Mike Gillis Discussion Thread
View Single Post
03-05-2013, 02:22 PM
Join Date: Dec 2009
Originally Posted by
I'd suggest 4 drafts isn't really enough time to draw a clear 'trend' on Nonis' drafting. Every team has good and bad drafts and just because 2004 came first and 2007 last doesn't necessarily indicate his drafting judgement/scouts/system got worse. As an aside, 2007 was a pretty poor draft all around. White and Ellingtom were bad picks no doubt, even at the time, but it is still 1 draft out of 4.
I also agree Nonis tended to 'outthink' himself by bypassing on the more commonly regarded BPA but to call the results bad or blame our dearth of prospects on him is unfair. He was at least average in his 4 drafts, possibly slightly higher when you factor in the quality of our successes over those drafts.
After 2004 he sure didn't improve on the team's drafting. Even if it was a phenomenal haul and we consider it an anomaly, it's not like his follow-ups were anything to write home about either. He did nothing with most of the mid to late-round picks starting from 2005. Compare that to Gillis who we'll also give the responsibility for his first draft to, for the sake of fair comparison; yet in 2009 we already have 4 guys who've reached the AHL level (and 2 more next year) - a vast improvement compared to the year before.
You can also judge how bad a team's drafting is by seeing just how far off the mark they're missing decent players on the ones that didn't make the NHL. From 2005 onward, the majority of those draftees never even made it as AHL regulars - only 4/14 made it to that level. Out of the 2009 crop alone MG will already go 5-for-6 next season.
From the way he was missing BPA's in the 1st round it wasn't a good trend either.
Last edited by vanuck: 03-05-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by vanuck