should straighten him out a little bit.IMO. Sure i've heard what he said as far as him liking the spotlight so on and so on. he's a little cocky for sure. I don't see it as a huge red flag.
If he'd walk into there and say i'm the best player in this draft take me... then i'd say he's a little high and mighty.

when it comes down to it i think if you're going to judge a guy from these micro moments then you're out to lunch. what we know and have seen is but a grain of sand within the bigger picture the organisation is seeing.
alot of assumptions are being formed with little facts

They do interviews for a reason dude. You're not out to lunch if you judge a guy from a 5 minute sit-down.

Yep, 5 minutes is more than enough time to judge someone's character. Laugh1 Facepalm

Sometimes you say things that I assume are a joke, but are completely devoid of smilies to denote that you are kidding.

No I am not kidding at all. You ever hear of JOB INTERVIEWS? They judge you in 5-30 mintues time, however long it takes to interview you. It's no different in the NHL. Kirk Muller apparently doesn't interview well, hence why he is without a HC job right now. At the combine, Seth Ambroz did not impress in his interviews, further cementing the fact that he doesn't have great character.

You can easily judge somebody by talking to them for 5-10 minutes.

You said 5 minutes. Nice backtrack. As I said to stempy, a job interviewer for a regular job is more concerned with qualifications first and foremost.

And btw, not being able to communicate well in an interview doesn't necessarily mean his character is questionable. It's two totally separate things. I can't believe this Dung has to be explained to you. Laughing3

I love how you take the low road and try to be insulting.

I'm not sure if you've ever had a big job interview, but mostly everyone picked to be interviewed has the SAME qualifications. It's the character that will stand out in the interview and it's the character that will give someone the job.

If you have 20 people all with BCom's going into an interview, the person who gets the job will be the one who has character and who stands out the most.

812011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:29 am

Ev

Ev
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

No, but they could drop A TON in the draft because of this.

822011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:42 am

Guest


Guest
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:let's for a second say that they think strome has some attitude issues.
once they suit him up for some pre-season games that should straighten him out a little bit.IMO. Sure i've heard what he said as far as him liking the spotlight so on and so on. he's a little cocky for sure. I don't see it as a huge red flag.
If he'd walk into there and say i'm the best player in this draft take me... then i'd say he's a little high and mighty.

when it comes down to it i think if you're going to judge a guy from these micro moments then you're out to lunch. what we know and have seen is but a grain of sand within the bigger picture the organisation is seeing.
alot of assumptions are being formed with little facts

They do interviews for a reason dude. You're not out to lunch if you judge a guy from a 5 minute sit-down.

Yep, 5 minutes is more than enough time to judge someone's character. Laugh1 Facepalm

Sometimes you say things that I assume are a joke, but are completely devoid of smilies to denote that you are kidding.

No I am not kidding at all. You ever hear of JOB INTERVIEWS? They judge you in 5-30 mintues time, however long it takes to interview you. It's no different in the NHL. Kirk Muller apparently doesn't interview well, hence why he is without a HC job right now. At the combine, Seth Ambroz did not impress in his interviews, further cementing the fact that he doesn't have great character.

You can easily judge somebody by talking to them for 5-10 minutes.

You said 5 minutes. Nice backtrack. As I said to stempy, a job interviewer for a regular job is more concerned with qualifications first and foremost.

And btw, not being able to communicate well in an interview doesn't necessarily mean his character is questionable. It's two totally separate things. I can't believe this Dung has to be explained to you. Laughing3

I love how you take the low road and try to be insulting.

I'm not sure if you've ever had a big job interview, but mostly everyone picked to be interviewed has the SAME qualifications. It's the character that will stand out in the interview and it's the character that will give someone the job.

If you have 20 people all with BCom's going into an interview, the person who gets the job will be the one who has character and who stands out the most.

Generally speaking, if there is not much to separate candidates, yes character will be a determining factor certainly. But in cases like that, most employers will take the necessary time to interview these people, and then will make a determination. That could include a couple or more interviews obviously, so you're time frame of 5-30 minutes is still way off. Like I said, you cannot judge someone's character until you REALLY get to know them, and to try and do without doing due diligence is dismissive.

As far as the "insult", you should expect people to challenge you when you make absurd generalizations like the Ambroz comment. You have no idea why he didn't interview well, yet you seem to think that it "cements the fact that he doesn't have great character". Perhaps he was nervous, or preoccupied, or maybe he's just not a good communicator. There are many factors that could be in play in a situation like this. In an interview, you need to be able to sell yourself and your attributes and people vary from person to person on how good they are at it. Often, people with lesser qualifications get jobs over more qualified people, because they "blew away" the interviewer. To suggest that a bad interview = bad character is potentially way off base.

832011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:46 am

Guest


Guest
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

No, but they could drop A TON in the draft because of this.

They'd have to be borderline stupid in the interview I would think. If a guy who's rated highly does poorly, it may hurt him a few spots in the draft, but like I said, skill and on-ice performance trumps everything. If a slam dunk number 1 prospect tanked his interview, would he slide? Doubtful. At the highest level, character has little to do with it. The guys who would be affected the most are guys who are counting on solid interviews anyway to help their draft standing.

842011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:50 am

stempniaksen

stempniaksen
Veteran
Veteran
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

I never went as far as saying a player will be discredited entirely because of attitude. I'm not naive enough to know that talents trump all, which is why guys like Taylor Hall and Dany Heatley got drafted where they did and why guys like Zherdev are still in the league. I just think it's naive on your part to think that NHL scouts don't completely rule some guys out based on crappy interviews (especially guys not slated to be top-10 draft picks).

852011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:34 pm

Flo The Action

Flo The Action
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:let's for a second say that they think strome has some attitude issues.
once they suit him up for some pre-season games that should straighten him out a little bit.IMO. Sure i've heard what he said as far as him liking the spotlight so on and so on. he's a little cocky for sure. I don't see it as a huge red flag.
If he'd walk into there and say i'm the best player in this draft take me... then i'd say he's a little high and mighty.

when it comes down to it i think if you're going to judge a guy from these micro moments then you're out to lunch. what we know and have seen is but a grain of sand within the bigger picture the organisation is seeing.
alot of assumptions are being formed with little facts

They do interviews for a reason dude. You're not out to lunch if you judge a guy from a 5 minute sit-down.

Yep, 5 minutes is more than enough time to judge someone's character. Laugh1 Facepalm

Sometimes you say things that I assume are a joke, but are completely devoid of smilies to denote that you are kidding.

No I am not kidding at all. You ever hear of JOB INTERVIEWS? They judge you in 5-30 mintues time, however long it takes to interview you. It's no different in the NHL. Kirk Muller apparently doesn't interview well, hence why he is without a HC job right now. At the combine, Seth Ambroz did not impress in his interviews, further cementing the fact that he doesn't have great character.

You can easily judge somebody by talking to them for 5-10 minutes.

You said 5 minutes. Nice backtrack. As I said to stempy, a job interviewer for a regular job is more concerned with qualifications first and foremost.

And btw, not being able to communicate well in an interview doesn't necessarily mean his character is questionable. It's two totally separate things. I can't believe this Dung has to be explained to you. Laughing3

I love how you take the low road and try to be insulting.

I'm not sure if you've ever had a big job interview, but mostly everyone picked to be interviewed has the SAME qualifications. It's the character that will stand out in the interview and it's the character that will give someone the job.

If you have 20 people all with BCom's going into an interview, the person who gets the job will be the one who has character and who stands out the most.
none of these guys have the same qualifications apart from playing hockey. seriously. you make it sound like it's a job interview for a PR position. I don't think any of the players came out sounding like Heatley 2.0. you take the best guy knowing exactly the type of player he is and how to work with him. i'll grant there could be major red flags but have we heard or seen any? no. no one has.

862011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:42 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
Big Ev wrote:I'm not sure if you've ever had a big job interview, but mostly everyone picked to be interviewed has the SAME qualifications. It's the character that will stand out in the interview and it's the character that will give someone the job.

If you have 20 people all with BCom's going into an interview, the person who gets the job will be the one who has character and who stands out the most.

Absolutely. Especially when theoretically there's only 10 guys interviewing (for the 6th overall). They got what they wanted out of the interviews guaranteed.

872011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:19 pm

NEELY


Mod
Mod
If you don't think organizations know about what a players on ice and off ice charaxterisitcs are you guys are mental. The hockey world is a very small world and there is no way people don't know everything about a guy before they draft him.

The 5 to 10 min interview they do is to get a better idea of what he is like as a person in a very general sense which leads to judgements about character. I'm not sure about everyone else, but when I go into an interview for a job, I am pretty sure they are judging me based on what I say and if they want me as an employee, this is the exact same thing.

It's not 5 mins of talking that makes the judgement on a player, it's 1 or two years of asking questions to people they know. But, while it's impossible to make a 100% accurate judgment on a players character in 5 mins, that's exactly what they do. The teams that judge character best are the ones that win all the time. Give The Red Wings 5-10 mins to talk to a kid, they will know if they want him. Impossible to be accurate, not impossible to make a very educated guess.

882011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:24 pm

PTFlea

PTFlea
Co-Founder
Co-Founder
I think that's quite fair. I could see myself looking for certain characteristics in a kid and if I don't see it in 5-10 minutes of questions, that's that IMO.

His skills have already been assessed to the 9th degree, the teams have already talked to his coaches from junior/overseas, his teammates have been talked to. This is the final stage, problem is, some kids have become amazing at faking it or knowing exactly what to say to please the organizations.

892011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 1:30 pm

NEELY


Mod
Mod
I gaurentee there is a question or two teams ask and they want a specific answer to which they will make their judgment. The most successful teams make their judgments and are usually right.

902011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:00 pm

Guest


Guest
stempniaksen wrote:
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

I never went as far as saying a player will be discredited entirely because of attitude. I'm not naive enough to know that talents trump all, which is why guys like Taylor Hall and Dany Heatley got drafted where they did and why guys like Zherdev are still in the league. I just think it's naive on your part to think that NHL scouts don't completely rule some guys out based on crappy interviews (especially guys not slated to be top-10 draft picks).

Except, I never said that, nor do I think it. What I said was that the chances of a guy hurting his stock with an interview is in part tied to how much skill he has. The more skill he has, the more he'll likely overcome a bad interview. Obviously, it's somewhat of a sliding scale, but even the most talented players is going to hurt himself if during an interview he offers up the fact that he enjoys killing kittens. It's all relative. Some guys will need to kill on an interview, others, it's not overly important.

Bottom line, your assertion (and Big Ev's) that a guy can hurt his draft standing by having a bad interview is a blanket statement, and not in any way applicable to all situations. There are other factors involved.

912011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:19 pm

stempniaksen

stempniaksen
Veteran
Veteran
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

I never went as far as saying a player will be discredited entirely because of attitude. I'm not naive enough to know that talents trump all, which is why guys like Taylor Hall and Dany Heatley got drafted where they did and why guys like Zherdev are still in the league. I just think it's naive on your part to think that NHL scouts don't completely rule some guys out based on crappy interviews (especially guys not slated to be top-10 draft picks).

Except, I never said that, nor do I think it. What I said was that the chances of a guy hurting his stock with an interview is in part tied to how much skill he has. The more skill he has, the more he'll likely overcome a bad interview. Obviously, it's somewhat of a sliding scale, but even the most talented players is going to hurt himself if during an interview he offers up the fact that he enjoys killing kittens. It's all relative. Some guys will need to kill on an interview, others, it's not overly important.

Bottom line, your assertion (and Big Ev's) that a guy can hurt his draft standing by having a bad interview is a blanket statement, and not in any way applicable to all situations. There are other factors involved.

Obviously other factors come into play, I never argued that. I still fail to see how it is a blanket statement to say that a bad interview can hurt draft standings, when in reality it happens every single year with 1 or 2 guys.

922011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 2:30 pm

Ev

Ev
Franchise Player
Franchise Player
Flo The Action wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
hemlock wrote:
Big Ev wrote:
Flo The Action wrote:let's for a second say that they think strome has some attitude issues.
once they suit him up for some pre-season games that should straighten him out a little bit.IMO. Sure i've heard what he said as far as him liking the spotlight so on and so on. he's a little cocky for sure. I don't see it as a huge red flag.
If he'd walk into there and say i'm the best player in this draft take me... then i'd say he's a little high and mighty.

when it comes down to it i think if you're going to judge a guy from these micro moments then you're out to lunch. what we know and have seen is but a grain of sand within the bigger picture the organisation is seeing.
alot of assumptions are being formed with little facts

They do interviews for a reason dude. You're not out to lunch if you judge a guy from a 5 minute sit-down.

Yep, 5 minutes is more than enough time to judge someone's character. Laugh1 Facepalm

Sometimes you say things that I assume are a joke, but are completely devoid of smilies to denote that you are kidding.

No I am not kidding at all. You ever hear of JOB INTERVIEWS? They judge you in 5-30 mintues time, however long it takes to interview you. It's no different in the NHL. Kirk Muller apparently doesn't interview well, hence why he is without a HC job right now. At the combine, Seth Ambroz did not impress in his interviews, further cementing the fact that he doesn't have great character.

You can easily judge somebody by talking to them for 5-10 minutes.

You said 5 minutes. Nice backtrack. As I said to stempy, a job interviewer for a regular job is more concerned with qualifications first and foremost.

And btw, not being able to communicate well in an interview doesn't necessarily mean his character is questionable. It's two totally separate things. I can't believe this Dung has to be explained to you. Laughing3

I love how you take the low road and try to be insulting.

I'm not sure if you've ever had a big job interview, but mostly everyone picked to be interviewed has the SAME qualifications. It's the character that will stand out in the interview and it's the character that will give someone the job.

If you have 20 people all with BCom's going into an interview, the person who gets the job will be the one who has character and who stands out the most.
none of these guys have the same qualifications apart from playing hockey. seriously. you make it sound like it's a job interview for a PR position. I don't think any of the players came out sounding like Heatley 2.0. you take the best guy knowing exactly the type of player he is and how to work with him. i'll grant there could be major red flags but have we heard or seen any? no. no one has.

Yes, Myles Bell. Highly touted d-man who just drove drunk and killed his passenger.

932011 NHL Entry Draft Watch - Page 6 Empty Re: 2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch on Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:05 pm

Guest


Guest
stempniaksen wrote:
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:
hemlock wrote:
stempniaksen wrote:People in the "real world" have their character judged on 5 minute interviews? Why is it a stretch to say scouts do the same when interviewing players?

If you've only got 5 minutes, it's impossible to make an accurate read on character. In that amount of time, the interviewer is trying to gain some insight as to the interviewees qualifications first and foremost. Sure, character counts, but 5 minutes is NOT enough time to judge someone's character, period. It's just plain dumb to think this is the case. 5 minutes is not time enough to judge ANYONE'S character. There simply isn't enough time to make a proper assessment, much less ask enough questions to make an informed decision.

As it relates to hockey, do you honestly believe that a player will be completely discredited based on a 5 minute interview? Unlikely. In the end, his on-ice performance trumps all. There are PLENTY of guys who've got attitude issues that still have employment because they perform on the ice.

I never went as far as saying a player will be discredited entirely because of attitude. I'm not naive enough to know that talents trump all, which is why guys like Taylor Hall and Dany Heatley got drafted where they did and why guys like Zherdev are still in the league. I just think it's naive on your part to think that NHL scouts don't completely rule some guys out based on crappy interviews (especially guys not slated to be top-10 draft picks).

Except, I never said that, nor do I think it. What I said was that the chances of a guy hurting his stock with an interview is in part tied to how much skill he has. The more skill he has, the more he'll likely overcome a bad interview. Obviously, it's somewhat of a sliding scale, but even the most talented players is going to hurt himself if during an interview he offers up the fact that he enjoys killing kittens. It's all relative. Some guys will need to kill on an interview, others, it's not overly important.

Bottom line, your assertion (and Big Ev's) that a guy can hurt his draft standing by having a bad interview is a blanket statement, and not in any way applicable to all situations. There are other factors involved.

Obviously other factors come into play, I never argued that. I still fail to see how it is a blanket statement to say that a bad interview can hurt draft standings, when in reality it happens every single year with 1 or 2 guys.

How do we know it's strictly based on interviews? That's the statement that I have issue with. It's not like GM's come out and say stuff like "Good thing he sucks at interviews otherwise he'd have never fallen to us!" As I said, other factors.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 6 of 67]

Go to page : Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 36 ... 67  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum