Todd Button....

[Paulie Walnuts]

2013 would have been the Feaster year. 14 probably still had Feaster residue on the draft. The Wise one was impacting those drafts a lot.

I think Treliving did value the draft, and focusing on it. The issue was he did not value the draft picks, and we went into drafts with him repeating the same story "I wish I could give the scouts more picks"

Same scouting staff that identified Kucherov who just had 100 assists and is up for MVP. Same ones who found Adam Fox who won a Norris.

The issue may also be they don't have the picks to swing big like that all the time, and take a safer route.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Robbob

I think the thing with the scouting staff also goes beyond who was drafted, but who they identified as an NHLer. Part of me thinks this is partly the reason that Tod is still around. At the end of the day, the GM makes the final decision. I think what has changed over the course of the last decade is probably all analytics and systems that the teams build. It is a far cry from the days where Sutter reached for Pelech because he needed a Warner replacement.

That's a great counter point. Maybe who we are taking isn't turning out, but players he and the staff identified that get taken a bit before our chance end up hitting.

Just a note on the GM influence that keeps getting brought up. It has been discussed in prior years that the GM does not make any picks beyond "the list" which is exhausted usually by end of 3rd round. It then goes to Tod and area scouts. Is this correct?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Where did I say I dont give him any credit for those drafts?

Sorry wasn't suggesting you in particular.

To me you have to look at number of picks, weighting of picks, and then success with that capital if you're going to assess your scouting staff.

The Flames had brutal draft capital levels but found players pretty much every year.

That's why they did well in that Athletic article.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

That's a great counter point. Maybe who we are taking isn't turning out, but players he and the staff identified that get taken a bit before our chance end up hitting.

Just a note on the GM influence that keeps getting brought up. It has been discussed in prior years that the GM does not make any picks beyond "the list" which is exhausted usually by end of 3rd round. It then goes to Tod and area scouts. Is this correct?

Every GM is different.

Some have parameters that steer the entire draft.

Calgary had a no Russians thing for years.

Sutter had a big and from Western Canada thing.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Every GM is different.

Some have parameters that steer the entire draft.

Calgary had a no Russians thing for years.

Sutter had a big and from Western Canada thing.

Just not Shea Weber.

I’m sorry, I know we already talked about this, but it will never not irritate me.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

That's a great counter point. Maybe who we are taking isn't turning out, but players he and the staff identified that get taken a bit before our chance end up hitting.

Just a note on the GM influence that keeps getting brought up. It has been discussed in prior years that the GM does not make any picks beyond "the list" which is exhausted usually by end of 3rd round. It then goes to Tod and area scouts. Is this correct?

It makes general sense. A GM isn't going to do the dives necessary to have input on players past 100 or so. And even in rounds 2 and 3 I suspect that their knowledge is based on scouts, and not other sources (as opposed to the upper half of round one). But overall I think it depends on the GM. I mean does anyone hold Button responsible for Jankowski?