I am not a troll actually and just last night in the game thread saw you all upset with another poster and arguing with them as well. You called them "cranky pants".
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
You do in general post large exaggerations and panicky stuff that seems more tilted to getting a rise out of people. The Kadri being 40 thing, the non-rebuild stuff, and the Flames moving out of the bottom ten regularly. If you aren’t deliberately trolling, you still are.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Bonded For This Useful Post:
Or is it a recognition that there is value in a dressing room for not going scorched Earth, and there's likely value in assessing a market and moving assets when a price is paid?
It appears to be the view of some. Comments like "The Flames can pick first and won't get a Celebrini" --- technically could be true, but its really strange not to want to have the best odds available to you. Being afraid of that drafting position and acting like its somehow a risk to the franchise --- really odd take.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Igottago For This Useful Post:
I am in a tight spot because I think the Flames should finish in the bottom 5, but I just can't stand the people who I agree with. A bunch of whiny whiny whiny whiny Oilers look a like whiners.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TheIronMaiden For This Useful Post:
Bedard and Celebrini are unusual. Again, my view is that Celebrini is the best prospect to come along since McDavid and the closest thing to Crosby we've seen because of the completeness of his game, offensive skills and compete.
There was thought that McKenna was also of this quality, but it's clear he's not.
Tiering guys is always dangerous but if we look over the top 3 picks since the McDavid draft
Star : Misa, Frondell, Levshunov, Sennecke, Cooley, Stutzle, Dahlin, Heiskanen
Good but not great: Slafkovsky, Nemec, McTavish, Beniers, Byfield, Svechnikov, Hischier,
Meh to Bust: Lafreniere, Kakko, Dach, Kotkaniemi, Patrick, Laine, Dubois
I think the franchise altering guys are Superstar and above. But even then, it's more likely you get something resembling a star player or a good player.
This is why re-builds are so hard. Which isn't to say that you don't need those top picks. You do because they are your best chance.
But this is why so many teams have failed re-builds. You need a lot of luck to hit on one of those guys that can change your franchise.
Yup. Between the McDavid draft and the Bedard draft I think there's only 3 years that the best player (IMHO) came from the top 3 picks: 2016, 2019 and 2020. And in those years the next best few players all came outside the top 3.
2022 - Hutson, 2021 - Johnston, 2018 - Q Hughes, 2017 Makar were all non top 3 picks and are the best in their class.
In 2016 Matthews was 1OA and the best player of the draft, but Tkachuk, Keller and McAvoy are next and they were outside the top 3.
In 2019, Jack Hughes at 1OA is the best player but Boldy, Caulfield, Cozens and Zegras are next and they weren't top 3.
In 2020 Stutzle is the best in class and he was 3OA. But Raymond, Jarvis and Sanderson are non-top 3 and they are the next best players IMO.
Schaefer is also an example of the role of luck though, as the Islanders certainly didn't bottom out to give themselves a good chance at a high pick. They hit the lotto. I think their odds of landing the 1st pick were 3.5% (someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that)
And that win could hurt them long-term if Schaefer is good enough to elevate a team, that would otherwise be trending to the bottom, back to the dreaded mushy middle.
It appears to be the view of some. Comments like "The Flames can pick first and won't get a Celebrini" --- technically could be true, but its really strange not to want to have the best odds available to you. Being afraid of that drafting position and acting like its somehow a risk to the franchise --- really odd take.
But I don't think people are saying they are afraid of that drafting position. If they are - point me to those quotes.
They are pushing back against the notion that a top pick has a high probability of being a franchise altering player. The odds are more they won't.
The nuance is this:
- The best chance of getting a franchise altering player is at the top of the draft. That's why you need to get some of those picks over the long-term
- But chances of getting a franchise altering player at the top of the draft is still well below 50% because those players are so rare overall.
I think that's how I, and others, see it.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
You do in general post large exaggerations and panicky stuff that seems more tilted to getting a rise out of people. The Kadri being 40 thing, the non-rebuild stuff, and the Flames moving out of the bottom ten regularly. If you aren’t deliberately trolling, you still are.
what! this inflated age thing is because of the loser facting Kadri is 40? hahahahahaha
Rhetts been a loser for 50 years!
__________________ Peter12 "I'm no Trump fan but he is smarter than most if not everyone in this thread. ”
But I don't think people are saying they are afraid of that drafting position. If they are - point me to those quotes.
They are pushing back against the notion that a top pick has a high probability of being a franchise altering player. The odds are more they won't.
The nuance is this: - The best chance of getting a franchise altering player is at the top of the draft. That's why you need to get some of those picks over the long-term
- But chances of getting a franchise altering player at the top of the draft is still well below 50% because those players are so rare overall.
I think that's how I, and others, see it.
Yes. And many fans want just that -- the best chance. And its something the Flames have never had.
Throwing out examples of great players drafted below the top of the draft doesn't make the top of the draft any less desirable, for fans or organizations. High draft picks are coveted assets for a reason. Just because not all of them turn out, isn't a reason not to want them. Especially when you know you're in a rebuild cycle.
__________________
A few weeks after crashing head-first into the boards (denting his helmet and being unable to move for a little while) following a hit from behind by Bob Errey, the Calgary Flames player explains:
"I was like Christ, lying on my back, with my arms outstretched, crucified"
-- Frank Musil - Early January 1994
It appears to be the view of some. Comments like "The Flames can pick first and won't get a Celebrini" --- technically could be true, but its really strange not to want to have the best odds available to you. Being afraid of that drafting position and acting like its somehow a risk to the franchise --- really odd take.
If that's how you interpret that.
I saw it as you only have a 25% of landing the first pick even if you do finish last, and this year's 1st isn't as good as previous 1st anyway.
Those could both be true, but still recognize better odds are better odds, and a higher pick is a higher pick.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
But I don't think people are saying they are afraid of that drafting position. If they are - point me to those quotes.
They are pushing back against the notion that a top pick has a high probability of being a franchise altering player. The odds are more they won't.
The nuance is this:
- The best chance of getting a franchise altering player is at the top of the draft. That's why you need to get some of those picks over the long-term
- But chances of getting a franchise altering player at the top of the draft is still well below 50% because those players are so rare overall.
I think that's how I, and others, see it.
It’s also just like… the least controversial position, which is why it’s so strange that people want to try to make it controversial by throwing stuff in like calling people “scared” of picking there.
The reality is that yes, the best players most often come at the very top of the draft. That’s how it works. It doesn’t need explaining, that’s literally how the draft is designed. It’s the whole purpose of the draft order being the way it is. But it’s also true that not every draft has a Celebrini, and not every player drafted in the top 3 is going to be a game changer, and not every game changer in a draft is going to go in the top 3, 5, or even top 10.
Those doses of reality I don’t think are ever meant to suggest that drafting at the top is bad or scary or pointless like some people try to make it seem. It’s just reality, and it should both temper expectations AND make people a bit more hopeful around picks throughout the draft instead of just writing the team and their chances off because they picked a center at 18 instead of 3.
That’s my perspective at least. I’d love a pick in the top 3. But I can’t control that so I’m still going to be excited by a pick in the top 10. And I’m more interested in seeing if someone like Reschny could become that #1 center than I am in spending time fretting that we haven’t picked one yet.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
He was hyped as most 1st overall picks are but he's a rare case where he's been better than many expected. I recall plenty of draft people saying he wasn't a Bedard tier prospect.
That’s what I remember too. Bog standard 1OA hype at the time but he’s killing it now.
Yes. And many fans want just that -- the best chance. And its something the Flames have never had.
Throwing out examples of great players drafted below the top of the draft doesn't make the top of the draft any less desirable, for fans or organizations. High draft picks are coveted assets for a reason. Just because not all of them turn out, isn't a reason not to want them. Especially when you know you're in a rebuild cycle.
Who doesn’t want them, though? Show me one person saying they’d rather pick 15th than 1st.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
It’s also just like… the least controversial position, which is why it’s so strange that people want to try to make it controversial by throwing stuff in like calling people “scared” of picking there.
The reality is that yes, the best players most often come at the very top of the draft. That’s how it works. It doesn’t need explaining, that’s literally how the draft is designed. It’s the whole purpose of the draft order being the way it is. But it’s also true that not every draft has a Celebrini, and not every player drafted in the top 3 is going to be a game changer, and not every game changer in a draft is going to go in the top 3, 5, or even top 10.
Those doses of reality I don’t think are ever meant to suggest that drafting at the top is bad or scary or pointless like some people try to make it seem. It’s just reality, and it should both temper expectations AND make people a bit more hopeful around picks throughout the draft instead of just writing the team and their chances off because they picked a center at 18 instead of 3.
That’s my perspective at least. I’d love a pick in the top 3. But I can’t control that so I’m still going to be excited by a pick in the top 10. And I’m more interested in seeing if someone like Reschny could become that #1 center than I am in spending time fretting that we haven’t picked one yet.
That's me as well.
I can't control it. I won't bitch about it on a daily basis. I choose to believe there are people assessing the value today vs the value at the pre Olympic freeze vs the value at the deadline and making a call.
Watch and see where it ends up.
And really happy there are no conditions on the pick this year.
It appears to be the view of some. Comments like "The Flames can pick first and won't get a Celebrini" --- technically could be true, but its really strange not to want to have the best odds available to you. Being afraid of that drafting position and acting like its somehow a risk to the franchise --- really odd take.
That's not what the view is. No one is afraid of picking first. The view is that people are not panicking over not having the best odds because even the best odds aren't great, and there's still a pretty good chance of getting the best player if you pick 4th or 6th or whatever.
Weird things happen. The Avs finished last but lost the lottery and ended up picking 4th in 2017. And they picked the best player in the draft.
2018. Buffalo finishes last and wins the lottery so they get the hoped for result and grab Dahlin - pretty good. But Carolina moves up 9 spots on the second lottery and picks Svechnikov also not bad. Montreal moves up as well and gets Kotkaniemi. But the best player is Quinn Hughes and he is taken 7th. Ottawa (arguably the loser of the lottery, takes Brady Tkachuk. AZ in typical sad sack fashion picks two spots worse than their finish and gets Barrett Hayton. But had the picks stayed the same but the teams went in their original order, Svechnikov is a Sen, Kotkaniemi is a Coyote, Tkachuk is a Hab, Hayton is a Red Wing, Zadina is a Canuck and Hughes is Hawk (and maybe that team misses out on Bedard later on).
Yup. Between the McDavid draft and the Bedard draft I think there's only 3 years that the best player (IMHO) came from the top 3 picks: 2016, 2019 and 2020. And in those years the next best few players all came outside the top 3.
2022 - Hutson, 2021 - Johnston, 2018 - Q Hughes, 2017 Makar were all non top 3 picks and are the best in their class.
In 2016 Matthews was 1OA and the best player of the draft, but Tkachuk, Keller and McAvoy are next and they were outside the top 3.
In 2019, Jack Hughes at 1OA is the best player but Boldy, Caulfield, Cozens and Zegras are next and they weren't top 3.
In 2020 Stutzle is the best in class and he was 3OA. But Raymond, Jarvis and Sanderson are non-top 3 and they are the next best players IMO.
I don't quite understand your argument. I don't think anyone is arguing that you can't get the best player in the draft outside of the 1st or 2nd pick, nor do I think anyone is saying that you can't get a star player deep in a draft either. However, there is a VERY high correlation of 'success' in drafting a a star player in the #1 spot, and you have a decreasing chance of drafting one the further you move away from the top pick.
So you are arguing in exceptions, rather than the rule.
Think of it this way: If you had to undergo a life-threatening medical procedure, do you take the one that gives you 85% odds of surviving? Or do you pick the one that gives you 2% odds of surviving? Either one of them may end up with you making it. However, some people who choose the 85% one inevitably die, while some who were forced (I imagine, by not having any other option) to do the 2% procedure managed to live. Do use this argument as a rational argument for someone to intentionally select the 2% procedure if given the choice? Obviously not. So why are you disregarding the decreasing odds of selecting a star player the further away from #1 that you go? How far way is acceptable?
Just because the Flames lucked out with Gaudreau, Brodie and Reichel in the 4th round, doesn't mean that they can reasonably expect to continue drafting a star player from the 4th round. Have a look for yourself since 1980 how many busts that were taken in the 4th round by the Flames: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/...r00005090.html
Sure, there is often the outcome that a player outside the #1 pick becomes the best player of the draft, even way down in the draft (Kucherov and Gaudreau were better picks than RNH, for instance). Nobody is arguing that this doesn't happen. What are the chances of it happening, however? The further away you get from #1, the lower your odds are of drafting a star.
Do you want Crosby, or do you want Bobby Ryan and Jack Johnson? Sure, Price and Kopitar should have been #2 and #3 instead of #5 and #11, but those were much to figure out than Crosby was, right?
Another way to look at it:
I LOVE Gary Roberts, and think he is one of the best all-time Flames. I also think that there was nobody better at that position in the draft and that the Flames did very well drafting Roberts there. I don't think the Flames win a cup without him. However, had they been in the position to take Mario Lemieux instead, I would argue that they would have won a handful of cups, right?
Here is a good rebuttal to your argument:
While the 2022 draft is still a bit too early to tell, even if you are correct that Lane Hutson is in fact the best player of that draft, I would still prefer the #1 selection and make my choice. Not everyone has the same list, so I would prefer that Conroy and his team get the very first selection of every draft, right? Plus, another step further, if Montreal didn't blow it up and try to select high in 2022, they probably wouldn't have been interested in trading out Kulak to obtain that pick used to draft Hutson with anyway, right? Why would they? So this actually helps prove the point that the Flames are better off trading away whatever assets they don't deem to be important 3-4 years down the road, and seeing if they can draft their own Hutson, or another Gaudreau, or Brett Hull again, and so on.
That's the only way the Flames are really going to come out of this rebuild as a contender - by drafting high and getting some stars, as well as finding them deeper in the draft. Finding only the top end stars makes you into the Edmonton Oilers. Finding stars only further into the draft turns you into the Flames. Insert McDavid and Draisaitl into the Flames' lineup with Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk, Brodie and Giordano, and I'll show you a cup winner, if not an outright dynasty.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
Pace needed the rest of the way to make the playoffs ... back to 104 point pace
Pace needed to NOT draft top 10 ... 96 point pace
Pace needed to NOT draft top 5 ... 87 point pace
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
Pace needed the rest of the way to make the playoffs ... back to 104 point pace
Pace needed to NOT draft top 10 ... 96 point pace
Pace needed to NOT draft top 5 ... 87 point pace
If we look by month at this point:
October: 2-8-2, 0.250 point percentage, 32nd
November: 7-6-2, 0.533 point percentage, 20th
December: 4-3-0, 0.571 point percentage, 16th
So really I think they have normalized to where people more expected them to be. Which is around .550 and maybe a 90 point pace but the terrible start is keeping them bottom 5 at this point.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
