View Single Post
03-05-2013, 04:11 PM
Sent to HF Minors
Beacon's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 9,895
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
It's certainly fair to question the GM and scouts when they consistently prove they cannot draft a top line player.

Every draft, literally every draft I call for high-risk, high-return prospects and this whole forum lambasts me for it. Why? Because people want to pretend that at #15 or even at #28, they can draft a player without flaws, as if there's no reason they slipped that far down. It's easier to pretend that someone doesn't have the offensive ability ("he's scoring almost a point per game in the OHL") than to pretend that a 5-11 player is really 6-2.

The Rangers like this strategy too. They prefer to get at least one player per draft, knowing that he may not turn into anything special, but hey, at least we'll have a guy like Dubinsky, Anisimov, Miller.

Their strategy works in the sense that they do get these kinds of players on a consistent basis. But if you are drafting Miller, don't be expecting Giroux. You have to take the risk of a strikeout if you are hoping to hit a homerun.

I like the idea of taking someone whose flaw may be something other than offensive skill. Others here are outraged at this thought. Sure in theory, they are ok with high-risk, high-return prospects, but as soon as a real flaw (other than offense) is identified, everyone here is horrified and wants to stay as far away from that draftee as possible.

Keep drafting Miller and you'll keep getting Miller.

Beacon is offline