Hockey's Future ranks Flames Prospect Pool 6th

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

Yes. At the time, the pick made sense. But the way it works is that drafting records are based on what the players drafted accomplish, not what their ranking was going into the draft. I mean, people on this board rag on the Oilers all the time for their top picks. Erixon may have seemed like a good pick at the time, which is why we got the return we did, but Erixon has not panned out. And until he does, it still goes into the the "first round pick not playing in the NHL" column..

no, that is simply too simplistic. there are too many factors you did not include, such as organizational development.

This goes into the "what did we get in return for the 2009 1st round draft pick" and the answer is, 2 2nd round picks in 2011 and Horak.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Other than Monahan, it's too early to say.

While that is the case, I don't remember ever being as excited about a prospect base in the 20+ years I've followed the team. There was always a lot of wishful thinking and post-rationalization with guys like Chucko, Nemisz, Nystrom, Pelech, Krahn, Saprykin, etc, but apart from Dion (and Morris way back when), you never really felt like we had many (or any) true blue-chip guys.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by theoforever

Are you sure because Edmonton is building something special.

Buffalo is building something even more special.

[ignite09]

Originally Posted by OutOfTheCube

I'm thinking 3 or 4 cups and a challenger for a decade.

I'd be happy with one. It's been a long time.

You guys will certainly be a case study in the drafting vs developement argument. The whole "suck ass until you're awesome" approach to building a stanley cup champion hasn't proven to be as idiot proof as some might hope.However, hopefully for the sake of the Sabres, you guys have a liitle more luck then our friends too the North.

[ignite09]

Originally Posted by trackercowe

You mean for us, right? Saying he will be a top ten prospect leaguewide is utter insanity.

Well yes, thought that would be obvious.

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

no, that is simply too simplistic. there are too many factors you did not include, such as organizational development.

This goes into the "what did we get in return for the 2009 1st round draft pick" and the answer is, 2 2nd round picks in 2011 and Horak.

Agree to disagree then. But when I see people analyze various GMs drafting records, they rarely are given the benefit of context for picks that don't pan out. If we are going to do that for Sutter, the same consideration should be given to other GMs when looking at their drafting records.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The one reason why Jay Feaster may get a job again in this league. Fault him all you want for his trades (and almost trades), but the guy and his team of scouts did a fantastic job in turning our prospect base into one that shows probably the most promise since the 1980s.

You mean Darryl's team of scouts? Todd Button is still running the show today. I get that the emphasis changed and rightly so but Darryl does deserve some credit for assembling that scouting staff and his only mistakes were probably trading too many 2nd round picks and making picks overly based on physical metrics over outright skill. Feaster does deserve props though for focusing more on skill over measurables and some astute looking picks were made during his tenure. I still don't believe he will find work any time soon as an NHL GM but he deserves some credit for stockpiling solid talent and supplementing the rebuild.

It's great to be recognized as having solid prospects but this is only half the battle as these players need to make the transformation into quality NHL players for any of this to be meaningful.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You mean Darryl's team of scouts? Todd Button is still running the show today.

In that case you should credit Al Coates who first hired him, and Craig Button, who promoted him to head scout. Darryl just kept him there.

I think it just goes to show how important leadership is. A boss might do nothing but direct his underlings, but those directions can make a big difference in whether there is success or not. Feaster had his issues, but on the scouting/prospect side of things, whatever he was doing looks like it was working.

[wingmaker]

I really like Sutter. There is much that he deserves credit for. But people trying to defend his drafting is ridiculous. The fact that the team started drafting much better as soon as he left does not somehow reflect well on him. He may have helped get the organization going in the right direction. He may have hired some good people. But his inability to draft well is not improved because the team drafted significantly better after he left. That is ridiculous.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by ignite09

Completely random, but Rafikov will be considered a top ten prospect by this time next year.

Wanna bet?

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

no, that is simply too simplistic. there are too many factors you did not include, such as organizational development.

This goes into the "what did we get in return for the 2009 1st round draft pick" and the answer is, 2 2nd round picks in 2011 and Horak.

For example, you don't have Brossoit bolded in your list of good picks. But to be fair you have to consider Brossoit a good pick, as well, because it was the centre piece of the trade to get Smid.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

I really like Sutter. There is much that he deserves credit for. But people trying to defend his drafting is ridiculous. The fact that the team started drafting much better as soon as he left does not somehow reflect well on him. He may have helped get the organization going in the right direction. He may have hired some good people. But his inability to draft well is not improved because the team drafted significantly better after he left. That is ridiculous.

The drafting improved before Feaster came along.

[ignite09]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Wanna bet?

An Avatar bet if you care enough is fine for me. More just a fan of this kid, then out to prove anyone a fool.

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

The drafting improved before Feaster came along.

Not considerably. If Ortio pans out, you have Backlund, Ortio, and Brodie from four drafts being impact players. That isn't terrible, but it isn't anything close to a good drafting record. Max Reinhart, Bill Arnold...unless they have serious upswings in their career trajectories, they are nothing more than bit parts.

I am not saying that Sutter was horrible at drafting. He did find a couple of decent players. But his record is hardly anything to get excited about.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Table 5

In that case you should credit Al Coates who first hired him, and Craig Button, who promoted him to head scout. Darryl just kept him there.

I think it just goes to show how important leadership is. A boss might do nothing but direct his underlings, but those directions can make a big difference in whether there is success or not. Feaster had his issues, but on the scouting/prospect side of things, whatever he was doing looks like it was working.

why didn't this mastery work in Tampa then?

I'm of the belief its not all in the scouting. Most of it came in the development.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

For example, you don't have Brossoit bolded in your list of good picks. But to be fair you have to consider Brossoit a good pick, as well, because it was the centre piece of the trade to get Smid.

i can if it'll make you happy

i provided the whole list for anyone that wanted to see. i just bolded names that stood out.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by ignite09

An Avatar bet if you care enough is fine for me. More just a fan of this kid, then out to prove anyone a fool.

My bad, thought you were making a guarantee.

But since you've got me thinking about it... this is something like how I think our rankings will look this time next year (assuming Reinhart/Granlund/Baertschi/Wotherspoon graduate from 'prospect' status. Monahan already has):

1. (4th overall pick of 2014)
2. Gaudreau (I think he'll only see 15-30 NHL games next year)
3. Ortio
4. Gillies
5. Poirier
6. Jankowski
7. Klimchuk
8. Ferland
9. Sieloff
10. (34th overall pick from 2014)

11. Arnold
12. Agostino
13. (54th overall pick from 2014)
14. Kanzig
15. (64th overall pick from 2014)
16. Kulak
17. Roy
18. Culkin
19. Rafikov
20. (84th overall from 2014)

I'm sure there'll be a lot of disagreement with the above from CP. I'm not too familiar with the guys I've ranked 14th thru 19th.

[ignite09]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

My bad, thought you were making a guarantee.

But since you've got me thinking about it... this is something like how I think our rankings will look this time next year (assuming Reinhart/Granlund/Baertschi/Wotherspoon graduate from 'prospect' status. Monahan already has):

1. (4th overall pick of 2014)
2. Gaudreau (I think he'll only see 15-30 NHL games next year)
3. Ortio
4. Gillies
5. Poirier
6. Jankowski
7. Klimchuk
8. Ferland
9. Sieloff
10. (34th overall pick from 2014)

11. Arnold
12. Agostino
13. (54th overall pick from 2014)
14. Kanzig
15. (64th overall pick from 2014)
16. Kulak
17. Roy
18. Culkin
19. Rafikov
20. (84th overall from 2014)

I'm sure there'll be a lot of disagreement with the above from CP. I'm not too familiar with the guys I've ranked 14th thru 19th.

No worries, I just remember hearing that Rafikov wanted to head over too the CHL this year, and I expect his stock to rise high if that's the case.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by wingmaker

I am not saying that Sutter was horrible at drafting. He did find a couple of decent players. But his record is hardly anything to get excited about.

Oh I'll say its horrible, but I think 99% of drafting has to do with the scouts and 1% has to do with the GM. I think fans know so little about drafting that we really have no idea who to point a finger at, so the GM is a target. Look at Feaster's Tampa team, what is it 4 NHL drafts and the only NHL players he got was Paul Ranger and Blair Jones?

As far as 1st round picks go, Darryl's were : Chucko, Pelech, Irving, Backlund, Erixon. Chucko blew chunks, ok I agree - no idea WTF he was thinking there. Pelech, I think it was a bad draft year, so whatever - this is the equivalent to probably a Jankowski pick, drafting a young guy that flies under the radar for a particular circumstance. Irving, well, never drafting a ####ing goalie. Backlund and Erixon were good picks IMO. Remember all of these were draft picks in the 20's.

Lets compare to Detriot in that time period: Jakub Kindl, Cory Emmerton (41th earliest), Brendan Smith, Tom McCollum, Landon Ferraro, Riley Sheahan

Pittsburg, same period after Jordan Staal? Angelo Esposito, Nathan Moon, Simon Despres, Beau Bennett

So there you go

[wingmaker]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Oh I'll say its horrible, but I think 99% of drafting has to do with the scouts and 1% has to do with the GM. I think fans know so little about drafting that we really have no idea who to point a finger at, so the GM is a target. Look at Feaster's Tampa team, what is it 4 NHL drafts and the only NHL players he got was Paul Ranger and Blair Jones?

As far as 1st round picks go, Darryl's were : Chucko, Pelech, Irving, Backlund, Erixon. Chucko blew chunks, ok I agree - no idea WTF he was thinking there. Pelech, I think it was a bad draft year, so whatever - this is the equivalent to probably a Jankowski pick, drafting a young guy that flies under the radar for a particular circumstance. Irving, well, never drafting a ####ing goalie. Backlund and Erixon were good picks IMO. Remember all of these were draft picks in the 20's.

Lets compare to Detriot in that time period: Jakub Kindl, Cory Emmerton (41th earliest), Brendan Smith, Tom McCollum, Landon Ferraro, Riley Sheahan

Pittsburg, same period after Jordan Staal? Angelo Esposito, Nathan Moon, Simon Despres, Beau Bennett

So there you go

Ok. Not sure what your point is. Sounds like we mostly agree. Perhaps the true issue is that developing players has vastly improved post Sutter.