Todd Button....

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Button “destroys” McDonnell in 2016, 2015, and 2014, though, and you’re citing years where the Flames has 6 picks in the top two rounds compared to Dallas’ 10.

Dallas has absolutely done great in the draft, but you’re just telling the story you want to tell.

No, I'm just looking at recent years worth of work where Dallas really built their team. Dallas' "model" has been cited by Conroy, and I'm saying Dallas' model is just "be excellent at drafting", and then giving examples where the Flames were clearly not as good as Dallas at doing that.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I also think calling Bourque better than Zary is a bit absurd. Zary significantly outpaced him in the AHL this year and last year, and Zary spent most of this year in the NHL while Bourque was still developing in the AHL, where his NHLe was lower than Zary’s output pace in the NHL.

He’s literally shown nothing that suggests he’s the better player over Zary.

I specifically say better at 30 than Zary at 24. I'm not saying Zary > Bourque, I am saying given draft position Bourque seems like a hell of a find at 30 compared to Zary at 24. Both look like good picks - but finding the (potentially) better player at 30 vs. at 24, is a sign that Dallas is better at drafting than the Flames in recent years. These are the differences between good teams and bad teams.

Zary AHL: 140GP, 38G, 62A, 100PTS
Bourque AHL: 147GP, 47G, 82A, 129 PTS

Bourque, being 4 months younger has produced better at the AHL level.

So yeah - I think Bourque at 30 is better than Zary at 24 - and generally, I'd say Bourque's production at the AHL level could indicate he's a better player than Zary (at the AHL level). We'll see what happens at the NHL level.

Dallas is a better drafting team than Calgary is. It's why Dallas is a better team than Calgary is. I'm not sure why we should get defensive about that, and the Flames should be (and undoubtedly are) looking at ways to improve that performance.

Bader's entire thread is a good read, but this stands out:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1785374410314248261

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Steve Bozek

2 woulda/coulda misses that really stand out for me are Kucherov and Point. Especially Point - a player from our own back yard.

The idea of "back yard" doesn't really matter. Players are so heavily scouted there's very little advantage in being close to a player.
Tampa passed on Point twice, picking two guys that played 0 NHL games combined.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The idea of "back yard" doesn't really matter. Players are so heavily scouted there's very little advantage in being close to a player.
Tampa passed on Point twice, picking two guys that played 0 NHL games combined.

Exactly, TB was just less dumb as everyone else.

[Erick Estrada]

The issue with critiquing Button is that the GM ultimately makes the call on picks at least in the first few rounds of the draft so it's impossible for people on the outside to know how much influence he's had on some of the bad picks made by the Flames in the early rounds over the years or even the good ones for that matter.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

No, I'm just looking at recent years worth of work where Dallas really built their team. Dallas' "model" has been cited by Conroy, and I'm saying Dallas' model is just "be excellent at drafting", and then giving examples where the Flames were clearly not as good as Dallas at doing that.



I specifically say better at 30 than Zary at 24. I'm not saying Zary > Bourque, I am saying given draft position Bourque seems like a hell of a find at 30 compared to Zary at 24. Both look like good picks - but finding the (potentially) better player at 30 vs. at 24, is a sign that Dallas is better at drafting than the Flames in recent years. These are the differences between good teams and bad teams.

Zary AHL: 140GP, 38G, 62A, 100PTS
Bourque AHL: 147GP, 47G, 82A, 129 PTS

Bourque, being 4 months younger has produced better at the AHL level.

So yeah - I think Bourque at 30 is better than Zary at 24 - and generally, I'd say Bourque's production at the AHL level could indicate he's a better player than Zary (at the AHL level). We'll see what happens at the NHL level.

Dallas is a better drafting team than Calgary is. It's why Dallas is a better team than Calgary is. I'm not sure why we should get defensive about that, and the Flames should be (and undoubtedly are) looking at ways to improve that performance.

Bader's entire thread is a good read, but this stands out:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1785374410314248261

If you’re limiting it to when Dallas was using “the Dallas model” then it stands to reason that you can’t compare it to Calgary when Calgary wasn’t. But if you’re just talking about who is better at drafting, then you shouldn’t arbitrarily remove years when McDonnell was head scout just cuz.

As for Zary/Bourque, suggesting Bourque is a better pick because he was picked 6 later at the end of the 1st round doesn’t make any sense. They were both good picks where they were taken.

It also doesn’t make any sense to compare their total AHL production when Zary played in the AHL a year earlier because Zary made the cutoff by 90 days, while Bourque was stuck in junior because he missed the age cut off by 8 days. You should be comparing D+1 to D+1, D+2 to D+2, etc. And the fact is, when they were both in the AHL at the same age and same time post-draft, Zary out-produced Bourque. Both last year (over the course of the season) and this year (Zary’s pace was significantly higher). When Zary went to the NHL, his production outpaced the NHLe of Bourque. There’s literally zero basis for Bourque being a better pick at 30 than Zary at 24 if he’s not actually a better player.

The 4 month thing is silly, too. Nobody is looking at NHL players and saying “well, despite being drafted the same year, x player is 3.5 months younger so he has so more potential!” It’s such a tiny age difference.

Who knows, maybe Bourque is the better player at the NHL level. Then you’ll have a point. But he’s not there yet.

It’d be like calling Zary a better pick at 24 than Mercer at 18 because he outscored him in junior and had a better production pace in his first NHL season. Like… sure, maybe he will be seen that way down the road but… sure isn’t that way yet.

[FanIn80]

I feel like the "Dallas Model" is just like Frank going to Vegas and walking away from the slots with a million dollar payout, and everyone talking about copying the "Frank Model" afterward.

[Roof-Daddy]

All the Dallas model refers to is turning the team around without burning it to the ground and drafting top 5 multiple years in a row.

It's going to take some luck for sure, but so does burning it to the ground.

[YyjFlames]

Might be posted somewhere else or may be a better thread to post this in, but Bader posted his ranking of team prospects on twitter.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1786435900609835050

Flames at 19

https://twitter.com/user/status/1786443916411318528

Also which one of you is Byron Bader?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

All the Dallas model refers to is turning the team around without burning it to the ground and drafting top 5 multiple years in a row.

It's going to take some luck for sure, but so does burning it to the ground.

The Dallas thing isn't really a model. It's what happens when a team scouts and drafts significantly better than the rest of the league. There's no GM out there that can snap their fingers and all of a sudden have Dallas's scouting team and decision makers. Most teams either have worse scouting staffs or managers that can't get out of their own way when it comes to evaluating talent and listening to their scouts. Burning it to the ground is actually a model that has worked for several organizations but once again burning it to the ground isn't a solution for poor scouting or decision making by management. Everyone likes to talk about Buffalo not working but look at the GM's and coaches they hired. They were doomed to fail. The most important part of running an NHL organization is having the right scouting and management in place. If you have that right chances are the team will be successful down the road regardless of the path they choose to take.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The idea of "back yard" doesn't really matter. Players are so heavily scouted there's very little advantage in being close to a player.
Tampa passed on Point twice, picking two guys that played 0 NHL games combined.

Don’t disagree with the point (pardon the pun) but that was our big is good era. We picked Hunter Smith in the second round, a guy who had one assist in 30 games in his draft year. I would be content if we never drafted a forward over 6’3 ever again, as irrational as that rule may sound.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Don’t disagree with the point (pardon the pun) but that was our big is good era. We picked Hunter Smith in the second round, a guy who had one assist in 30 games in his draft year. I would be content if we never drafted a forward over 6’3 ever again, as irrational as that rule may sound.

I think he just means everyone was dumb if he lasted to the third round.

Not big, but his skating was suspect too.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

All the Dallas model refers to is turning the team around without burning it to the ground and drafting top 5 multiple years in a row.

It's going to take some luck for sure, but so does burning it to the ground.

Which is the same "model" that Calgary's been following for the last 40 years. The difference between Dallas and Calgary is Dallas formed their core out of the good young players they drafted, and then kept them and built around them. Calgary has always considered their vets as the core and the young guys are expected to stfu and fall in line.

Conroy might be the first GM we've had since Fletcher that wants to buld our core from the draft instead of July 1st.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Conroy might be the first GM we've had since Fletcher that wants to build our core from the draft instead of July 1st.

I think he's the first one that's been allowed to, as there is now little choice.

I expect other GM's may have wanted to.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Which is the same "model" that Calgary's been following for the last 40 years. The difference between Dallas and Calgary is Dallas formed their core out of the good young players they drafted, and then kept them and built around them. Calgary has always considered their vets as the core and the young guys are expected to stfu and fall in line.

Conroy might be the first GM we've had since Fletcher that wants to buld our core from the draft instead of July 1st.

This is an interesting theory. Can you expand on it or provide examples?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Don’t disagree with the point (pardon the pun) but that was our big is good era. We picked Hunter Smith in the second round, a guy who had one assist in 30 games in his draft year. I would be content if we never drafted a forward over 6’3 ever again, as irrational as that rule may sound.

Yeah my main point was to dispute the notion that the Flames somehow made a larger mistake by missing out on a player in their "back yard". I just don't think for any of the primary leagues, that's true at all. They are all heavily scouted.

But would a few things:
- Not claiming the Flames were a good drafting team at the time
- I don't think you can completely ignore size. As much as the NHL has a bias for size, fans have a bias against it. I think you have to factor it in, alongside other attributes.
- For me, for a team like the Flames to succeed, they need to produce a higher volume of NHL players because they will lose more to free agency and have a harder time attracting free agents.
- So with that, you can do that in two ways. If you are an average drafting team (say with a 20% hit rate) get more picks. So instead of product 1 out of 5, product 2 out of 10. Or be a better drafting team so that you convert more often. Ideally do both. Instead of hitting 1/5 per draft, hit 3 out of 9 per draft.

Obviously you need to pick the right players, but I'm beginning to think that quantity of picks is actually the bigger driver of success. You don't have to be better if you have more picks.

[AustinL_NHL]

Originally Posted by Steve Bozek

2 woulda/coulda misses that really stand out for me are Kucherov and Point. Especially Point - a player from our own back yard.

I mentioned it a couple years ago when it happened, but FWIW, Brayden Point's father took my brother-in-law and I (along with a bunch of his other employees) to a Stampeders game a couple years ago and told me the Hurricanes & Flames were the only 2 teams to not even interview Point in his draft year.

Like guys wtf lol

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Yeah my main point was to dispute the notion that the Flames somehow made a larger mistake by missing out on a player in their "back yard". I just don't think for any of the primary leagues, that's true at all. They are all heavily scouted.

But would a few things:
- Not claiming the Flames were a good drafting team at the time
- I don't think you can completely ignore size. As much as the NHL has a bias for size, fans have a bias against it. I think you have to factor it in, alongside other attributes.
- For me, for a team like the Flames to succeed, they need to produce a higher volume of NHL players because they will lose more to free agency and have a harder time attracting free agents.
- So with that, you can do that in two ways. If you are an average drafting team (say with a 20% hit rate) get more picks. So instead of product 1 out of 5, product 2 out of 10. Or be a better drafting team so that you convert more often. Ideally do both. Instead of hitting 1/5 per draft, hit 3 out of 9 per draft.

Obviously you need to pick the right players, but I'm beginning to think that quantity of picks is actually the bigger driver of success. You don't have to be better if you have more picks.

Hunter Smith was a horrendous pick. He was a 1 point player, and overage season had 40 which isn't good by any metrics. He was selected because of size.

When you make a major blunder like that you should be placed on a PIP in any workplace.

Size doesn't just mean you are good, or bring anything to the table.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

I mentioned it a couple years ago when it happened, but FWIW, Brayden Point's father took my brother-in-law and I (along with a bunch of his other employees) to a Stampeders game a couple years ago and told me the Hurricanes & Flames were the only 2 teams to not even interview Point in his draft year.

Like guys wtf lol

Probably to busy interviewing the next Hunter Smith. I kid but still a big miss.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

This is an interesting theory. Can you expand on it or provide examples?

I meant it more in the metaphorical sense, as in the identity of the Flames is always shaped by the GM and coaches and the core of the team is always about the vets.

[CF84]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Button has been Director of Scouting since 2000-01. So I decided to look at the first team on HockeyDB for comparison. Surprisingly they have had almost the same number of picks during Button's window (2001 on). I did not include the last two drafts because players have not really started to work their way into the NHL yet.

Anaheim (48/154 - .311 batting average)

Top players: Ryan Getzlaf (1157), Corey Perry (1311), Bobby Ryan (866), Justin Schultz (745), Sami Vatanan (473), Kyle Palmeri (818), Cam Fowler (974), William Carlsson (685), John Gibson (477), Richard Rakell (721), Hampus Lindholm (745), Frederick Andersen (495), Shea Theodore (497), Trevor Zegras (211), Jamie Drysdale (147)

Role players: Stansislov Chistov (196), Martin Gerber (229), PA Parenteau (491), Tim Brent (207), Joffrey Lupul (701), Shane O'Brien (537), Drew Miller (571), Ladislav Smid (538), Tim Brent (207), Brendan Mikkelson (131), Matt Beleskey (477), Eric Tangradi (150), Steven Kampfer (231), Jake Gardiner (645), Brandon MacMillian (171), Peter Holland (266), Emerson Etem (173), Devante Smith-Pelly (395), Chris Wagner (373), Josh Manson (578), Jaycob Megna (185), Nick Ritchie (481), Marcus Petterson (444), Brandon Montour (520), Ondrej Kase (258), Jacob Larsson (172), Troy Terry (350), Max Jones (258), Sam Steel (339), Josh Mahura (191), Maxime Comtois (211), Isaac Lundestrom (258), Mason MacTavish (153)

versus

Calgary (29/153 - .189 batting average)

Top players: Dion Phaneuf (1048), TJ Brodie (908), Johnny Gaudreau (763), Sean Monahan (764), Rasmus Andersson (455), Matthew Tkachuk (590), Adam Fox (357)

Role players: Chuck Kobasew (601), David Moss (501), Curtis McElhinney (249), Eric Nystrom (593), Matthew Lombardi (536), Brandon Prust (486), Dustin Boyd (220), Adam Pardy (342), Adam Cracknell (210), Lance Bouma (357), Michael Ferland (355), Sven Baertschi (292), Markus Granlund (335), Laurent Brossoit (140), Mark Jankowski (354), Brett Kulak (498), Sam Bennett (615), Oliver Kylington (201), Andrew Mangiapane (417), Dillon Dube (325), Adam Ruzicka (117) Juuso Valimaki (228)

Some may say that Anaheim has had a positional advantage in the draft, drafting earlier more often, but they have had more peaks and valleys than the Flames. The average draft position for Calgary is 120 versus 104 for Anaheim. Anaheim drafts a little earlier on average but hits all over the draft with more consistency.

I don't see Calgary getting better or having better drafts. What I see is recency bias coming to the fore and giving the impressions the Flames are better. Remember the excitement over the 2021 draft and all the great young talent we scooped up? Yeesh, that was ugly in retrospect. It's not all Button's fault, but I definitely think the Flames performance at the draft table has not been near as good as people are suggesting or trying to build up. I think it is easy to see why one team has won a cup and the other has not.

I have a few things to contest here. First, I think you've missed the 2007 draft for the Flames with Mikael Backlund and Keith Aulie which brings the batting average to 31/153 or .203. Second, players like Zary would have more games on a lousy Anaheim team while players like Jamie Drysdale would just be getting their first opportunity on the Flames keeping them under 100 games. Jacob Larsson may have never even cracked the Flames D. The Ducks have been terrible long enough that they have players playing above their skill level and the Flames have just entered that portion of their re-build/re-tool. By next season we should see all of Coronato, Zary, Pelletier, and Pospisil on the list and the following season we should see Wolf and one or two others. It's just that part of the ebb and flow of prospects joining a system combined with the on average worse drafting position of the Flames. The Ducks have had been in a rebuild for a few years (arguably 4 or 5) and it shows when compared to the Flames 1 year.


Also, do the Flames scouts get any credit with a player like Giordano or did he have to knock on the door himself begging for a chance?

The Flames made some horrible choices in the early 2000s, but I've had much more hope since around 2015. Button and the scouting department do seem to have an eye for what makes an excellent defenseman in drafting Andersson, Kylington, Fox, and even lower picks like Solovyov. I have a bit less confidence in their ability to draft star forwards outside the 1st round which would be great.

A draft position of 120 vs 104 is pretty significant. I'd be pretty upset if the Flames only picked at a 120 quality and the Ducks always got a quality of 104 and then both were judged on their performance as if position shouldn't matter.

To the bolded: The Flames came literally closer than any NHL team has ever come to winning a cup without actually winning it in the same time frame.