Quote:
Originally posted by Pointman+Jul 31 2005, 06:37 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Pointman @ Jul 31 2005, 06:37 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by JiriHrdina@Jul 30 2005, 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by dustygoon@Jul 30 2005, 11:03 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-looooob
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
@Jul 31 2005, 04:27 AM
have to agree the nepotism stuff is a little fishy. don't think Sutter will overpay his boy though, but we'll see
always love the comments at the bottom of the TSN stories, like the one guy who says its going to be a long year for the Flames because they had a bad draft...yep because every other team is going to have three or four draftees step right in to starring roles this season
|
Maybe I am the only one, but I find drafting your son to be a solid conflict of interest.
Sutter lost a lot of credibility in my mind for that pick. Trust in Sutter and all that BS just went out the window for me.
Disgusting.
|
The sense from the article I read was that it wasn't Sutter's choice. The scouting team asked both the player and Darryl if they would be OK with it - this suggests it was not Darryl's idea.
|
I don't by it at all. It's reasonable now for Darryll Sutter to distance from this decision. I won't believe anyone whoever would say, it was not his decision. EVEN if original idea was not his (and I'm sure it was), he as GM is still responsible for every pick he made. [/b][/quote]
Fair enough, but there's a big difference in my view between these two conversations:
Darryl to his scouting staff: "Hey guys - you know what I think we should do...take my son!"
and
Scouting staff to Darryl: "Hey Darryl - we actually think your boy is a decent prospect. If he's available in the 7th we recommend taking him. Would you be comfortable with that".
I'm much more comfortable with the latter scenario.