Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
It's not about the other teams it's about the situation fairly or unfairly. At the time the Flames were looked at as an old team that badly needed an infusion of young talent. The consensus was they should not be gambling on 1st round picks given their lack of talent in their system at that time. Fair or unfair that's the way it was viewed by those in the media and around the league.
It's no different about the situation of the Flames passing on Shinkaruk at 22. Piorier and Shinkaruk will be forever linked for better or worse. If Shinkaruk turns into a star and Poirier just another player Flames fans will hear about it for years despite the fact that the Leafs passed on him at after and a handful of teams before the Flames. Fair or not it's going to be an ongoing story. You can deal with it or you can continue to complain about how the media is out to get the Flames.
|
I think the Shinkarek one is much more valid as he was the clear alternative to Poirer. In the Matta case Matta wasnt a clear alternative to Jankowski. And many media complained about trading down as well. At 14 there was even more options other than Matta to pick and then you don't get Seilof. My issue with the media isn't that they rag on the flames I think that is made up in peoples heads but that in this case the comparison isn't valid because there was no concensus alternative. Yes, Jankowski was off borad, but there wasn't a clear alternative that makes comparisons later on valid.
Sure the narative is changing now and its becoming a Matta vs Janko. Early on it was a Teruvein(sp) vs. Janko, and if Matta busts out over the next two years it will become XXX vs Janko. Its not a valid way of assessing draft success.