Quote:
Originally Posted by polak
I don't know, I'll break the mold and suggest that depending on the situation, 1st rounders should sometimes be drafted by need. After the 1st round it should always be BPA since it's a total crapshoot.
When should 1st rounders be by need? When your first round picks start to stack up in one position after a few years. Then you end up like the Oilers who took the consensus BPA every year and now they have a bunch of soft but skilled forwards and the rest of team is utter trash.
|
Except that isn't exactly what the Oilers did.
The year they took Hall they thought they were taking the best player available (it was debatable vs Seguin.) Hard to say how many teams would have taken Hall and how many Seguin
The year they took RNH they thought they were taking the best player available (still debatable that year as well.) I'm sure there's at least one team that would've picked Landeskog ahead of RNH. Wouldn't surprise me if Huberdeau was ahead of RNH for some people. But RNH was fairly consensus #1.
The year they took Yakupov their scouting staff reportedly liked Murray the best and several of their key guys liked Griffin Reinhart. Reportedly Katz influenced the pick. Yakupov was certainly not a consensus BPA that year. TOR had Rielly #1. CGY had Galchenyuk #1. I think CBJ liked Murray more than Yakupov (just a theory.) At the time people talked about trading down and taking a defenseman and clearly that was the right move in retrospect.
The year they took Nurse reportedly their scouting staff actually liked Nichushkin the best but MacTavish overruled BPA and selected Nurse based on organizational need.
BPA should have been the philosophy the entire time. They'd be in better shape with Murray and Nichushkin instead of Nurse and Yak.
EDM has problems determining who the best player available is, lets be frank.