Craig Conroy and "The Dallas Model"

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Aka, you need to suck for a few years and draft high which means being a poor team on the ice, and the idea of a 2-3 year turn around that we keep talking about is basically a fools errand?

What if as an organization you commit to being nauseatingly unwatchable for 3 years and your draft picks don’t hit. What do you do then? Seems like you are pot committed at that point.

Wonder how much money your franchise would lose over that stretch. As it wouldn’t end at 3 years and could go on indefinitely.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Goriders

What if as an organization you commit to being nauseatingly unwatchable for 3 years and your draft picks don’t hit. What do you do then? Seems like you are pot committed at that point.

Wonder how much money your franchise would lose over that stretch. As it wouldn’t end at 3 years and could go on indefinitely.

At least it’s a chance.

A half ass retool basically has less of a chance of succeeding.

What happens if Calgary’s current crop of draft picks don’t hit? And there us only one current premium pick there.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Goriders

What if as an organization you commit to being nauseatingly unwatchable for 3 years and your draft picks don’t hit. What do you do then? Seems like you are pot committed at that point.

Wonder how much money your franchise would lose over that stretch. As it wouldn’t end at 3 years and could go on indefinitely.

But your option has an even less chance of happening. You're acting like your plan to just say "f it losing sucks let's use our Cap space and try to get winning again" is somehow safer or better. It isn't.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Goriders

What if as an organization you commit to being nauseatingly unwatchable for 3 years and your draft picks don’t hit. What do you do then? Seems like you are pot committed at that point.

Wonder how much money your franchise would lose over that stretch. As it wouldn’t end at 3 years and could go on indefinitely.

What choice do the Flames have? Are big dollar UFA signings like Kadri, Markstrom, Coleman, Tanev and Zadorov getting the Flames into the playoffs without their drafted star players?

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Go back and read what he said to Jiri and then tell me I'm the angry one.

Come on people ...

Not angry at all - just hearing Jiri make the same statement multiple time a week that the Flames are the 2nd best drafting team because of an article evaluating drafting players from 6-15 years ago that actually shows / states the Flames actually really suck at drafting in the first round and average in the 2nd, but hit in Adam Fox (a player who fell to his spot because teams knew he wouldn’t sign and didn’t want to waste a pick on him ) makes them “ a top drafting team “

They have drafted 1 superstar player in 30? years in MT who actually
Played for them and even that was 6th overall - higher then they will be drafting this year

But as long as the Athletic ranks us 2nd in value above replacement from 2010- 2018 and includes a player who never played and was never going to
Play for us I guess we have nothing to worry about !

[GullFoss]

They can pretend it's a retool and call it a retool. But it's a rebuild. How is the team next season going to better than this season without Hanifin and Tanev and Lindholm?

IMO they flames playbook will be as follows:

1) sign UFA for 1-3 years
2) try to find misfits to buy at low prices
3) try to compete
4) sell off pending UFAs at deadline for picks and prospects
5) end the 2024-25 season missing the playoffs
6) hold a press conference around garbage day and say it's still a retool

[All In Good Time]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

At least it’s a chance.

A half ass retool basically has less of a chance of succeeding.

What happens if Calgary’s current crop of draft picks don’t hit? And there us only one current premium pick there.

Exactly
Now that we’ve made this turn and started down this road we might a well keep tearing things down for another year or two and then start thinking how the drafting has been, how it has to continue and what other pieces we might need.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Not angry at all - just hearing Jiri make the same statement multiple time a week that the Flames are the 2nd best drafting team because of an article evaluating drafting players from 6-15 years ago that actually shows / states the Flames actually really suck at drafting in the first round and average in the 2nd, but hit in Adam Fox (a player who fell to his spot because teams knew he wouldn’t sign and didn’t want to waste a pick on him ) makes them “ a top drafting team “

They have drafted 1 superstar player in 30? years in MT who actually
Played for them and even that was 6th overall - higher then they will be drafting this year

But as long as the Athletic ranks us 2nd in value above replacement from 2010- 2018 and includes a player who never played and was never going to
Play for us I guess we have nothing to worry about !

There's some real logical issues here. The Flames can be ranked as a very good drafting team without drafting a lot of superstars. Why? Because drafting performance has to be evaluated on your draft position.

Name a player better than Zary who was drafted after him? Or Pospisil? Or Wolf? Or even a guy like Ruzicka? Valimaki turned out to be a decent pick. Pelletier will be good. They took Andersson and Kylington out of the second round and both are great picks at that level. Mangiapane was a 6th rounder.

[boogerz]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Senators are a poor example as they tried to fast forward the rebuild and they actually have underachieved this season. Sabres are the typical organization people use as an example of why rebuilding doesn't always work but they are really the outlier. Teams still have to get the picks right in the rebuild but it's been proven when you make the right picks you can build a true cup contender.

Sens are also a great example of how to botch a rebuild with subpar coaching.

Dallas weren't an entertaining team to watch for a few years due to their playing style, but they have not been shy about shelling out money on reputable head coaches like Montgomery, Bowness, and Deboer.

Edwards also needs to get serious about paying $$$$ to court an above average head coach (not named Sutter) if the Flames are going after the "Dallas Model".

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

There's some real logical issues here. The Flames can be ranked as a very good drafting team without drafting a lot of superstars. Why? Because drafting performance has to be evaluated on your draft position.

Name a player better than Zary who was drafted after him? Or Pospisil? Or Wolf? Or even a guy like Ruzicka? Valimaki turned out to be a decent pick. Pelletier will be good. They took Andersson and Kylington out of the second round and both are great picks at that level. Mangiapane was a 6th rounder.

You know the article only goes to players draft pre 2018 …. It isn’t even evaluating some of those players

Maybe read the article ( or with more detail ) before you just blindly defend your buddy ��

[Ped]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Name a player better than Zary who was drafted after him? Or Pospisil? Or Wolf? Or even a guy like Ruzicka? Valimaki turned out to be a decent pick. Pelletier will be good. They took Andersson and Kylington out of the second round and both are great picks at that level. Mangiapane was a 6th rounder.

Way too early for the Zary draft, but Neighbours, Foerster, Greig, Peterka, and Faber all could be.


Pospisil? Kurashev and Sharangovich.


Ruzicka? Toropchenko and Batherson


Hitting on late picks is great. But they still need to draft a superstar or two

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

You know the article only goes to players draft pre 2018 …. It isn’t even evaluating some of those players

Maybe read the article ( or with more detail ) before you just blindly defend your buddy ��

So how do you propose to evaluate the quality of teams' drafts post-2018? The later you go, the fewer players have even graduated to the NHL.

Seems like you're asking for nonexistent data so you can pooh-pooh the method.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Not angry at all - just hearing Jiri make the same statement multiple time a week that the Flames are the 2nd best drafting team because of an article evaluating drafting players from 6-15 years ago that actually shows / states the Flames actually really suck at drafting in the first round and average in the 2nd, but hit in Adam Fox (a player who fell to his spot because teams knew he wouldn’t sign and didn’t want to waste a pick on him ) makes them “ a top drafting team “

They have drafted 1 superstar player in 30? years in MT who actually
Played for them and even that was 6th overall - higher then they will be drafting this year

But as long as the Athletic ranks us 2nd in value above replacement from 2010- 2018 and includes a player who never played and was never going to
Play for us I guess we have nothing to worry about !

Well I don't post about it multiple times of week but absent actual arguments defaulting to hyperbole is not unexpected.

And never did I say we have nothing to worry about.
You are overlooking the points I've made because you have some sort of gear to grind. And when people are doing that they resort to exaggeration and miss-representing what others are saying.


I don't see what is so absurd about my points which are:

- Given the disadvantages the Flames have, they should strive to be amongst the best at drafting

- There is data suggests they already are a good drafting team, and therefore could build further on this foundation.
- That includes needing more and higher draft picks to put in the hands of those folks that drive that advantage.


Now why you would find any of that so aggravating is beyond me.

[Jason14h]

Just the one offs “Flames are the 2nd best drafting team “ like it’s a fact , because you read one article that says it (while a lot of other rank us much worse and current prospect base much lower then 2nd

I actually agree with most of your post content - and think we are on the same page regarding needing to acquire more ammo and take more shots with those bullets

But I think expecting the Flames to draft better then the average team when they have shown no ability to over the past 20 years , 10 years , or 5 years is naive

At best we should hope they can be in the top half (maybe 3rd) for drafting and get multiple top 5 picks AND hit on some lower depth picks

[Jiri Hrdina]

I’ve always qualified that it was according to a recent study. I never stated it as fact absent that qualification.
Happy to read other articles that present a different view but a straight prospect rating doesn’t normalize for quality or quantity of picks

[Boreal]

If you want an honest assessment of “the Dallas Model”, back it up to “the Detroit model.”

Two teams received the architects of the Detroit model.

Dallas with Nill & Edmonton with Holland.

It is clear as to who was the better talent evaluator which enabled Detroit to attain & maintain dominance.

The meaning of “the Detroit model” has now inverted as one that exemplifies how hard it can be to become competitive after excusing losing as part of a rebuild.

Holland was & is a dope, as whiffing on Quinn Hughes demonstrates (in addition to having Evan Bouchard rated higher) but they also never received any real luck in the draft lottery, with a highest pick at 4th overall.

If your chief talent evaluator sucks or is out of touch with how the game is evolving it makes a retool/rebuild waaaaay longer & harder. Not just in talent evaluation, but also in development potential (raw skills/abilities that can be put to better use or revealed/refined).

Yzerman knows what he is doing on the talent evaluation front, but Holland’s last few years were so bad that it has now forced Yzerman’s hand to an extent into bad contracts and doing what he can do prime the pump that gets them back into the playoffs.

Iginla & Conroy are not Holland.

The likely have as comprehensive of a list on draft eligible players moving forward as almost anyone ever has.

However, ultimately their ability to critically think, assess talent, evaluate and development players will be based on who actually plays & contributes. Just like everyone else.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I’ve always qualified that it was according to a recent study. I never stated it as fact absent that qualification.
Happy to read other articles that present a different view but a straight prospect rating doesn’t normalize for quality or quantity of picks

But even the article you like to use shows the Flames are terrible at 1st round drafting (26) and average at 2nd round

Almost the entirety of the “gain” is from 2 players - MT and Fox

When MT fell to 6th every team in the NHL was picking him 6th - so I don’t give any “credit” for that pick . And like I’ve said about Fox - and even the article as well - do you really give full credit for drafting a guy who fell because teams knew picking him is probably throwing away an asset, and never played a game for your franchise ……

They actually were below expected “value” most years . They just crushed MT and Fox and that skews the data hugely .

Remove Fox and they are somewhere in the middle / bottom middle

[Enoch Root]

Remove a couple good picks and they are average...

no #### - who isn't?

As for MT being a given, that's just as true of all high picks, so why would you hold that against the Flames in particular?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by jayswin

But your option has an even less chance of happening. You're acting like your plan to just say "f it losing sucks let's use our Cap space and try to get winning again" is somehow safer or better. It isn't.

Actually, his option is the most likely path to a cup. Within 2-3 years of picking high for the first time, rebuilding teams should be adding talent and “going for it,” as that the typical turnaround for most teams in that situation. The teams that take longer are the teams you don’t like when people mention because it’s “lazy” to bring them up or they’re just outliers.

If a team isn’t a contender in year 3-4 after a top pick, they need to rebuild/retool or aggressively add veterans. Most teams that rebuild remain in the middle ground and never really accomplish anything. A big part of this is the fact that Cup winners very often have star-calibre players on entry level deals. As soon as a couple of the young guys are on their second contract, you’re basically in the #### for the foreseeable future and the job becomes significantly more difficult.

[Saqe]

Delusional to think the Flames will be a contender in three-four years, even if they hit with their picks. Those picks will take years of development and learning how to win. And even then if you have bad management, like the Oilers, nothing is guaranteed. The Panthers became a powerhouse nine years after drafting Barkov. It's a really long process when you are starting from scratch with no elite talent.