Quote:
Originally Posted by 1qqaaz
We don't have full hindsight yet. But if Lapierre and Foerster end up being better than Zary, it could be a bad trade. It doesn't really matter if the Flames "got their guy".
If Zary ends up being better than those two, which he very well could be, I'll take back my reservations. Same as if Boltmann actually turns out. Lets say you love Zary as a prospect. Boltmann was not worth the risk in losing the chance to draft Zary as you moved down from #22 to #24 (even though I just said Lapierre and Foerster are good prospects).
Really? I think it does.
Part of what makes the Iginla and Bouwmeester trades bad is the fact that Klimchuk and Poirier didn't work out. Even those the actual picks had nothing to do with the value returned in the trade.
Or when the Flames traded down to pick up Jankowski. They got Sieloff, a bust, and gave up the chance to draft Teuvo and Vasilevsky. The pick not working out does indeed make it a bad trade.
I also disagree that it's too early to judge the Boltmann pick. Most of us hated the pick at the time, and continue to hate it now. But if it's too early to judge him, then I guess there's no point in commenting on the quality of and D+1 pick under any circumstances. Not only is it fair to rate draft picks a year after they were drafted, but it's fair to judge them at the time of being drafted, or even before the pick was made.
For an example, if the Flames were to pick Raty at #12, I think that would be a bad pick. Yes, I am judging a move that hasn't even happened.
|
First off not saying there are any right or wrong answers on things like this ... to each their own.
But to me the only thing that matters is the scouting group (team's) view on draft day.
If they felt Zary and three others players were a cut above others on draft day, and could still take one of those players and get an additional asset they made the right call.
There are two things at play here.
1) Asset management based on the team's list
2) The value of the team's list
I think you're going after #2 which is a different conversation.