[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't disagree with the prioritize centers thing, but this is exactly why the Flames should bottom-out rather than REACH.



Look at last year's draft - there was a run on centers, and it allowed the Flames to draft Parekh. Should the Flames have skipped Parekh to draft the following centers left: Luchanko (13th), Helenius (14th), Boisvert (18th), Hage (21), Surin (22), Beaudoin (24) Letorneau (25).. or someone else? Which C prospect would you trade Parekh for 1-for-1 with?


The problem for the Flames isn't that they haven't prioritized centers before, it is simply because they often finish too high and teams often reach for centers to start with, leaving 'star' wingers and good top 4 defencemen left over to pick from. Sure, there is an odd center that gets passed over and ends up being an awesome player (like Point).


Flames drafted Monahan and Bennett when they picked high. They took Tkachuk over Jost (10th), McLeod (12th), Kunin (15th)... sure, maybe they should have reached for Tage Thompson (26th), but I feel Tkachuk was the right pick and I wouldn't trade him 1-for-1 versus any center drafted after him either.


Flames did prioritize center in 2012 - they aimed at Jankowski. Sure, they could have picked Teravainen, Laughton, Girgensons - and you could say they definitely missed out on Hertl, even if he never was a real #1 C, but you can attribute that to other factors rather than prioritizing the position. The best picks they missed out on (non-Cs) were goalie and wing - Vesilevski and Wilson (assuming the original draft position of 14). There were other good picks of course, but we are talking about prioritizing centers. For reference, Galchenyuk is the 3rd highest scoring C from that draft class, and he hasn't played in the NHL since 2022-23.


Don't get me wrong - there definitely are good centers that come outside of the top end of the draft, but getting one that turns into a #1 center is extremely rare. Point is such a rare example. That's probably the year in which taking centers only would have led to a better outcome than I can see from the last few drafts, but grabbing point wasn't a given. More likely the Flames would have drafted MacInnis over MacDonald (no change in outcome), and Ryan Donato (or Dvorak) over Smith (huge upgrade) - though maybe they would have went with Justin Kirkland (he probably would have left he organization with no games for the Flames anyway). Things really become interesting in the third round using this 'model', however, as instead of Brandon Hickey (who looked like an absolute steal of a pick for a few seasons after, but wouldn't sign and demanded a trade-out, and never made the NHL anyway) the next center taken was indeed Brayden Point. However - it was 15 picks later. Would Calgary - under Burke - really have taken Point (5'11" - maybe 5'10" at the draft?)? Maybe.. maybe they would have just reached past him at one of the next couple of centers - Iverson or Wallmark? It is tough to say.



It is an interesting exercise. On paper, and given Calgary's hole organizationally, I would agree with the change in draft philosophy in theory. When actually going through the drafts, and seeing how in many cases you end up worse off, it seems to be a worse approach. Teams miss in the draft - the best drafting organizations miss way more than they hit. However, it seems to me that by focusing only on one position for the first 3-4 picks of a draft, the likelihood of either downgrading the player or missing altogether increases.



BPA, and if it is close, take the premium position - Cs===>Ds===>Ws/Gs (since goalies are so wild to predict and usually take longer to develop than a team holds their rights for). Calgary ends up drafting more good wingers than centers simply because there are usually much better wingers left over than centers at the time they pick. It appears the best way to grab a better center is to either:


1) bottom-out and draft higher
2) trade-up - even if it is cost prohibitive


So, perhaps the answer isn't to draft 3-4 centers exclusively. Maybe the Flames would be better served to trade their highest 3 picks either together, or in a series of trades, and get as far up the draft as possible and simply make a single selection? Maybe that would result in an actual greater chance of drafting a #1 center in the long run year over year, though I do think the rest of your prospect base will probably take a large hit if you continue for a few years.

Edit: Forgot to make this point - 2012 was such an awful year to prioritize centers. Imagine if the Flames drafted Vasilevski in that round. Now remember how awful goaltending was in the playoffs year-over-year with the Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm-Tkachuk era. I bet the Flames would have likely experienced a much higher success level in the playoffs had they added Vasiliveski - and I myself dislike a 1st being used on a goaltender. Just goes to show that any hard and fast 'rules' shoot you in the foot - take the best player available, period, and you are more likely to have success long-term.