[Trade] Frost + Farabee from PHI to CGY for Pelletier + Kuzmenko + 25 2nd + 28 7th

[Funkhouser]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Oh please god not this article again

It actually showed the Flames were quiet bad outside of MT and Fox

And drafting Fox late when his stock is low because people are worried he won’t sign - and then having him not sign - isn’t “great drafting “

The article showed they were very bad in the 1st round , bad in the 2nd , but really really good in later rounds because they found a Norris winner late (who never played for them)

The amount of people referencing this article who clearly never read it (or understood the data ) astonishes me

I see this narrative all the time on CP, but have never once seen it from a reputable source.

Fox was projected to go in the second round (McKenzie ranked him 55)
https://www.tsn.ca/matthews-goes-wir...spect-1.511597

Its not as if he was projected to be a perennial Norris contender and projected in the top 10. He didn't fall, he went around where he was ranked.

The Flames should get credit for this pick regardless of the fact he turned out to be a huge flake.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Their issue is similar to the Flames in that they haven't unearthed an elite player despite the fact they had higher picks to work with. Parekh has the chance to be that for the Flames but none of those Kings players are close outside of Kempe who is a 1st line talent on a lot of teams. Kings right now are what the Flames don't want to be in a few years. Plateaued with a mediocre roster.

And this is my point. With Tkachuk and Fox now gone you have to have some major home runs to replace those guys. What is the likelihood of finding another Gaudreau late? Those types of picks are very rare. Of course to build an elite team you'll need to hit on some depth which the Flames have been pretty good at also but where are we going to find our top line stars and number one d-man? That is my worry moving forward. It's what really stagnates a team because once you're somewhat competitive it becomes harder and harder to find those players.

[Bingo]

For fun ...

Here is the Flames franchise (Atlanta included) top ten drafts based on simple GP / # of picks

1 1984
2 1979
3 1996
4 2011
5 1973
6 1981
7 2007
8 1992
9 2015
10 2000

And here is the top ten drafts based on simple GP / # value picks (picks inside the top 60)

1 1984
2 1981
3 1996
4 1992
5 1973
6 2004
7 1983
8 2007
9 1994
10 1993

Clearly you need careers to run out before you get games played for drafts as old as even 2005.

2007 is emerging with Backlund's career.

[Psytic]

We always talk about Dallas but I think Minnesota might be more where the Flames realistically are trending. They both have managed to find gold outside the top 5. The Wild haven't had a pick that high in 20 years. They are often forgotten by the media just like the Flames but its a hard working team with some solid drafted young players under their belt. They have been pretty competitive even with a large amount of dead cap for a number of years usually always high up in their division. They remind me of the Flames the most of any team. We need our Kapirzov and Boldy and then there's no reason why the Flames cant be 3rd in div every year. We aren't that far off talentwise from LA and Van imo.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by Hackey

And this is my point. With Tkachuk and Fox now gone you have to have some major home runs to replace those guys. What is the likelihood of finding another Gaudreau late? Those types of picks are very rare. Of course to build an elite team you'll need to hit on some depth which the Flames have been pretty good at also but where are we going to find our top line stars and number one d-man? That is my worry moving forward. It's what really stagnates a team because once you're somewhat competitive it becomes harder and harder to find those players.

If you accumulate enough middle six players, eventually you can package them with picks for an A prospect or high pick. We see very good mid twenty year old players moved for 1st round picks or excellent players from time to time.

Basically, that's what Flames have to do. Be a good team that drafts well and accumulates enough assets to eventually get an Eichel when the chance arrives. We did come close according to Eichel. That gets us playoff hockey every year, a pipeline of exciting players and eventually maybe even a star. That seems to be the product they are selling.

Flames just have to hold off on blowing assets on players that won't really move the needle.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by Psytic

We always talk about Dallas but I think Minnesota might be more where the Flames realistically are trending. They both have managed to find gold outside the top 5. The Wild haven't had a pick that high in 20 years. They are often forgotten by the media just like the Flames but its a hard working team with some solid drafted young players under their belt. They have been pretty competitive even with a large amount of dead cap for a number of years usually always high up in their division. They remind me of the Flames the most of any team. We need our Kapirzov and Boldy and then there's no reason why the Flames cant be 3rd in div every year. We aren't that far off talentwise from LA and Van imo.

Getting a Kaprizof is the hard part though..

If he's not a top 10 player in the NHL then he's close.
Well over a ppg player.
Since he's entered the league he's 10th in pt/pg and 6th in goals.

But I agree. If we could get a Kaprizof caliber player we will be competitive.

[Kipper_3434]

Originally Posted by Bingo

For fun ...

Here is the Flames franchise (Atlanta included) top ten drafts based on simple GP / # of picks



And here is the top ten drafts based on simple GP / # value picks (picks inside the top 60)



Clearly you need careers to run out before you get games played for drafts as old as even 2005.

2007 is emerging with Backlund's career.

No 2003 on either list shows how much value lists like this lack.

Didn't realize flames only on both lists.

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by Hackey

And this is my point. With Tkachuk and Fox now gone you have to have some major home runs to replace those guys. What is the likelihood of finding another Gaudreau late? Those types of picks are very rare. Of course to build an elite team you'll need to hit on some depth which the Flames have been pretty good at also but where are we going to find our top line stars and number one d-man? That is my worry moving forward. It's what really stagnates a team because once you're somewhat competitive it becomes harder and harder to find those players.

That's the point of this whole discussion: Calgary's drafting and development record suggests they are one of the most likely clubs to find these gems. They may already have those players in the fold. And if not, based on their track record, the more they pick, the more likely they are going to hit on those picks compared to other teams.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

No 2003 on either list shows how much value lists like this lack.

Didn't realize flames only on both lists.

Not sure what the second comment means.

But it was a simple list of GP by draft year. If you don't find value I'm good with it.

If you go by points or points / game you effectively ignore stay at home defensemen and goaltenders.

Games played pulls out the impact of team building in a draft year.

2003 was Phaneuf at 1000 + games and then nobody. That's not a great draft year in terms of games played / pick. Tim Ramholt turns out and it's a different story.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Not sure what the second comment means.

But it was a simple list of GP by draft year. If you don't find value I'm good with it.

If you go by points or points / game you effectively ignore stay at home defensemen and goaltenders.

Games played pulls out the impact of team building in a draft year.

2003 was Phaneuf at 1000 + games and then nobody. That's not a great draft year in terms of games played / pick. Tim Ramholt turns out and it's a different story.

It seems he initially did not realise it was a Flames only list, thus with how great 2003 was as an overall draft, thought this list then made no sense.
Then he understood it was Flames only, so the initial comment became moot.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

That's the point of this whole discussion: Calgary's drafting and development record suggests they are one of the most likely clubs to find these gems. They may already have those players in the fold. And if not, based on their track record, the more they pick, the more likely they are going to hit on those picks compared to other teams.

Why has Detroit never found another Zetterberg or Datsyuk?
Why hasn't Tampa found another Kucherov or Point?
Why hasn't Minnesota found another Kaprizov?
Why hasn't Boston found another Pastrnak?
Why hasn't Anaheim drafted another Getzlaf and Perry?
Why hasn't LA drafted another Kopitar?

All of these players were drafted over 10, 20, 25+ years ago. Your past draft success doesn't really guarantee any future success. It ultimately makes you think that luck is a much bigger factor than skill.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Why has Detroit never found another Zetterberg or Datsyuk?
Why hasn't Tampa found another Kucherov or Point?
Why hasn't Minnesota found another Kaprizov?
Why hasn't Boston found another Pastrnak?
Why hasn't Anaheim drafted another Getzlaf and Perry?
Why hasn't LA drafted another Kopitar?

All of these players were drafted over 10, 20, 25+ years ago. Your past draft success doesn't really guarantee any future success. It ultimately makes you think that luck is a much bigger factor than skill.

I think there is a bunch of luck for sure.

But it's not just luck.

It's a read on a player in a situation where other teams don't have the same read.

If say Boston comes back the next ten drafts they may not have that opportunity again ... where they have a book on a player that was different than other teams.

But luck for sure. Calgary "won" the 2024 draft, but that took a lot of teams passing on players that fell to them, but also a read on said players to take them when other teams didn't.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Why has Detroit never found another Zetterberg or Datsyuk?
Why hasn't Tampa found another Kucherov or Point?
Why hasn't Minnesota found another Kaprizov?
Why hasn't Boston found another Pastrnak?
Why hasn't Anaheim drafted another Getzlaf and Perry?
Why hasn't LA drafted another Kopitar?

All of these players were drafted over 10, 20, 25+ years ago. Your past draft success doesn't really guarantee any future success. It ultimately makes you think that luck is a much bigger factor than skill.

A lot of due diligence but in the end it is a crap shoot. That’s why I’m not a big fan of the tank strategy.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think there is a bunch of luck for sure.

But it's not just luck.

It's a read on a player in a situation where other teams don't have the same read.

If say Boston comes back the next ten drafts they may not have that opportunity again ... where they have a book on a player that was different than other teams.

But luck for sure. Calgary "won" the 2024 draft, but that took a lot of teams passing on players that fell to them, but also a read on said players to take them when other teams didn't.

You never really know until the players are actually put into the pro environment. Before that happens it’s a lot of educated speculating.

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by Goriders

A lot of due diligence but in the end it is a crap shoot. That’s why I’m not a big fan of the tank strategy.

Not really, statistically the top picks have much more success

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Bingo

For fun ...

Here is the Flames franchise (Atlanta included) top ten drafts based on simple GP / # of picks



And here is the top ten drafts based on simple GP / # value picks (picks inside the top 60)



Clearly you need careers to run out before you get games played for drafts as old as even 2005.

2007 is emerging with Backlund's career.

I've long been pondering how best to evaluate a draft - with a formula that takes most things into account but is still easy to use and mostly for fun. someday I'll get to it (figure some combination of games played-adjusted for goalies-, draft position, stars drafted and major player/team awards resulting)


84 is the best Flames draft no matter how you slice it. its one of the best drafts of all time- even more so adjusted for draft position it's just a stunning draft


79 is a nice haul, but 79 was also the crazy deep draft due to multiple cohorts- in that light Flames maybe don't shine super bright


81 has to be up there- not many teams draft 2 HOFers ever- let alone without a top 10 pick


83 is an underrated draft with some nice grabs


80, 85, 87 all had elite players snagged, often late but lacking multiple impact players



90s were bleak- but 92 and 96 were good drafts. the 00s also sad- sure a name like Phaneuf stands out- but that was a high pick in a deep draft. Backlund and Brodie salvage their years


things start to turn 11, 15,16 all delivered, jury out on some of the rest but some early returns look nice

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by looooob

I've long been pondering how best to evaluate a draft - with a formula that takes most things into account but is still easy to use and mostly for fun. someday I'll get to it (figure some combination of games played-adjusted for goalies-, draft position, stars drafted and major player/team awards resulting)

I was thinking total salary per draft / salary cap of that season would likely work too for each player drafted in say 10 years, added?

That would indicate value per draft pretty effectively.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think there is a bunch of luck for sure.

But it's not just luck.

It's a read on a player in a situation where other teams don't have the same read.

If say Boston comes back the next ten drafts they may not have that opportunity again ... where they have a book on a player that was different than other teams.

But luck for sure. Calgary "won" the 2024 draft, but that took a lot of teams passing on players that fell to them, but also a read on said players to take them when other teams didn't.

I guess that might be a combination of skill and luck if you're able to unearth something that all the other teams do not. The fact that it seems to occur so infrequently makes it seem more like something fortunate as opposed to something you're actively doing with regularity.

I have quite a bit of confidence the Flames scouting staff will be able to find value throughout the draft. Someone like Andersson is pretty great value. Someone like Zary who likely won't be a star is still good value. Someone like Bennett was obviously disappointing value. If he was drafted outside the top 10 I don't think Bennett would have ever been an issue.

But there is also a big gap from a value pick and a superstar. The difference in probability for those two things is likely pretty large when you're drafting outside the top 5.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Hackey

I guess that might be a combination of skill and luck if you're able to unearth something that all the other teams do not. The fact that it seems to occur so infrequently makes it seem more like something fortunate as opposed to something you're actively doing with regularity.

I have quite a bit of confidence the Flames scouting staff will be able to find value throughout the draft. Someone like Andersson is pretty great value. Someone like Zary who likely won't be a star is still good value. Someone like Bennett was obviously disappointing value. If he was drafted outside the top 10 I don't think Bennett would have ever been an issue.

But there is also a big gap from a value pick and a superstar. The difference in probability for those two things is likely pretty large when you're drafting outside the top 5.

Sam Bennett was the 2nd line center of a Stanley Cup winning team, and is playing for Canada in a Best on Best tournament.

It's beginning to look like the issue with Sam Bennett was his development and how he was coached in Calgary, more than actually being a disappointing pick.

To your point not a superstar or in the realm of Draisaitl who went 3rd overall...but really in terms of historical 4th overall picks really isn't a bad pick.

[dino7c]

Bennett is an odd player...career high 49 points but contributes in other ways, sometimes