Hickey Named Biggest Riser from 2014 Draft

[Fire]

Just looking at the roster of BU an noticed Ahti Oksanen, a 6'3" undrafted Finnish defenseman with 19 goals in 30 games. Is this guy look as impressive as his numbers indicate?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Fire

Just looking at the roster of BU an noticed Ahti Oksanen, a 6'3" undrafted Finnish defenseman with 19 goals in 30 games. Is this guy look as impressive as his numbers indicate?

Certainly a large uptick in goals for a 22 year old in his third year in college. Haven't really paid any attention to him though

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by activeStick

So Button has been our main scout for a while has he not? Why all the apparent success in recent years (I know it's still early, but definitely a lot more positives vibes of late) but epic fails in the past? I'm honestly confused.

I recommend this for anyone who has a similar question, and/or who thinks Darryl Sutter was 'horrible' in regards to drafting, and that all the credit goes to Feaster.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/23...r-hockey-sense

Things changed philosophically at around the Backlund draft.

“We began to change what we were looking for even before that,” said Button, the club’s amateur scouting director. “I know a lot of people give (former GM) Darryl (Sutter) a lot of grief but not for his hockey sense, for the way he treated people. But he recognized after 2006 the game was changing. From when we took Mikael Backlund, it’s been progressing.”

The Flames prioritize "Character" and "Hockey Sense" over everything else. They try to avoid those 'headcases' (for example, avoiding Shinkaruk, who was at least a possible headcase, but was constantly rumored to have some character issues). No need for a further explanation - Monahan is exactly the type of player that emphasizes character.

What is hockey sense? How does it help? In the same article, Button kind of gives a bit of insight. It isn't just 'where to go' - though I am sure that helps. It is being able to adjust your game to what works. The strengths you had in junior may no longer be applicable (or possible) in the NHL, and if you have low hockey sense, you are unable to adapt.

“Hockey sense allows a guy with less of a skill-set in a different area to still succeed,” Button said, noting the likes of Brett Hull, Luc Robitaille, Craig Janney and Andrew Brunette succeeded without being top skaters. “If you’re a smart player and can’t skate, you can compensate. But if you’re a dumb player and are fast, you’ll only be skating circles. “Hockey sense can limit them.”

This is why I say that it is incredibly difficult to point at one GM and say: "He sucked at drafting". When Sutter took over as GM, the scouting staff was a skeleton crew. You can definitely argue that it took way too long to turn it around, but Sutter in fact did turn things around for Calgary. It was a bit 'too little, too late' for him, and his below-average scouting record coupled with bad coaching decisions/terrible 48 hours of trading forced the Flames to let him go.

I do think that it is difficult to gauge a scouting staff (and a GM who is responsible for hiring said scouting staff) for a number of years. I just imagine a GM makes certain changes to a scouting staff and the organizational philosophy. How does a GM know that those moves were the right ones with respect to the philosophical and personnel changes? On top of this, how can the GM be able to differentiate between scouting and development? Perhaps scouting is top-notch, but the development system is sub-par (or vice-versa).

I just see drafting and development as a long process. As fans, I think we can only see trends over many years. I was extremely critical of Sutter's drafting, but upon looking back on it, there was a clear organizational shift and an upward performance trend. Weisbrod (according to that article) helped it along as well. No idea what Burke's input was into that process - though I imagine he did have input. No idea what Treliving has added since either. Again, time will tell if things seemed to shift positively or negatively. You simply can't judge a draft with only a year or two out - it is fine to be positive or negative about it as we all have our favorite prospects that we hope get drafted by the Flames, but we always have to remind ourselves that only a number of years will tell if a draft was poor or amazing.

What I am worried about was losing Tom Webster. He had a reputation for being an excellent talent evaluator, and he apparently was also quite the mentor for the entire scouting staff as well. It was a big loss organizationally. I don't foresee a huge dip, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bit of a dip.

As for Hickey, great seeing his stock rise. Somewhere on this forum someone posted an article where a member of the media asked a couple of players a few questions about the team, and Eichel being one of the members of the team that was polled. "Who had the best one timer" or something like that, and they said "Hickey - no matter what he gets shots through, even if they are terrible passes and he has to reach for it or if they are bouncing". I may be misremembering the exact quote, and perhaps what I said was a bit of an exaggeration, but that was essentially at least the gist of it.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Fire

Just looking at the roster of BU an noticed Ahti Oksanen, a 6'3" undrafted Finnish defenseman with 19 goals in 30 games. Is this guy look as impressive as his numbers indicate?

I THINK he is the guy that moved up to forward. Was a forward - then defence - then forward again. Explains the uptick.

[Mony]

getbak and sureloss have posted this already in the NCAA prospects thread of the Backburner forum - but for those who are unaware, Hickey and Jack Eichel's Boston University Terriers will take on Yale today on TSN2 at 12:00pm Mountain/2:00pm Eastern. 1 hour and 15 minutes notice for those who do not already know and want to watch.

[Mony]

Hickey just now with a brilliant move 4 on 4. Cuts around a couple d-men down the wing with strength and speed, all the way to the front of the net and creates a great scoring chance.

[Mony]

End of period one. Hickey hassles a Bulldog in his own zone along the boards and then creates a turnover.

[Dr. Doom]

Originally Posted by activeStick

So Button has been our main scout for a while has he not? Why all the apparent success in recent years (I know it's still early, but definitely a lot more positives vibes of late) but epic fails in the past? I'm honestly confused.

Good question. Seems you got some answers.

I have something to add...

Could it have been due to Weisbrod? I know he left... but was he responsible for much of the good drafting we saw?

I hope not - now that he's left...

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Dr. Doom

Good question. Seems you got some answers.

I have something to add...

Could it have been due to Weisbrod? I know he left... but was he responsible for much of the good drafting we saw?

I hope not - now that he's left...

Weisbrod was only responsible for the Jankowski draft. He was pulled back after that one and wasn't here for any before that one (he was hired a few days after the 2011 draft).

[Mony]

2-2 after three periods. Last 35 seconds, Yale starts a rush up ice and Hickey bats a puck out of mid-air on a good defensive play to disrupt the Yale attack.

[Mony]

Danny O'Regan who was impressive all game scores the winner. Boston University advances to face the winner of Minnesota-Minnesota Duluth tomorrow. Hickey looked great during the game.

[Madrox]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Weisbrod was only responsible for the Jankowski draft. He was pulled back after that one and wasn't here for any before that one (he was hired a few days after the 2011 draft).

Was he not involved in 2013 as well?

[debil]

"I grew up loving the oilers".

[Zevo]

Good for you.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I recommend this for anyone who has a similar question, and/or who thinks Darryl Sutter was 'horrible' in regards to drafting, and that all the credit goes to Feaster.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/23...r-hockey-sense

Things changed philosophically at around the Backlund draft.

That article is 3 years old and Sutter did suck at drafting, he had a couple good picks but most were not good.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Jacks

That article is 3 years old and Sutter did suck at drafting, he had a couple good picks but most were not good.

The immediate results were bad. But there was a lot of work started in overhauling the department and getting the resources in place to build it.

The Flames were excessively neglegent with the department pre Sutter. Unable to stock their own AHL team, the system was really depleted. Many strategic moves were made that have set the organization up to start doing a better job in the draft.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Hickey because he can get it off anywhere even if it's in his feet

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Jacks

That article is 3 years old and Sutter did suck at drafting, he had a couple good picks but most were not good.

I guess you completely missed the point of that article, and what Button had to say, based on how dismissive you are about that article.

Yes, that article was 3 years old - I am not following your point as to why that matters. Has the Flames' current philosophy deviated since then? Does Monahan, Bennett and whomever the Flames select next year not have a single thing to do with the philosophy that evolved under Sutter?

I think a number of fans view the drafting and development program with a start date and an end date that corresponds to a certain GM, and base their opinions strictly off of that. That is certainly one way of looking at it, but IMO, an incomplete way. Drafting and development takes a number of years before you can accurately gauge how well a GM has done. You have to try and see what philosophical differences have changed, you have to see how the scouting and development staff grew or regressed in number, and the turnover. Positive and negative effects may only be revealed with time, and a GM who implemented those may not be around by then.

If you were to look at when Sutter started as a GM in terms of the drafting and development staff, and look at it when he left, there was a huge change. The philosophy that the Flames currently operate under with regards to the draft evolved under him - the same philosophy that Feaster worked under (and that was the point of the article I listed). Sutter did quite a lot of work in rebuilding the drafting and development program - he got it back on track. Feaster came in and reaped all the rewards (unfairly IMO), but he also did add to it by expanding the scouting staff still further (so I think Feaster definitely deserves well-earned praise for his body of work in that area, just not ALL the praise). Hopefully Treliving continues to do more of the same.

Contrast it to what the Oilers did. I am guessing they were in the same boat as the Flames coming out of the late 90's and into the early 2000's. I don't think they have successfully implemented a drafting philosophy, hired competent scouts, or implemented a successful development program. The Flames started this under Sutter successfully, Feaster continued it, and I hope (and would bet) that Treliving further refines it during his tenure. It is partially why Calgary's current rebuild is going along much more successfully thus far than Edmonton's has, and it is a HUGE reason why Edmonton's has failed miserably.

But yes, Sutter 'sucked at drafting' is a much easier and much more concise way of looking at it.

[driveway]

I decided to go all-in on Hickey when we drafted him. So stoked to get this kid on the Flames in a couple of years.