2016 NHL Draft

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

They are literally paid to try and be smarter than everyone.

By everyone, I mean the 29 other NHL teams.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

LOL. What a stupid statement.

I really hope the Flames scout are smarter than everyone else with their draft pick. It's their job to be as smart about it and as prepared as they can be. EVERY team's scouting staff is trying to outsmart the rest.

You want them to be stupider than everyone with this draft pick?

I believe what he's getting at is the thinking that they are smarter than everyone else.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

By everyone, I mean the 29 other NHL teams.

You mean, the competition? We shouldn't try to outsmart the competition in a competitive market?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

You mean, the competition? We shouldn't try to outsmart the competition in a competitive market?

It would be nice to outsmart everyone in a billion dollar sports league where players and managers are paid millions of dollars to also try and win.

If you think you're the smartest person in the league, you're probably not. Probably the opposite, in fact. Although I don't think it's true for Treliving, the Flames under Feaster thought they were smarter than everyone else, and made themselves look foolish multiple times.

That's all I mean.

[Toonage]

Ultimately the hope is the Flames don't John Weisbrod or Jim Benning themselves. I wouldn't worry about that with our management.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

It's the idea that if 29 people think a player is a mid-first round pick, but 1 thinks he's a top 5, the collective is probably correct.

There is no consensus at the draft except at the very top end. Would you be surprised to learn that sometimes teams take players in the 1st round that another team doesn't even have on their entire draft list? It happens. Flames liked Jankowski and they weren't the only team. To pretend that they were alone and somehow idiots because of that is a tired and silly narrative.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

No need to take things so personally and mock posters. Calm down.

You said something stupid. I called you out on it. I was not mocking you but certainly the statement you made was deserving of being mocked.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

It would be nice to outsmart everyone in a billion dollar sports league where players and managers are paid millions of dollars to also try and win.

...But you hope the Flames don't try to outsmart everyone in a billion dollar sports league where players and managers are paid millions of dollars to also try and win.

Sound logic.

If you think you're the smartest person in the league, you're probably not. Probably the opposite, in fact.

Or, maybe there's no correlation between self-assessment and proficiency. You don't get bonus points for feigning modesty.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

There is no consensus at the draft except at the very top end. Would you be surprised to learn that sometimes teams take players in the 1st round that another team doesn't even have on their entire draft list? It happens. Flames liked Jankowski and they weren't the only team. To pretend that they were alone and somehow idiots because of that is a tired and silly narrative.



You said something stupid. I called you out on it. I was not mocking you but certainly the statement you made was deserving of being mocked.

There is no consensus, but there is logic. If you think I said something stupid, fine. Disagree with me, but jumping directly into insults is not a good method to create discussion. It creates only contempt.

If the Flames are picking 5th or 6th or 7th or whatever and players like Dubois, Tkachuk, Juolevi, Chychrun, etc., are still on the board, and the Flames pick Brown, I will be angry, because that's an unnecessary risk to be taking with all the talent still available. There's a reason why Brown is ranked in the middle of the first round in almost every publication.

I don't think Jankowski is a bad prospect. He's a good prospect. But he was not a wise selection, considering both the position the team was in and the other talent available. The Flames deserve flack for that because they thought they were smarter than everyone else and had tunnel vision for one player. That's what I'm afraid of. I don't think anything I've written here is stupid or worthy of derision.

I said the same thing regarding Bennett and Ritchie in 2014, and took a lot of heat for my position on that as well.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

...But you hope the Flames don't try to outsmart everyone in a billion dollar sports league where players and managers are paid millions of dollars to also try and win.

Sound logic.



Or, maybe there's no correlation between self-assessment and proficiency. You don't get bonus points for feigning modesty.

You misunderstood my statement and it has already been clarified multiple times since.

[Gaskal]

The hope is that Treliving doesn't pull off a Feaster/Weisbrod in the 2011 1st round. Or Don Sweeney, for that matter.

[SuperMatt18]

It's not really a "risk" if the scouts have done their homework and really this happens every draft - there is a lot of movement from 6/7-15 usually vs the compiled lists.

People tore apart the Canadiens for taking Price so early.

Columbus was blasted for taking Johansen instead of Connolly.

People thought Scheifele was a reach at 7 when he was ranked in the teens by most people.

The Lindholm pick by Anaheim was criticized when they took him at 6 because most had him ranked around 15.

Couture was a reach at 9 when the Sharks took him there.

The list goes on and on - a team shouldn't be afraid to take the player they like best because of the consensus rankings.

What if Chicago liked Erik Karlsson best in 2008 but took Kyle Beach instead because he was higher on the rankings - would you have critized them for taking the guy ranked 20 at number 10?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

There is no consensus, but there is logic. If you think I said something stupid, fine. Disagree with me, but jumping directly into insults is not a good method to create discussion. It creates only contempt.

Suggesting our scouts should try to be stupider than the rest of the teams is stupid. We can't sugarcoat it for you bud. Saying you don't want our scouts to excel at their job is stupid.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

If the Flames are picking 5th or 6th or 7th or whatever and players like Dubois, Tkachuk, Juolevi, Chychrun, etc., are still on the board, and the Flames pick Brown, I will be angry, because that's an unnecessary risk to be taking with all the talent still available. There's a reason why Brown is ranked in the middle of the first round in almost every publication.

Brown will likely end up higher than mid 1st round on a lot of those publications and for a reason. CSS has him ahead of Sergachev, McLeod, Keller, etc and that was before he had an impressive U18s. If they feel he's the best prospect then it isn't an unnecessary risk. The opinions of the other scouting services are irrelevant to the Flames scouts. They have their own list and its not more risky or less so if it agrees with the guys who aren't paid by NHL teams.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't think Jankowski is a bad prospect. He's a good prospect. But he was not a wise selection, considering both the position the team was in and the other talent available. The Flames deserve flack for that because they thought they were smarter than everyone else and had tunnel vision for one player. That's what I'm afraid of. I don't think anything I've written here is stupid or worthy of derision.

He was a wise selection because its hard to find top two line centres with size in the draft outside the top 10. So while it was going to take him a while to achieve that upside due to how skinny he was and the poor level of hockey he had been playing at, his worth as a fully developed player would be high.

Dude, scouts think they are smarter than other scouts all the time, that's how the frickin draft works. Are you gonna complain that the Flames took Morris too high because he was supposed to be a 3rd or 4th rounder? Other teams laughed at the selection by the Flames. Guess what, they were wrong and so were the independent scouts that year. Morris was one of the best picks in that draft. Thank god the Flames scouts weren't worried about whether they thought they were smarter than the rest of not.

Scouts are PAID to be smarter than the other scouts. You are complaining that they might do their job well, how stupid is that.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I said the same thing regarding Bennett and Ritchie in 2014, and took a lot of heat for my position on that as well.

In 2014 there was a clearcut top 4. The draft fell off after those 4. I don't think a single poster on here wanted Ritchie ahead of Bennett and I was probably one of Ritchie's biggest supporters on here. Bennett was in a whole other tier than Ritchie.

This differs quite a lot from this draft where after the clearcut top 3 the separation between the players from 4-15 isn't that great, so team lists are going to vary wildly.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

It's not really a "risk" if the scouts have done their homework and really this happens every draft.

People tore apart the Canadiens for taking Price so early.

Columbus was blasted for taking Johansen instead of Connolly.

People thought Scheifele was a reach at 7 when he was ranked in the teens by most people.

The Lindholm pick by Anaheim was criticized when they took him at 6 because most had him ranked around 15.

Couture was a reach at 9 when the Sharks took him there.

The list goes on and on - a team shouldn't be afraid to take the player they like best because of the consensus rankings.

What if Chicago liked Erik Karlsson best in 2008 but took Kyle Beach instead because he was higher on the rankings - would you have critized them for taking the guy ranked 20 at number 10?

The fact that there are success stories does not lessen my statement. I can name far more mistakes taking this strategy than successes. This is just something I'd consider an unnecessary risk.

And I'm not really talking about taking somebody ranked 8th over somebody ranked 5th. We're talking about Logan Brown, who before Button's comment, wasn't even being considered as a pick for the Flames.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

If the Flames are picking 5th or 6th or 7th or whatever and players like Dubois, Tkachuk, Juolevi, Chychrun, etc., are still on the board, and the Flames pick Brown, I will be angry, because that's an unnecessary risk to be taking with all the talent still available.

So if the Flames are picking 5th, 6th, or 7th and the Flames take the player that they've spent an entire year determining is the 5th, 6th, or 7th best player available, you will be angry.

There's a reason why Brown is ranked in the middle of the first round in almost every publication.

And? You know where Ryan Johansen was ranked in 2010?

https://www.nhl.com/news/seguin-tops...econd/c-524284

Tenth. He was drafted 4th, and he's probably the 4th or 5th best player in that draft, with two of the other four best players being Russians.

Know where Mark Scheifele was ranked by in 2011? 16th. He was drafted 7th. As of now he's probably becoming the second, third, at worst fourth best player from that draft, and the best player from that draft is Gaudreau himself.

I guess someone needs to go back in time and tell those teams about the talent of Brett Conolly and Sean Couturier.

I don't think Jankowski is a bad prospect. He's a good prospect. But he was not a wise selection,considering both the position the team was in and the other talent available.

1) The position of the team has zero bearing on drafting. You draft the eventual best player not the most ready player.
2) What other talent available? Let's work our way down Hertl a 3C, Girgensens a 3/4C, Ceci a defenseman, Wilson a 4th liner, Teravainen an undersized 3C, Vasilevsky a goalie in the first round, Laughton a 3C, Matheson a bottom pair D, Subban a goalie in the first round, and Maata, a defenseman.

That's one player, Maatta, who has established himself as anything to lose sleep over (a lost nap at best) - and he's not even a forward which is what we desperately needed (and still need) in our system at the time with an old Iginla entering the final year of his contract. I guess you'd have preferred we stick to the CSS rankings and draft sixth ranked Codi Ceci instead of Mark Jankowski because Ceci is more talented than Jankowski?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Suggesting our scouts should try to be stupider than the rest of the teams is stupid. We can't sugarcoat it for you bud. Saying you don't want our scouts to excel at their job is stupid.

How am I suggesting this? Just because you've misunderstood and, as usual, overreacted to my one sentence post does not mean that your interpretation is correct.

Again, my position has been clarified by other posters besides just myself who seem to understand what I meant by that post.

In 2014 there was a clearcut top 4. The draft fell off after those 4. I don't think a single poster on here wanted Ritchie ahead of Bennett and I was probably one of Ritchie's biggest supporters on here. Bennett was in a whole other tier than Ritchie.

Then you misremember. Not a lot, but a handful of posters wanted Ritchie despite, yes, there being a clear top 4 in that draft available to the Flames.

So, how can you say there was a clear top 4 for 2014, but I can't say that Logan Brown should not be in the discussion for the Flames pick for this draft? Where is the consistency in your logic?

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

It's not really a "risk" if the scouts have done their homework and really this happens every draft - there is a lot of movement from 6/7-15 usually vs the compiled lists.

People tore apart the Canadiens for taking Price so early.

Columbus was blasted for taking Johansen instead of Connolly.

People thought Scheifele was a reach at 7 when he was ranked in the teens by most people.

The Lindholm pick by Anaheim was criticized when they took him at 6 because most had him ranked around 15.

Couture was a reach at 9 when the Sharks took him there.

The list goes on and on - a team shouldn't be afraid to take the player they like best because of the consensus rankings.

What if Chicago liked Erik Karlsson best in 2008 but took Kyle Beach instead because he was higher on the rankings - would you have critized them for taking the guy ranked 20 at number 10?

Yes, but were any of those picks followed by outlandish, unnecessary comments from the GM making the selection?

Making the pick isn't really the issue, it's how they handled themselves making the pick. It's one thing to pick someone higher than expected, it's another to double-down like that - putting unnecessary pressure on the player in one hand and sullying your own reputation with other GMs in the other.

"He will be the best player from the draft in 10 years"? Ok there Mr. Foresight. "We're really surprised he was still on the board at X"? Rings kind of hollow when all the teams below you are probably gonna be saying the exact same thing... probably because you let a player slide to them that they weren't expecting. From going outside of expectations in the first place.

I guarantee comments like that are not looked at favorably in the NHL GM community. It might have even affected future Feaster trades as well. Either way, as a GM you want to leave as many doors open as possible, and Feaster didn't certainly help his case that draft.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The fact that there are success stories does not lessen my statement. I can name far more mistakes taking this strategy than successes. This is just something I'd consider an unnecessary risk.

The fact that there are mistakes does not "greaten" your statement. Fact is these GMs, scouts all get together and hash out the risks versus rewards of all these available players. It's their job. Unnecessary? Acquiring who you think will become the best player is necessary. Otherwise you're not doing the job your employer pays you for.

We're talking about Logan Brown, who before Button's comment, wasn't even being considered as a pick for the Flames.

By whom, Calgarypuck?

Calgarypuck posters like you and I are smarter than paid professional amateur scouts, and those pros should not try to be smarter than Calgarypuck?

[D as in David]

Is it smarter to think you're not smarter than everyone else? People smarter than me must know the answer to this - I think.

[TheScorpion]

God, this argument is going in circles fast.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I get what Ashasx is saying, but I do think he is overstating what the ""concensus" is. As has been repeated ad nauseum, there is no board. Having said that, with enough opinions published, there does seem to be some agreement at the top end of the draft.
For me, I think the early prognostications for this draft year are still true. Top 3 of Matthews and the Finns. Picks 4-15, maybe more, could go many different ways. If the Flames are in the 7th spot, I could for sure see them take Brown or Jost, notwithstanding where they land on McKenzie's list. It wouldn't be a mistake (except with the benefit of hindsight 5-10 years later).