Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
At some point, all of those teams had a greater than normal number of picks, and/or higher draft picks, than most other teams. Because if you're relying on the standard number of picks, and drafting 8th-12th every season, then your plan is to draft and develop way, way better than your peers. Which isn't so much a plan as a hope. The idea of a rebuild is to stack the young asset acquisition deck in your favour. Multiple first and second round picks. Top-five picks. Etc.
|
First of all, let me say that I agree with this.
But I would also like to point out that in practice, recent history is spotty at best.
As an example, look at Chicago (as they are a team that most would agree have rebuilt successfully):
2006: 6 picks in the top 100, only Toews, a lottery pick, to show for it
2007: 5 picks int eh top 100, only Kane #1 overall to show for it
2010: 6 picks in the top 100, nothing of consequence to show for it
2011: 6 picks in the top 100, too early to tell but Saad, and we'll see how McNeil and Danault turn out
I have rummaged through the draft history looking for examples of teams loading up picks and how it turned out, and it is actually pretty shocking how poorly it usually turns out.
Again, not saying I am against it, because I am not - I want the Flames to move some vets this year and load up. Just saying.
Just goes to show that, before you start loading up draft picks, you need to ahve your scouting and development systems where they need to be.