[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

No. I have to agree with Friedman on this point. When picking in the top-ten at the entry draft, a team should ALWAYS pick the best player available.

Where Friedman and the panel are wrong is in two points:
• First, the belief that the Oilers mix of talent is okay, and merely needs supplementation and growth to be successful. Wrong. The problem stems from a failed draft philosophy on Edmonton's part. They have been building a river hockey team to win by outscoring the opposition. The problem is that this is an unsustainable model, that has NEVER WORKED at the NHL level. The players are talented, but the mix is horrible, and will never succeed because the model does not work.
• Second, the belief that the Oilers "fab five" are comparable to other successful teams' top picks. They are not—not even close. The Oilers have assembled a group of talented players, but this group is not on the same level of the truly elite NHL talent like Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, MacKinnon, Toews, etc. The Oilers best players are not good enough to win on talent alone, and they are not the right kind of players to develop the sort of game to compensate for their shortcomings.

It's not a simple correction. The Oilers need to dismantle and start over if they want to succeed.

Actual Friedman pointed out exactly your second point. They all agreed that Hall/RNH were not elite and they didn't compare to Colorado, Toews/Kane, etc