Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Tij Iginla ranked No. 10 overall by Bob McKenzie for 2024 NHL Draft

Calgary4LIfe · 04-07-2024, 12:52 AM

I 100% believe in a few drafting philosophies:

1) BPA ALWAYS. Never draft by positional need.
2) If 3 prospects are equal, you rank them by positional value - C over D over W.

These are two rules I feel are important. I do, however, feel the need to quibble here.

During the last 10 seasons, who were the Flames best players? Gaudreau and Tkachuk - both wingers. Jarome was by far the best skater on the team during his era. It wasn't wrong to draft those players. What was wrong was that the Flames didn't draft enough difference makers, period.

Flames didn't screw up by trying to 'build around Jarome'. I don't understand that sentiment. You don't build a successful hockey team by building around anyone. You build around a core. If the Flames draft Tij, they won't be building around him. They will be building around a core that includes him. They will need to draft more difference makers, more core players, more franchise-level players. That's how the Flames will be building a contender.

Who is the best player in Tampa who has continually pulled that organization kicking and screaming to championships? Kucherov. Point and Stamkos are fantastic talents - they won because they build a great team, period, with a good amount of franchise-level players in most positions. They build solid depth around those core players, and the cups came. However, Kucherov was by far the best player on that team, and remains so.

Does this mean I abandon my rules above? Of course not. My point stands - you follow rule #1 first. Then you draft not by positional need, but by positional value. I don't care if Calgary doesn't have enough wingers at some point during this rebuild and are flush at centre - centres can play wing much easier than wingers can play centre (Sharangovich notwithstanding).

The only slight adjustment I make right now where Tij is concerned is:

C over D over W unless Iginla, in which it becomes Iginla over C over D. Why? I think because he is more Tkachuk than Lemieux (Brendan, that is). He has been around the game more than your average prospect. He has been improving in spades, especially in the playoffs. Being a playoff performer tells me that this kid as some of those intangibles.

So if you have Iginla equal to a centre, I would pick Iginla. If you have a centre ranked ahead of Iginla, you pick the centre. That's the slight exception I think the Flames should make.

However, my opinion could be very different from yours. I didn't see a problem in building WITH (not around, but WITH) Iginla during that era (Iginla, Kiprusoff and Regehr - that was the extent of the core, though there were very good support players along the way like Conroy, Langkow, Tanguay, etc). Building with Gaudreau and Tanguay wasn't a bad idea - there was just not enough game changers. Gaudreau, Tkahuck, Giordano, Backlund (elite-level defensive specialist - totally not an argument if you don't have him on your list of him being a core member). Monahan looked like he was going to be a franchise-level player, but he didn't really become that as he didn't control play on the ice. Ditto for Lindholm who looked great for about 2 seasons.

That's the issue with the Flames - they didn't draft enough core pieces. They came out of the rebuild too early in the Gaudreau era. In the Button era, he misidentified two important core players in Savard and St. Louis who most likely would have had this team winning a cup or two if they stayed (St. Louis - Savard - Iginla, Regehr and Kiprusoff - try to stop that).

Once again, if there is a centre or a defencemen that is definitely better than Tij, by all means I hope the Flames draft him over Tij. I personally don't really think there is a clear-cut better player around 5 and lower, so I would hope that the Flames draft Tij. If they don't, it is because they believe that there is someone who is better, or will likely become better over the years, and that's fine too.

My real point is that I disagree in the notion that the Flames have to come out with a C or a D to build around. They need to draft the BPA, to be a piece of the future core to build around, regardless of position. You don't get rid of a Mathew Tkachuk and keep Lindholm believing him to be the more valuable player that gives you a better chance to win, right (I mean, not if you have a choice). You don't trade Jarome and keep Langkow, thinking that Langkow is the player that gives you the best shot to win. You keep the best players. If you have too many of one, you make them switch positions if possible (easier if they are centres of course), or you trade your core pieces for other core pieces in a hockey trade.

Mathew Tkachuk returned Weegar who is tied for 2nd in goals, plus another elite level winger (well...), plus a first and a b-class centre prospect (who probably won't pan out). Had the Flames traded Iginla a few seasons earlier, he would have returned a ransom too. So if you do get stuck with too many franchise-level wingers, that's ok. Or you get stuck with too many franchise centres or defencemen - you can always trade franchise level players for a ransom, regardless of position.

That's just how I see things anyway. I know a large contingent of people don't, and that's ok too. I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing to choose a slightly worse C over a winger - by your own equation of value, that centre may provide more value long-term. I do think it is crazy to prioritize position when there is a much better prospect on the board.

That's how you end up drafting Juolevi over Tkachuk.

04-07-2024, 12:52 AM	#117
Calgary4LIfe Franchise Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Exp:	I 100% believe in a few drafting philosophies: 1) BPA ALWAYS. Never draft by positional need. 2) If 3 prospects are equal, you rank them by positional value - C over D over W. These are two rules I feel are important. I do, however, feel the need to quibble here. During the last 10 seasons, who were the Flames best players? Gaudreau and Tkachuk - both wingers. Jarome was by far the best skater on the team during his era. It wasn't wrong to draft those players. What was wrong was that the Flames didn't draft enough difference makers, period. Flames didn't screw up by trying to 'build around Jarome'. I don't understand that sentiment. You don't build a successful hockey team by building around anyone. You build around a core. If the Flames draft Tij, they won't be building around him. They will be building around a core that includes him. They will need to draft more difference makers, more core players, more franchise-level players. That's how the Flames will be building a contender. Who is the best player in Tampa who has continually pulled that organization kicking and screaming to championships? Kucherov. Point and Stamkos are fantastic talents - they won because they build a great team, period, with a good amount of franchise-level players in most positions. They build solid depth around those core players, and the cups came. However, Kucherov was by far the best player on that team, and remains so. Does this mean I abandon my rules above? Of course not. My point stands - you follow rule #1 first. Then you draft not by positional need, but by positional value. I don't care if Calgary doesn't have enough wingers at some point during this rebuild and are flush at centre - centres can play wing much easier than wingers can play centre (Sharangovich notwithstanding). The only slight adjustment I make right now where Tij is concerned is: C over D over W unless Iginla, in which it becomes Iginla over C over D. Why? I think because he is more Tkachuk than Lemieux (Brendan, that is). He has been around the game more than your average prospect. He has been improving in spades, especially in the playoffs. Being a playoff performer tells me that this kid as some of those intangibles. So if you have Iginla equal to a centre, I would pick Iginla. If you have a centre ranked ahead of Iginla, you pick the centre. That's the slight exception I think the Flames should make. However, my opinion could be very different from yours. I didn't see a problem in building WITH (not around, but WITH) Iginla during that era (Iginla, Kiprusoff and Regehr - that was the extent of the core, though there were very good support players along the way like Conroy, Langkow, Tanguay, etc). Building with Gaudreau and Tanguay wasn't a bad idea - there was just not enough game changers. Gaudreau, Tkahuck, Giordano, Backlund (elite-level defensive specialist - totally not an argument if you don't have him on your list of him being a core member). Monahan looked like he was going to be a franchise-level player, but he didn't really become that as he didn't control play on the ice. Ditto for Lindholm who looked great for about 2 seasons. That's the issue with the Flames - they didn't draft enough core pieces. They came out of the rebuild too early in the Gaudreau era. In the Button era, he misidentified two important core players in Savard and St. Louis who most likely would have had this team winning a cup or two if they stayed (St. Louis - Savard - Iginla, Regehr and Kiprusoff - try to stop that). Once again, if there is a centre or a defencemen that is definitely better than Tij, by all means I hope the Flames draft him over Tij. I personally don't really think there is a clear-cut better player around 5 and lower, so I would hope that the Flames draft Tij. If they don't, it is because they believe that there is someone who is better, or will likely become better over the years, and that's fine too. My real point is that I disagree in the notion that the Flames have to come out with a C or a D to build around. They need to draft the BPA, to be a piece of the future core to build around, regardless of position. You don't get rid of a Mathew Tkachuk and keep Lindholm believing him to be the more valuable player that gives you a better chance to win, right (I mean, not if you have a choice). You don't trade Jarome and keep Langkow, thinking that Langkow is the player that gives you the best shot to win. You keep the best players. If you have too many of one, you make them switch positions if possible (easier if they are centres of course), or you trade your core pieces for other core pieces in a hockey trade. Mathew Tkachuk returned Weegar who is tied for 2nd in goals, plus another elite level winger (well...), plus a first and a b-class centre prospect (who probably won't pan out). Had the Flames traded Iginla a few seasons earlier, he would have returned a ransom too. So if you do get stuck with too many franchise-level wingers, that's ok. Or you get stuck with too many franchise centres or defencemen - you can always trade franchise level players for a ransom, regardless of position. That's just how I see things anyway. I know a large contingent of people don't, and that's ok too. I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing to choose a slightly worse C over a winger - by your own equation of value, that centre may provide more value long-term. I do think it is crazy to prioritize position when there is a much better prospect on the board. That's how you end up drafting Juolevi over Tkachuk.