Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.
Owners set the pace. They made it clear in the mid 2000s that they were ok with a strategy that sold the picks. Although GMs have autonomy within the framework, owners sanction their moves implicitly through their continued employment (or eventual firing).
|
I don' think there's any line to be drawn coming down from ownership between Darryl Sutter going mad scientist through most of his GM tenure free-wheeling and giving picks away left and right and Treliving trying to make calculated moves to improve the current team. Yes, there are examples like the premium paid for Hamonic I get the criticism for... but I think acquiring young, cost controlled pieces like Lindholm and Hanafin moves us further toward the sustained success those angry that we're not using the picks are speaking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.
And I don't think Flash is being obtuse.
|
I don't think you're famliar with the poster then. Because this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Wow! Hamilton and Hamonic and Smith!
Meanwhile, the Bruins WON more games this playoff year (5) than the Flames have PLAYED in the last 3 years (4).
I'm sure they are jealous of Calgary's sweet players.
|
Couldn't have been any more obtuse. How does the number of playoff games the Bruins won *this last season* have anything to do with their number of draft picks in the last three calendar years? Moreover, how is that a slight against the moves we made? I don't seem to recall the likes of Senyshyn, DeBrusk and Zboril contributing to many of Boston's playoff wins this season.
Again, you can't toss out and cherry pick the number of picks we've made vs. a team like the Bruins in the last three years devoid of the fact several of the picks that swung the number in their favour (from us giving to them) resulted in us acquiring two significant, cost controlled young former top five picks that are now on our roster.