Who do we hope ends up GM?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

He let them make it, that's enough for me. Just a head shaker.

The same team that picked Pat Kane and Johnathan Toews also once picked Cam Barker first overall.

[neo45]

Originally Posted by moon

It isn't that bad now that you look at it. Alzner probably better, Gagner much worse and Voracek a wash.

Obviously Couture would have been the guy but since 3 forwards picked between Hickey and him looks like a lot of teams got that one wrong and it would have been a bit of an off the wall pick.

Are you seriously saying that Hickey is as good as these guys?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by neo45

Are you seriously saying that Hickey is as good as these guys?

This will be good.

[moon]

Originally Posted by neo45

Are you seriously saying that Hickey is as good as these guys?

I said Alzner better, Voracek better so far but I think going forward Hickey could pass him and Hickey much better than Gagner.

I was talking about the pick which takes into consideration the future potential of each guy. Obviously up until now Voracek and Alzner much, much better.

[Flash Walken]

Huh.

"A Wash" = "Much, much better."

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

The same team that picked Pat Kane and Johnathan Toews also once picked Cam Barker first overall.

Third overall - but it was an exceptionally weak first round. Not many good players.

As for this Hickey/Gagner debate... wowzers. Gagner isn't great, but he isn't that bad.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Huh.

"A Wash" = "Much, much better."

Not really that hard to understand if you pay attention and read what is written.

When said said a wash it was in regards to the pick which took into consideration their whole career. I think when all is done the Hickey pick will look like a wash with Voracek.

As I clarified right now Voracek obviously has been much better.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by moon

I said Alzner better, Voracek better so far but I think going forward Hickey could pass him and Hickey much better than Gagner.

I was talking about the pick which takes into consideration the future potential of each guy. Obviously up until now Voracek and Alzner much, much better.

What a surprise that this is your opinion on this subject. Hickey is not as good as any of those 3, and unless a miracle happens, never will be.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by moon

Not really that hard to understand if you pay attention and read what is written.

When said said a wash it was in regards to the pick which took into consideration their whole career. I think when all is done the Hickey pick will look like a wash with Voracek.

As I clarified right now Voracek obviously has been much better.

Edit: What am I doing....

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by strombad

What a surprise that this is your opinion on this subject. Hickey is not as good as any of those 3, and unless a miracle happens, never will be.

Hickey was also projected to go late first round, early second round.

If the Kings really did think that Hickey would be better than Gagner (debatable since he never even played a game for him then they lost him on waivers), Alzner, Voracek, Couture (heck, even Ellerby) why not trade down?

That's the difference for me between that pick and Barker. It reeks of the "I'm smarter than everyone else" attitude which I hate so much in hockey.

[C_of_Red28]

I think I would be interested in Jim Benning, Boston Bruins Assistant GM.

[devo22]

Hickey was drafted way too high and then had his fair share of injuries ... plus the Kings had other young defensemen that passed him on the depth chart (Voynov, Martinez, Muzzin etc). He'll never be near as good as Alzner for example, but at least he has turned into a solid NHLer after all these years. Just another Islanders waiver reclamation project.

I wouldn't hold this pick against Futa though. The whole draft thing is such a long process, and there had already been the combine and probably a number of interviews before Futa joined. I doubt that the whole scouting department, which spends a whole year valueing draft eligible players, would change everything because of one guy who joins the team two weeks prior to the draft. I'd expect Futas knowledge and influence to really kick in for the first time in the 2008 draft.

[terminator]

Dennis rodman

[Roof-Daddy]

Jim Benning -> from Bruins AGM to Flames GM
Mike Futa -> from Kings Director of Amateur Scouting to Flames AGM

That seems like it would be a solid combination, but what do I know. Whoever we end up hiring, I just hope he builds the Flames into a legit contender.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

Hickey was also projected to go late first round, early second round.

If the Kings really did think that Hickey would be better than Gagner (debatable since he never even played a game for him then they lost him on waivers), Alzner, Voracek, Couture (heck, even Ellerby) why not trade down?

That's the difference for me between that pick and Barker. It reeks of the "I'm smarter than everyone else" attitude which I hate so much in hockey.

Projected by who? Teams probably had a wide difference of opinions of where Hickey should go. The draft usually has very little consensus. Pretty sure I saw a behind scenes video of the draft where you saw a clip of a GM or scouting director acknowledging the pick as decent right as it happened. Undoubtedly some teams didn't like the player as much as LA did but thats the nature of scouting.

Couture went a bit ahead of where he was projected. So did San Jose think they were smarter than everyone else? What about a pick like Morris for the Flames. He was rated in the 80's-90's and we took him 13th. He was probably one of the top 5 players taken in that draft when you look back. Were they smarter than everyone else? Even a pick like Blake Wheeler isn't looking like a bad "reach" if you look back at that year. So is a team guilty of thinking they are smarter than everyone else if the pick is a bust but they actually get credit for being smarter than everyone else if the pick turns out?

Teams have to believe in their own convictions about players. They are trying to win at scouting. So yeah, most teams will believe they are smarter at it than a bunch of the other teams. And teams will have differing philosophies around the draft. Teams will see different players on different days. These are factors in why they will end up creating massively different draft lists. Just because Bob Mackenzie or Central Scouting thinks a pick is off the board doesn't mean the team's scouts are a bunch of mad geniuses.

Unless they botch the process of combining their list or the GM meddles, every team is making the best draft list they can and sticking to it. They have to believe in their process and evaluation of the players. So I don't understand this concept. of "thinking they are smarter than everyone else" and it being a negative idea.

As for why certain teams didn't trade down in certain years, that certainly is a different discussion and each case is up for debate. I happen to think teams should trade down when taking guys that probably would be available several picks later. I liked how we worked the Jankowski pick, getting Sieloff basically for free. I think Wheeler and Hickey both might have still been available 3-5 spots later.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by moon

It isn't that bad now that you look at it. Alzner probably better, Gagner much worse and Voracek a wash.

Obviously Couture would have been the guy but since 3 forwards picked between Hickey and him looks like a lot of teams got that one wrong and it would have been a bit of an off the wall pick.

How is Gagner much worse than Hickey? He's much better and Voracek a wash?? Jesus do you even watch games outside Calgary and your precious Team Canada? Voracek is way better like Hickey isn't even in the same stratosphere as Voracek.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Projected by who? Teams probably had a wide difference of opinions of where Hickey should go. The draft usually has very little consensus. Pretty sure I saw a behind scenes video of the draft where you saw a clip of a GM or scouting director acknowledging the pick as decent right as it happened. Undoubtedly some teams didn't like the player as much as LA did but thats the nature of scouting.

Couture went a bit ahead of where he was projected.

Projected by who?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Projected by who?

Exactly! People need to drop this notion of there being some consensus draft list that teams stray from. There is no consensus. Teams wildly disagree and have massively different draft lists. Central Scouting and Bob Mackenzie are merely two lists out of 30+ lists that are very different. People would be shocked if they could look at all 30 teams lists and see how much they differ from each other. People would be shocked at how different each draft would go if you shuffled the order of the teams and re-did it.

That's why it helps comes draft time to read as many different lists as you possible can. Because you see some scouting agencies believe in certain players and others don't. And where there might be a bit of a grouping (ie. some year might have a top 8 or so that most teams agree on but not necessarily on the order). Last year I had Redline, ISS, and FC. Redline really liked Poirier (see their list here http://www.redlinereport.com/wp-cont...le-Package.pdf scroll down for full profiles ) in addition to Monahan and Klimchuk. ISS thought much more highly of our Kanzig pick than did Redline.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Exactly! People need to drop this notion of there being some consensus draft list that teams stray from. There is no consensus. Teams wildly disagree and have massively different draft lists. Central Scouting and Bob Mackenzie are merely two lists out of 30+ lists that are very different. People would be shocked if they could look at all 30 teams lists and see how much they differ from each other.

That's why it helps comes draft time to read as many different lists as you possible can. Because you see some scouting agencies believe in certain players and others don't. And where there might be a bit of a grouping (ie. some year might have a top 8 or so that most teams agree on but not necessarily on the order). Last year I had Redline, ISS, and FC. Redline really liked Poirier (see their list here http://www.redlinereport.com/wp-cont...le-Package.pdf ) in addition to Monahan and Klimchuk. ISS thought much more highly of our Kanzig pick than did Redline.

Teams may have wildly different lists, but generally they all have the same players in the top 40. I have been told by a Carolina scout that it is extremely rare that there is a 1st round pick where it's not in the top 40 of every teams list.

[moon]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

How is Gagner much worse than Hickey? He's much better and Voracek a wash?? Jesus do you even watch games outside Calgary and your precious Team Canada? Voracek is way better like Hickey isn't even in the same stratosphere as Voracek.

Do you even read threads or just whine and cry right away.

I already posted about this in this thread.