Quote:
Originally Posted by theoforever
I was not comparing lifetime Feaster/Burke draft records. What I said was that Burke's record was brutal and that Feaster draft record with Flames was good. Therefore, sample size and length are not relevant to argument at hand which is about Feaster's impact on Flames drafting record vs possible future impact of Burke's on Flames drafting record.
In case of Feaster I have his draft record with Flames.
Therefore, his Tampa Bay record has no influence on what happened later with Flames.
On the other hand, in case of Burke, there is no Flame drafting record, so previous drafting was mentioned. That is completely admissible if trying to predict future direction and impact on drafting by Flames.
|
Let's face it, that's pretty bad argument construction. Using one GM's lifetime draft record vs another's handpicked record with only one team doesn't really make much sense and doesn't seem a fair way of evaluating it.
Nevermind the fact that GM's aren't really doing the drafting by themselves and are only one voice amongst many, many times not the most important voice in the conversation either since most GM's don't do a lot of scouting for the draft in comparison to their head scout and scouts.
Nevermind the fact that Burke isn't the GM at all, Treliving is and therefore PHO's draft record should be under consideration in any properly constructed argument about our drafting.
This thread went to crap and probably won't be salvaged. If people wanna debate Burke vs Feaster vs Treliving and express their paranoia about Burke being a puppet master maybe go ahead and start that up. This thread was about our emphasis on prospect development I thought.