Thread: Biggest Bust
View Single Post
08-25-2009, 10:46 PM
vadim sharifijanov
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,588
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Axxellien View Post
Pat Falloon was supposed to be the second coming of the second coming!! Right after Lindros....Writers, pundits, experts were all raving!! What occured?
i don't remember people calling falloon the second coming of anything. he was a consensus top five pick, but it's not like he was supposed to be a generational talent. he was just an average sized guy with no physical game who had a pretty good shot and was made to look really good because his junior linemate (ray whitney) had put together one of the WHL's all time great years.

as i recall, everyone was shocked that he was chosen before scott niedermayer, and san jose were probably the only team in the league who would have done that (for two reasons: 1. they were a new team in a new city and needed an offensive player to market, and 2. they thought they had discovered a guy who was just as good who would still be available in the second round-- sandis ozolinsh).

falloon was a lot like daigle. he put up some points early on as one of the few offensive options on a really bad team, and was gradually phased out when that team got better, bouncing around and flirting with the 20 goal mark but never sticking in one place. but daigle is a bust because he was supposed to be a superstar. falloon is just a guy who was drafted high who didn't develop into a star. if he's a bust then scott thornton and chad kilger are busts. falloon played more than 500 games in the league and outscored both of those guys.

Originally Posted by MS View Post
To me, the biggest bust in NHL history is Daniel Dore. Reasoning?

1) high draft position - 5th overall in the deep 1988 draft.

2) terrible, terrible player - 17 NHL games, career high of 22 points in the AHL. Compared to 'busts' who played 300-400 NHL games and were sort of serviceable, he's just a steaming pile of crap.

3) players taken immediately behind him - Dore was taken #5 overall; the #7-10 players in the 1988 Entry Draft were Martin Gelinas, Rod Brind'Amour, Jeremy Roenick, and Teemu Selanne.

I don't think you can find a more useless pick taken that highly ahead of so many elite players. Dan Woodley is one of the few that are close.
i'd be happy to hear some stories about dore and what happened to this kid. why was he picked so high? was he rated high or was he a reach? what did he look like in the NHL?

Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
Daigle is a good choice. But However i wonder if the massive hype of Lindros in that Era led to the massie hype of Daigle... was Daigle actually in a weaker draft and just a guy that might be good but because of the rabble regarding Lindros he was overhyped from the start?
i have often suspected the same thing. the daigle draft was a very good one at the top-- pronger, kariya, and a bunch of other guys who all played more than 850 games. and in retrospect it was a mistake to rate daigle ahead of pronger and kariya. but i think after lindros and the popularization of the NHL in the US, plus the hockey card boom, draft-watching became a big trend. not just daigle, but the entire top 6 of that draft class were supposed to be franchise players (and they all turned out pretty good, though gratton, niedermayer, and kozlov obviously never became franchise players). if you believed the hype, that draft class looked a lot like the 2003 class. future captains and cornerstones everywhere (people talked the same way about todd harvey as they now do about mike richards or toews; arnott was the next messier, kenny jonsson was the swedish bourque). nicklas sundstrom was the best one out of him, forsberg, and naslund. thibault was the next roy. etc. etc. but i think the fact that it projected to be a particularly good draft (there was also koivu, allison, bertuzzi, deadmarsh), at a time when the game was looking for young cant-miss stars to develop, severely overrated daigle. in a normal year, he would have projected to be a future star, like lecavalier or stamkos. but, blown way out of proportion, he was projected to be a generational talent like lindros or crosby or ovechkin. so yeah, he was a bust. but factors beyond his control turned him into a bigger bust than he should have been.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote