How’s Honzek doing these days?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

It's too early to make declarations any which way, but I felt like since the draft that Conroy and Co were strangely bullish and set on this kid even though there were a lot of strong talents to pick from at their position.

I think they might've had some tunnel vision and while it may not come back to bite them necessarily, there's a good chance they passed up a better NHLer that was an obvious choice even then. i.e. Perreault

Time will tell. I just don't like the limited sample size of "elite" play they had to go off of in his draft year.

Hopefully this is the Flames' Gabriel Landeskog and we're eating crow in a couple years.

How do you determine that they had tunnel vision?

[Goriders]

I watched him in Penticton. He’s not going to walk in next year and be a saviour. He looks like he needs a few seasons to physically fill out and gain some experience playing against pros.

[Ziggy Lidstrom]

I wanted Ritchie , Rehpkof and Musty if we couldn’t get any higher up.

Yet , I did think Honzek would be a good pick.

Guys with his size hands and wheels go pretty high on draft day.

The injuries aren’t a concern for me long term. He was cut by a skate in the WJCs in his D - 1 year and suffered a core injury this preseason playing with the big club. Not related and aberrations if anything. We will see though. He’s probably still playing a bit cautiously as he’s only been 20 * games back from injury.


The giants aren’t an offensive powerhouse but a strong defensive team.

Development isn’t linear I agree. I think we just should be patient with this guy. Even if he doesn’t play Center in pro he could still be a valuable top six offensive load. He’s probably going to play at 6’4 210. If he keeps his skating strength he will be a force to handle on the cycle. He’s a skilled PWF prospect and I’m ok seeing him go to the AHL next year. He will have Parker bell and coronato probably starts the year there. Stormgren is a sleeper too. Lipinski will be there and hopefully morin and Brustavic. That is already a Better offensive environment than what he has in Vancouver.

PWFs take longer to season anyway.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I am still very happy with this pick. When he fills out, he is going to be difficult to stop, especially with his motor and speed.

[Two Fivenagame]

I think this is what we should expect from a mid range first round pick. Honzek has some exciting tools but will need to develop if he is going to slot into a top 9 role. Same with Zary, Pelletier, Coronato etc.
This is what mushy middle gets you.

[Moneyhands23]

Originally Posted by Two Fivenagame

I think this is what we should expect from a mid range first round pick. Honzek has some exciting tools but will need to develop if he is going to slot into a top 9 role. Same with Zary, Pelletier, Coronato etc.
This is what mushy middle gets you.

This may be a mushy middle pick, but in an extremely deep draft.

[Two Fivenagame]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

This may be a mushy middle pick, but in an extremely deep draft.

I read that as well. I question what a deep draft really means tho. Would a player like Honzek be selected at 10-12 OA in a normal draft year? Those players typically need development time as well. Look at Coronato taken 13OA.
This is what just missing the playoffs gets you - some depth, a few really good players here and there, but not elite players.

My point is, Honzek has plenty of time. No need to put pressure on the kid. He isn't the saviour.

Gavin McKenna will be...

[dustygoon]

It was Yzerman that was rumoured to be high on Honzek and scouting him hard wasn't it?

As for Perreault, was he the american player that was apparently telling teams which ones he would sign with and which he wouldn't? Thus he dropped. Or was that Moore?

Injuries can throw a player off for a full year even if they come back. Toss this season in the bin. I'm waiting until next fall to judge.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

How do you determine that they had tunnel vision?

Not sure I'd use those words, but isn't that what you want?

Give me a convicted scouting group any day.

It's the waffling crews that seem to draft the falling guy and fail.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Not sure I'd use those words, but isn't that what you want?

Give me a convicted scouting group any day.

It's the waffling crews that seem to draft the falling guy and fail.

Yeah that's basically what I was confused about.
You have a list. You rank players. You take those players.
Is that tunnel vision or just knowing what your list is?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

This may be a mushy middle pick, but in an extremely deep draft.

The strength of the 2023 draft being due to depth was over-stated.
The reason why the draft was a strong one was almost entirely because of the top 3 guys.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Yeah that's basically what I was confused about.
You have a list. You rank players. You take those players.
Is that tunnel vision or just knowing what your list is?

I wrote an article for the Forecaster about 20 years ago about players that slide in the draft vs players taken before they were expected; at that point there was a huge discrepancy in favour of taking a player early.

Was also interesting to see what teams tended to draft the sliding guy. Edmonton was either the biggest culprit or top three for drafting using the Hockey News.

[Enoch Root]

If picking the guy your scouting staff likes is tunnel vision, then isn't pretty much every team guilty of it? And isn't that how you want them to be?

Terms like 'tunnel vision' and 'mushy middle' are just the fanbase doing the usual everything-Calgary-does-is-crap verbiage, IMO.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I wrote an article for the Forecaster about 20 years ago about players that slide in the draft vs players taken before they were expected; at that point there was a huge discrepancy in favour of taking a player early.

Was also interesting to see what teams tended to draft the sliding guy. Edmonton was either the biggest culprit or top three for drafting using the Hockey News.

There's a couple surprising things I've heard over the years about how teams have been caught unprepared.
- The Caps apparently didn't have Forsberg on their list because they didn't believe he would drop to them at 11. When he did, they panicked and took him even though he wasn't on their list (which was the right call). But then that was a factor in why they traded him later for Martin Erat - because there wasn't a ton of internal support for the pick.
- There's also been stories of teams "running out of players" on their list because they only go into the draft with 75 names. They don't have an exhaustive list.
- You also hear examples of where teams throw out their list for some rounds, and let a specific guy make their pick. "OK Jim, you can make the pick here".

Which all kinda surprises me. I would assume the well staffed and analytically driven organizations would have an exhaustive list that you work through. If things happen in the draft that are counter to expectations such that a guy you thought you could get in the 4th may go higher, then I guess you can pivot. But if you have a proper list, where you have agreed on the stack rank - should that list not drive it all? I suppose if you find that you've only drafted D through the first 3 rounds or something you may want to not in the 4th.

But stuff like that makes me wonder how tight teams are. I suspect some teams are (Dallas) and they have an advantage as a result.

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

There's a couple surprising things I've heard over the years about how teams have been caught unprepared.
- The Caps apparently didn't have Forsberg on their list because they didn't believe he would drop to them at 11. When he did, they panicked and took him even though he wasn't on their list (which was the right call). But then that was a factor in why they traded him later for Martin Erat - because there wasn't a ton of internal support for the pick.
- There's also been stories of teams "running out of players" on their list because they only go into the draft with 75 names. They don't have an exhaustive list.
- You also hear examples of where teams throw out their list for some rounds, and let a specific guy make their pick. "OK Jim, you can make the pick here".

Which all kinda surprises me. I would assume the well staffed and analytically driven organizations would have an exhaustive list that you work through. If things happen in the draft that are counter to expectations such that a guy you thought you could get in the 4th may go higher, then I guess you can pivot. But if you have a proper list, where you have agreed on the stack rank - should that list not drive it all? I suppose if you find that you've only drafted D through the first 3 rounds or something you may want to not in the 4th.

But stuff like that makes me wonder how tight teams are. I suspect some teams are (Dallas) and they have an advantage as a result.

I imagine that its rare to have total agreement on a list. In fact, you probably don't want that.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by fotze2

I imagine that its rare to have total agreement on a list. In fact, you probably don't want that.

Right but because of that, you should come into the draft with the list that has been agreed to. You have months to have the arguments and come to consensus. You don't want that happening on the draft floor.

[Strange Brew]

Well I would call "tunnel vision" the action of focusing on or falling in love with a particular player too early in the process before you fully scout and assess the other players available. IMO that would not be a good thing but I have no idea whether the Flames did that. It would be very hard to know.

For several years I lived next door to the AGM for an NBA team before he moved to bigger and better things. I was a little surprised at the process around drafting that he shared. The GM and AGM had very little involvement in scouting and selecting the later round picks (in this case, the second round). Effectively delegated most all of it to the scouting department.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Well I would call "tunnel vision" the action of focusing on or falling in love with a particular player too early in the process before you fully scout and assess the other players available. IMO that would not be a good thing but I have no idea whether the Flames did that. It would be very hard to know.

For several years I lived next door to the AGM for an NBA team before he moved to bigger and better things. I was a little surprised at the process around drafting that he shared. The GM and AGM had very little involvement in scouting and selecting the later round picks (in this case, the second round). Effectively delegated most all of it to the scouting department.

That’s what you want imo. Why hire a whole team of scouts if you are going to overrule them. I’d rather the GM be hands off including round one. Pay people to do their job and trust them.

[Enoch Root]

I think it is possible for a group to get too focused on an individual player - Jankowski comes to mind - but that is probably very rare. For the most part, conviction is what you want.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think it is possible for a group to get too focused on an individual player - Jankowski comes to mind - but that is probably very rare. For the most part, conviction is what you want.

I've got nothing from behind the scenes on the Jankowski pick but there was so much ink on Weisbrod seeing him, snow storm, dominant, next Nieuwendyk ....

That I wonder if there should be a distinction between

a) laser focuses scouting group with an agreed upon list
b) hockey exec with one viewing obsessing over a player