How/Why does Tod Button still have a job?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by icarus

So does that mean all of our current prospects will suck because they were drafted by Tod Button?

Maybe that is why they traded Aulie.

Sutter knew who drafted him.

[mister__big]

Originally Posted by flambers

I guess I don't understand the example....

Mason Raymond came from the NCAA route. He spent two year's in University then spent 1 year in AHL, then spent 3/4 of another year in AHL.

Mason Raymond is also 4 years older and he is playing in his 2nd full season in the NHL season.

I would think you need to wait another 2 to 3 years before this example even makes sense.

I'm talking about Raymond of last season, not this season. Last year he got off to a torrid start and then fell off the face of the earth with just 13 points in the last 59 games of the season. But he continued to get chances to play and he was in the lineup for 72 games last year when he could've been scratched for his poor play.

If Backlund is given more opportunities to be in the lineup, I think he can develop nicely into a good player. But him sitting in the press box or continuously getting shuffled between Calgary and Abbotsford isn't going to help in his development.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by icarus

So does that mean all of our current prospects will suck because they were drafted by Tod Button?

Yes?
We have what looks to be 2 sure-fire NHLers - Backlund, whose upside looks to be a good 2nd line C, and Erixon, who looks to be the return of Toni Lydman, which is nice. The rest? Who knows? Certainly there are some 4th liners, but they are a dime-a-dozen, and we shall see if Nemisz, Irving, Wahl, Negrin, Ortio, Howse amount to anything - they could go either way.

[afc wimbledon]

Of course having your good draft picks eventually ask for more money is alot more palatable if you get a couple of Stanley cups out of them, I doubt Pittsburgh will be complaining when their team gets broken up due to the added expense of having players with rings on.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Yes?
We have what looks to be 2 sure-fire NHLers - Backlund, whose upside looks to be a good 2nd line C, and Erixon, who looks to be the return of Toni Lydman, which is nice. The rest? Who knows? Certainly there are some 4th liners, but they are a dime-a-dozen, and we shall see if Nemisz, Irving, Wahl, Negrin, Ortio, Howse amount to anything - they could go either way.

Or the Flames have the following players who could be "NHLers"

Backlund, Pelech, Irving, Erixon, Negrin (maybe Seabrook)

Plus a few who could be good checkers (still an asset)... Cunning, Sutter, Van Der Gulik

Junior players who have had solid seasons.... its way to early to label these players...

Howse, Wahl, Nemisz, Brodie,

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Maybe the problem is we are holding on to these guys too long because there are no young players to fill in? Or holding on to the wrong guys? .

This is what I'm talking about - there are other factors at play beyond just the scouting - and this is a good example. I'm not sure I agree 100% with it or not, but I think you can make a case that Sutter over the years hasn't let enough vets walk via free agency.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Because, that formula just isn't sustainable over several seasons. You need good drafting as a necessary fall back.

Case in point - the 2009-2010 Calgary Flames. Too many overpaid/underperforming players, and no 1st or 2nd round pick in the draft because assets had to be used to supplement the talent on the team through trades instead of developing homegrown talent.

Eventually, it catches up to you if you draft poorly.

You complain about the bad draft record, so shouldn't you be happy that we trade away picks for other assets? What is the point of keeping them if you "suck" at drafting...Don't bother bringing up the Jokinen for a First, cause we all know that everyone on this board thought it was a great trade at the time.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

This is what I'm talking about - there are other factors at play beyond just the scouting - and this is a good example. I'm not sure I agree 100% with it or not, but I think you can make a case that Sutter over the years hasn't let enough vets walk via free agency.

Yes, I would agree with that, but if there is nothing on the farm, what choice does he have? I am curious to see what happens with Nystrom this season, as a case in point... nice player, but no reason to pay him more than $600K - I am curious to see if Sutter lets him walk.
There are two (?) possible explanations - either our farm system is barren, or Sutter does not trust young players and is overly wedded to "experience".

[icarus]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Yes?
We have what looks to be 2 sure-fire NHLers - Backlund, whose upside looks to be a good 2nd line C, and Erixon, who looks to be the return of Toni Lydman, which is nice. The rest? Who knows? Certainly there are some 4th liners, but they are a dime-a-dozen, and we shall see if Nemisz, Irving, Wahl, Negrin, Ortio, Howse amount to anything - they could go either way.

So who do you suggest to hire who drafts nothing but sure things and avoids the guys who could go either way? God?

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

You complain about the bad draft record, so shouldn't you be happy that we trade away picks for other assets? What is the point of keeping them if you "suck" at drafting...Don't bother bringing up the Jokinen for a First, cause we all know that everyone on this board thought it was a great trade at the time.

Huh? You keep your picks and draft well, or are you ruling out that option?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Yes, I would agree with that, but if there is nothing on the farm, what choice does he have? I am curious to see what happens with Nystrom this season, as a case in point... nice player, but no reason to pay him more than $600K - I am curious to see if Sutter lets him walk.
There are two (?) possible explanations - either our farm system is barren, or Sutter does not trust young players and is overly wedded to "experience".

Maybe a little from column A and B. I was a little disappointed that guys like Vandergulik weren't given more of a chance this year. I'm not sure it was necessary to sign a guy like Sjostrom when you had DVG in the minors and it seemed like he slotted in nicely last year when given limited chances.

But I also think at times guys like him, haven't had good camps and haven't really shown they are ready.

So it's a little of both I think.

Having Brian McGratton take up a roster spot all season doesn't help either.

[afc wimbledon]

Who is going to replace Toskala next year?

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by icarus

So who do you suggest to hire who drafts nothing but sure things and avoids the guys who could go either way? God?

Problem is that we have less sure things, and good upside "either way" guys than almost all the other teams... How about Poile?

[mister__big]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Who is going to replace Toskala next year?

I think he will be re-signed for 1 year at close to league minimum a la Raycroft. He might want to prove himself to get a bigger contract 2 years later.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Who is going to replace Toskala next year?

Unless the pattern changes - someone cheap and not very good. The Flames haven't thus far under Sutter allocated much cap space to the back-up position. You get what you pay for. I hope they sign a guy like Biron or even Toskala to a 1.5 million deal. You can't have your back-up consistently giving up losses.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Maybe a little from column A and B. I was a little disappointed that guys like Vandergulik weren't given more of a chance this year. I'm not sure it was necessary to sign a guy like Sjostrom when you had DVG in the minors and it seemed like he slotted in nicely last year when given limited chances.

But I also think at times guys like him, haven't had good camps and haven't really shown they are ready.

So it's a little of both I think.

Having Brian McGratton take up a roster spot all season doesn't help either.

I think McGrattan (or equivalent) still has a place in the NHL. Ideally, it would be someone like Eager who can actually play. McGrattan makes $500K, so I am fine with that - it's not like he is taking more salary cap room than he should. If we had signed Laraque, for $1.5M we would have a problem. I really, really hope we don't do something stupid like sign Nystrom for $1.3M.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by mister__big

I think he will be re-signed for 1 year at close to league minimum a la Raycroft. He might want to prove himself to get a bigger contract 2 years later.

Really? from 4 mill to 500 grand for a thirty something player, I suspect he will look to either move to a team that needs him as a nos 1 or retire, especially as he is putting up decent stats since coming in from the Maple Laffs.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Really? from 4 mill to 500 grand for a thirty something player, I suspect he will look to either move to a team that needs him as a nos 1 or retire, especially as he is putting up decent stats since coming in from the Maple Laffs.

Precisely - there is no way a reasonably proven veteran like Toskala takes less than $1.5M on a 1-year deal. He can go to the KHL and make more if worst comes to worst.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

You complain about the bad draft record, so shouldn't you be happy that we trade away picks for other assets? What is the point of keeping them if you "suck" at drafting...Don't bother bringing up the Jokinen for a First, cause we all know that everyone on this board thought it was a great trade at the time.

Surely there is another option... ie., either turning over some scouts or changing philosophies a little. The default position on a draft pick should be that it won't work out.

As for the Jokinen deal, does Sutter get a pass on it just because it was popular? According to some most people who have defended the recent trades that were unpopular, armchair GM opinions are not valid. shouldn't that also apply in the reverse situations then?

As a side, there was a time that the Flames were one of the more innovative drafting teams (drafting Makarov as an older European before it was popular, success at drafting from the U.S. college and university circuits while other teams overlooked them - often with late round picks). Now we seem to focus mostly on mainstream sources (CHL, with a few Europeans from Sweden and Finland, the occasion US university players). With late round picks, I'd love to see the Flames take a chance on some players from central and eastern europe (Russia, Czech Rep. and Slovakia) for a change. Countries like Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Norway and Slovenia are starting to progress... do the Flames even send scouts to places like that?

[mister__big]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Really? from 4 mill to 500 grand for a thirty something player, I suspect he will look to either move to a team that needs him as a nos 1 or retire, especially as he is putting up decent stats since coming in from the Maple Laffs.

I agree that league minimum is probably too low for a guy like Toskala. He should get somewhere in the range of $1.3-1.5M for a 1-year deal, much like the one Biron got with the NYI.

I'm skeptical that he can be a number 1 goalie anywhere, especially after his stint with the Leafs. He may not be the reason for their poor record, but he wasn't outstanding for them either. He's probably better off being a 1B or backup, playing no more than 30 games a year.