Quote:
Originally Posted by littlereddevil
Yeah, exactly it introduces another variable and some bias to their analysis.
Take for example Buffalo and Detroit. Both recent teams who have had prolonged playoff droughts, and a number of high draft picks. Would you call their abundance of picks a success story? Buffalo is practically the farm team of the NHL and haven't been in the playoffs since 2008. I've lost track of the number of rebuilds they've gone through. Clearly their abundance of high picks hasn't been a success as it hasn't translated into playoff success (let alone any playoff appearances). This website makes a lot of assumptions that high draft picks = automatic playoff success and has created a false equivalence.
Where do you draw the line and decide to arbitrarily analyze each team? The past 5 years? The past 20 years? What about from 2015-2020?
Maybe this sounds like a cope but the jury is still out on the current Flames management group. We were suddenly forced into a rebuild situation after the previous one failed, give it some time.
|
Buffalo has drafted high but Detroit I think is a prime example of a team that never got the high picks and lack the high level talent needed to become a contender. I'd say they are more of an example that picking 5-20 every year makes it extremely difficult to find elite players. Outside Raymond they've never picked higher than 6 during this current rebuild. They've got some nice pieces but they lack stars and that will be there downfall. I feel Calgary could have a very similar trajectory I'd they refuse to tear it down for a few seasons.
I also find the argument against teams like Buffalo interesting because what is the alternative? Do you believe without drafting high they would have been better? Just because something doesn't work out doesn't mean the alternative would have been any better and more likely than not would have been worse.