Flames young goalies who didn't pan out

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

You are looking at recent history. I am looking at Button's tenure as a whole - that includes '05, '06, '09, '13, and '14 - all of which produced 5 NHL guys (out of 36 picks) to play a good chunk of games for the Flames (Erixon & John Gilmour didn't play here). So for every solid run there is a dud. ('06 looks a lot like '14 to me.)

If we are only looking at the last few years, then in the context of this thread, Sigalet is doing just fine and the Flames have no goalie issues.

This is where we need to know exactly where the bar is set. Is Sigalet doing a great job of turning crap goalies into solid NHLers, or is he not helping good goalies become great? Is Button great at drafting AHLers, or is he not finding top line talent?

Yes, I am not the GM, and they know better than I. I would just like to know what it is that keeps these guys around while everyone else gets shown the door.

I think the GM running the draft either lets guys make decisions or get too involved.

Sutter had the big Western kid push, imagine those days for Euro scouts for scouts from Quebec?

From 2015 on they are finding talent, and that would include a mixture of the guy at the top of the hockey ops group (Treliving), and how he works with his head of scouting. Just doesn't seem like the time to fire a guy in the midst of five strong draft years.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

You are looking at recent history. I am looking at Button's tenure as a whole - that includes '05, '06, '09, '13, and '14 - all of which produced 5 NHL guys (out of 36 picks) to play a good chunk of games for the Flames (Erixon & John Gilmour didn't play here). So for every solid run there is a dud. ('06 looks a lot like '14 to me.)

Of course I am focusing on recent history! I don't see why this matters at all if we are attempting to evaluate Button's suitability to the position moving forward. His last five drafts—all under the same GM—have been great. Again, what good reason is there for a change if the formula in place right now appears to be working?

If we are only looking at the last few years, then in the context of this thread, Sigalet is doing just fine and the Flames have no goalie issues.

This doesn't make any sense to me.

This is where we need to know exactly where the bar is set. Is Sigalet doing a great job of turning crap goalies into solid NHLers, or is he not helping good goalies become great? Is Button great at drafting AHLers, or is he not finding top line talent?

Button is clearly drafting quality NHL talent, and making the most out of the resources he has to work with. This is why the Flames have a bunch of second, third, fourth and sixth round players all manning key roles on the team, and on virtually every line and defence pair.

I think evaluating Sigalet from this vantage point is more difficult, which is why I don't see how anyone can develop any strong feelings about his performance one way or another. I think it is fair to wonder about whether he is the best person for the job.

Yes, I am not the GM, and they know better than I. I would just like to know what it is that keeps these guys around while everyone else gets shown the door.

Unlike Sigalet, there does not seem to be a good case to be mounted for replacing Tod Button. Can you make one? You have to this point failed to do so.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I think the GM running the draft either lets guys make decisions or get too involved.

Sutter had the big Western kid push, imagine those days for Euro scouts for scouts from Quebec?

From 2015 on they are finding talent, and that would include a mixture of the guy at the top of the hockey ops group (Treliving), and how he works with his head of scouting. Just doesn't seem like the time to fire a guy in the midst of five strong draft years.

That's really the question, isn't it. How do we measure success?

We don't really know what the last 2/3 draft years are yet (so far only 1 out of 15 has played an NHL game). Solid NHLers, AHL regulars, never hear from again.....any of the selection could be any of these.

In Sigalet's case it is way more difficult. Did he help or hinder Elliott or Smith? Has his mentoring helped improve Orito, Gillies, Rittich? Has he had crap to work with and we will see his measure when he turns Wolf from great into elite?

If you are the head coach, it seems pretty clear - you have a playoff team, win more than 1 round or you are out. (for some years it looked like - you have a bubble team, make the playoffs or you are out.) Assistant coaches - make the PP better, or you are out.

For Sigalet (and Button) it seems it is - keep doing what you are doing, and we'll cross our fingers.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Of course I am focusing on recent history! I don't see why this matters at all if we are attempting to evaluate Button's suitability to the position moving forward. His last five drafts—all under the same GM—have been great. Again, what good reason is there for a change if the formula in place right now appears to be working?

By what measure? What makes them great? That is what I am asking.

5 of 29 picks currently play for the flames (17%). 1 in a top six role, 1 in a top four d-role.



Does 1 solid NHL player per draft constitute a good draft or a great one?

Button is clearly drafting quality NHL talent, and making the most out of the resources he has to work with. This is why the Flames have a bunch of second, third, fourth and sixth round players all manning key roles on the team, and on virtually every line and defence pair.

Of the 23 man roster 12 were draft picks. I don know if that is good or bad.

(At this point we do not know what kind of talent any of the '18 or '19 picks are.)

I think evaluating Sigalet from this vantage point is more difficult, which is why I don't see how anyone can develop any strong feelings about his performance one way or another. I think it is fair to wonder about whether he is the best person for the job.

OK.

[/I] Unlike Sigalet, there does not seem to be a good case to be mounted for replacing Tod Button. Can you make one? You have to this point failed to do so.

The question is what does success look like? If the bar is # of players gone pro, fine. Button has done great. Is it the # of players who play games for the Flames? Ok, not looking so great there.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

By what measure? What makes them great? That is what I am asking.

This is from an article a few years back...

"The truth is that very few players taken in the NHL draft this weekend will ever play in the NHL. In order to get an accurate read of how many drafted players played at least 200 games in the NHL, a study by proicehockey.about.com looked at the drafts between 1990 and 1999. Of the 2,600 hundred players drafted just 494 or 19% played in at least 200 contests. 63% of first round picks played but less than 25% of second round picks survived and only 12% of third rounder selections. Former NHL general manager Doug MacLean said his math over the last decade showed that only 15% of second round picks ever become impact players."

https://guelphstorm.com/odds-not-gre...hl-draft-picks

5 of 29 picks currently play for the flames (17%). 1 in a top six role, 1 in a top four d-role.

Six. Tkachuk, Mangiapane, Dube, Andersson, Kylington and Valimaki—who already made the team in 2018, but hasn't played in 2019–20 because of injury. That's A MINIMUM of 2/3 first-round picks (=66%); a minimum of 3/4 second-round picks (=75%); a minimum of 1/5 sixth round picks (=20%). Adam Fox is 1/2 third round picks (=50%)—the fact he is playing in NYR is not a fault of the scouting department.

Two of these forwards—Tkachuk and Mangiapane—are top-six forwards. Two of these defensemen—Andersson and Valimaki—are already or trending to be fixtures in the top-two defence pairings.

All of these players will play +200 games barring injuries Based on the numbers provided by the article I cited, the worst-case scenario is already ahead of the League average numbers for draft success.

Does 1 solid NHL player per draft constitute a good draft or a great one?

It depends entirely on what sort of draft capital the team has to spend. 2013 was not good, since the Flames had three first round picks and four picks in the top-70, and came away with only one NHL player. But in the last five drafts the Flames have had only one top-ten selection and one top-20 selection. Both are already NHL players. Outside of the first round the Flames have had four picks in the top-60, and three of those are already a NHL players. In five years two of their picks outside of the top-60 are already NHL players. That's found money, considering the success rate of players in the NHL draft.

Of the 23 man roster 12 were draft picks. I don know if that is good or bad.

This is too simplistic a measure for assessing the scouts's performance at the draft since they don't control player movement.

(At this point we do not know what kind of talent any of the '18 or '19 picks are.)

Right, but there are some early indicators which show that a couple of these players are already performing ahead of their draft position:

Emilio Pettersen was a sixth round pick, and he has signed a NHL contract after only two years in college. He was one of the three youngest players in Denver this year, and was far and away the best player on one of the top teams in the country. It is significant any time a NCAA player foregoes his juniour year for a NHL contract. It's almost unheard of for this to happen for a sixth round pick.

Dustin Wolf was a seventh round pick, and as mentioned above he was named the top goalie in the WHL in only his draft-plus-one season. Wolf was also the #2 goalie for Team USA in the most recent IIHF under-20 tournament. It's not a guaranteed indicator for future success, but these are certainly notable achievements which importantly show that he is trending ahead of his draft position.

The question is what does success look like? If the bar is # of players gone pro, fine. Button has done great. Is it the # of players who play games for the Flames? Ok, not looking so great there.

It can't be number of players on the roster, since there are plenty of drafted players who have and will be traded before realizing their NHL potential. Ferland, Fox, Gilmour and Kulak were all players drafted by this scouting group, and all have performed better than their draft positions in other organisations.

I would say that the above breakdown shows what drafting success looks like: simply put, how are players performing relative to their draft position? How many drafted players from each round are playing in the NHL, and in what roles? The answers are going to vary, but for a player like Dube—a late second round pick—to be a regular on the third line in his rookie season is already a tremendous accomplishment. A third round pick playing a key role in a high impact trade like Fox shows how much he had already outperformed his draft position while still under the Flames's control. For a player like Mangiapane to be playing and scoring on the second line is a smashing success.