Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
Sutter improved the on-ice product at the expense of the long-term asset base.
That's part of the reason the franchise continues to have to rob peter to pay paul.
And indeed his drafting was god-awful.
Consecutive years of Chucko-Pelech-Irving-Backluknd-Nemisz-Erixon
One NHLers in 6 years of first round picks.
Late 1sts are hard but you should hit on more than 1 in 6.
|
I actually disagree with this assessment, and I disagree with it BECAUSE the drafting was poor. The chances that those draft picks that Sutter traded away would have amounted to more than what he received back in his trades was minuscule. Why?
Let's keep the following 3 things in mind:
1) Sutter was a rookie GM - as a coach who has moved into the GM role, what scouts does he have a relationship with? Who does he trust?
2) Calgary was very much a budget team with a very small scouting staff (one of the, if not the smallest in the NHL IIRC), when Sutter took over in 2002. The Flames were also sharing their AHL affiliate during that time. The scouting AND the development side of things was practically non-existent.
3) A pick is worth MORE to a team that can draft well, and less to a team that can't. Since the vast majority of players that enter the NHL draft don't get a sniff of the NHL, one must conclude that in order to reap actual talent that will eventually play in the NHL, a team must have a strong scouting staff AND a strong development program.
Had Darryl walked into a more established team with a good scouting staff in place and a good development program in place - including full control of their own AHL affiliate - then one could argue most correctly that Sutter was indeed trading the future for the win now. I think it is fair to criticize Sutter for taking too long in building his scouting team and for getting ownership on board with spending money on an AHL affiliate, but we also aren't privy to what ownership - having just gone through those rough 90's - were willing to spend.
The current drafting philosophy evolved and was set under Darryl's tenure - the same philosophy that Feaster followed and the same that Burke and Treliving followed as well. Todd Button spoke about this a few years ago in fact.
The drafting DID improve every year, especially around 2008 (when the philosophy was identified), and the body of work from the scouting team could actually be analyzed to see who is actually good at scouting, and who never hits on their picks.
I would have made a lot more trades with my draft picks if I was him, not less, given the environment he was operating under. I would have done so at least until I was able to have a scouting team in place that I trusted more (and it seemed he did just that as the years went on and his scouting staff grew).