Quote:
Originally Posted by MelBridgeman
You complain about the bad draft record, so shouldn't you be happy that we trade away picks for other assets? What is the point of keeping them if you "suck" at drafting...Don't bother bringing up the Jokinen for a First, cause we all know that everyone on this board thought it was a great trade at the time.
|
Surely there is another option... ie., either turning over some scouts or changing philosophies a little. The default position on a draft pick should be that it won't work out.
As for the Jokinen deal, does Sutter get a pass on it just because it was popular? According to some most people who have defended the recent trades that were unpopular, armchair GM opinions are not valid. shouldn't that also apply in the reverse situations then?
As a side, there was a time that the Flames were one of the more innovative drafting teams (drafting Makarov as an older European before it was popular, success at drafting from the U.S. college and university circuits while other teams overlooked them - often with late round picks). Now we seem to focus mostly on mainstream sources (CHL, with a few Europeans from Sweden and Finland, the occasion US university players). With late round picks, I'd love to see the Flames take a chance on some players from central and eastern europe (Russia, Czech Rep. and Slovakia) for a change. Countries like Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Norway and Slovenia are starting to progress... do the Flames even send scouts to places like that?