HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Flyers actual 2013 draft rankings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-12-2013, 07:53 AM
  #76
dawkins121
Registered User
 
dawkins121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
What is there to be "not sure" about? I don't think I've seen a single person suggest that it was a good pick. Even if Goul works out, he's still a player you could have gotten at a later point in the draft. When you draft a guy in the 3rd round who has to catch the breaks to be Z. Rinaldo.... you dun messed up.

Poor draft management given that the success rates on picks aren't that dramatically different between rounds 2 and 3, but fall off pretty quickly thereafter. Made even worse when you go off your consensus draft board to take him. Not a huge Lodge fan, but Bjorkstrand was a no brainer at their pick.... even based on their board.
It's pretty funny how much that pick seemed to taint the whole draft, even though odds are whoever got picked in the 3rd round won't end up being an impact player anyway. I guess the seemingly willful disregard for potential, upside, and awareness of how the league is developing rubs people the wrong way.

dawkins121 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 07:55 AM
  #77
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
jd2210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
What is there to be "not sure" about? I don't think I've seen a single person suggest that it was a good pick. Even if Goul works out, he's still a player you could have gotten at a later point in the draft. When you draft a guy in the 3rd round who has to catch the breaks to be Z. Rinaldo.... you dun messed up.

Poor draft management given that the success rates on picks aren't that dramatically different between rounds 2 and 3, but fall off pretty quickly thereafter. Made even worse when you go off your consensus draft board to take him. Not a huge Lodge fan, but Bjorkstrand was a no brainer at their pick.... even based on their board.
Someone (not me) must like him. I see on the prospect voting he has 4 votes this round which totally blows my mind when guys like Manning, MAB, Wilcox and many other better options are still avail

jd2210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 08:02 AM
  #78
BrimFullofAsham45
Registered User
 
BrimFullofAsham45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 1,450
vCash: 500
Don't know if anyone has mentioned this but 17 and 18 are Pulock/Bigras, i think.

BrimFullofAsham45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 09:00 AM
  #79
RinaldoZac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 212
vCash: 1046
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrimFullofAsham45 View Post
Don't know if anyone has mentioned this but 17 and 18 are Pulock/Bigras, i think.
We had Pullock but i have added Bigras. Thanks!

RinaldoZac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 11:35 AM
  #80
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawkins121 View Post
It's pretty funny how much that pick seemed to taint the whole draft, even though odds are whoever got picked in the 3rd round won't end up being an impact player anyway. I guess the seemingly willful disregard for potential, upside, and awareness of how the league is developing rubs people the wrong way.
I don't see how selecting Goulbourne can be defended in the 3rd round. I don't care if his leadership qualities or toughness are sky-high; the 3rd round this year was still chock-full of hockey talent when the Flyers' pick came around, and IMHO the Flyers brass sidestepped an opportunity to further bolster the system. It's telling that Goulbourne himself seemed surprised how high he was picked.

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 12:35 PM
  #81
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
When you draft a guy in the 3rd round who has to catch the breaks to be Z. Rinaldo.... you dun messed up.
Goulbourne was a reach, which is not debatable, so this post is in no way defending the pick. However, Holmgren really did a disservice in calling him Z2. Rinaldo and Goulbourne are different players by what I read and according to stats.

Here is Rinaldo's stat line as a 19 year old: 60 games 25 pts 255 pim.

Here is Goulbourne's 19 year old line : 64 games 27 pts 135 pim.

Rinaldo was a goon in juniors who has worked very hard to become a useful NHL player. Goulbourne, for a fighter had very few penalty minutes. Also, it was said he was deployed as a defensive specialist and on the penalty kill. I think Holmgren could of soften the rage if he described him as a future Lapierre or Betts instead of Rinaldo part 2.

Psuhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 12:39 PM
  #82
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd2210 View Post
Someone (not me) must like him. I see on the prospect voting he has 4 votes this round which totally blows my mind when guys like Manning, MAB, Wilcox and many other better options are still avail
Again, this has almost nothing to do with liking the player or not. They could have taken him in Round 5 and no one would have cared.

They passed on guys that by their own draft board were rated 50+ spots higher to select a guy whose UPSIDE is compared to Zack Rinaldo. I like Rinaldo. He plays a solid role and improved tremendously in the smart play category last season. That said, Rinaldo is still young and you took a guy who MIGHT someday be his replacement if things break right after getting the original Rinaldo in the 6th round.

I almost think that someone lost a bet and had to announce Goul's name or moon the arena. They chose the former. Only way to explain it.

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 12:52 PM
  #83
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,317
vCash: 500
By the way, according to this article, the Flyers had Goulbourne rated exactly where they took him... number 72.

http://flyers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=678285

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 01:31 PM
  #84
dawkins121
Registered User
 
dawkins121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieParent View Post
I don't see how selecting Goulbourne can be defended in the 3rd round. I don't care if his leadership qualities or toughness are sky-high; the 3rd round this year was still chock-full of hockey talent when the Flyers' pick came around, and IMHO the Flyers brass sidestepped an opportunity to further bolster the system. It's telling that Goulbourne himself seemed surprised how high he was picked.
Oh I'm not disagreeing, it's completey indefensible. I was just pointing out you rarely see this much attention paid to a 3rd round pick.

dawkins121 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 01:38 PM
  #85
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawkins121 View Post
Oh I'm not disagreeing, it's completey indefensible. I was just pointing out you rarely see this much attention paid to a 3rd round pick.
I'd imagine that most posters here can remember the Klotz pick, which was nearly identical.

This is reflective of an organization that simply doesn't learn from its mistakes.

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 03:06 PM
  #86
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
jd2210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,517
vCash: 500
I wouldn't argue FOR the Ghoul pick but the amount of time spent throwing around the Klotz pick is getting ridiculous (overall, not this thread). Bellamy isn't exactly tearing it up. What about Morrison, Berlitsson or DeSerres? In fact who have we drafted in the last 10 years in the third round that has gone on to have a decent NHL career at all? I seriously think the word "Klotz," must be the most overused word on this forum. (Sunshine at #2, and Hyka #3)

Anyone who makes the NHL outside of the first 2 rounds is a bonus and the Flyers went for who they thought had the best chance of making it once they got past the second round.

I know this was supposedly a deeper draft then some years, but everyone pretty much agreed that the talent dropped off near the end of the second round. Everyone picked after that comes with an asterix of some kind.

I think that because this team did a great job getting Ghost and Cousins in back to back years with third round picks, that now people expect to strike gold every third round and that just usually isn't the case.

I was hoping to see the youngest Subban picked in that spot so I'm not overly happy with Ghoul myself just for the record. I'm just tired of the whole "Klotz was a junk pick" argument. Also for the record, Klotz and Rinaldo (I don't know about Ghoul) do not play at all the same game in any way shape or form.

jd2210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 03:09 PM
  #87
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 7,786
vCash: 500
If Flyers management feels that Goulbourne has a 90% chance of being an NHL player while a higher ceiling player like Lodge or Bjorkstrand only has a 30-40% chance, I'm not going to hate on the pick too hard. I maintain what I said on draft day-- past the second round, you're not always looking for a home run. Sometimes you're just looking to get on base.

I agree totally with San Filippo. Had Holmgren said, "We think Tyrell can be a heart and soul guy like Max Talbot who can grind it out and play responsibly on the PK", people would not be as angry as they are. Having a fourth line that can wear down the opposition is a pretty big piece of the puzzle when it gets down to playoff time. Your chances of landing a top six forward in the third round is are slim, and our top six is pretty full for the foreseeable future.

If Goulbourne becomes an NHL player in any capacity, he will be a better pick than most players taken in the third round.

hockeyfreak7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 04:07 PM
  #88
Jtown
Registered User
 
Jtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Posts: 10,228
vCash: 539
Some teams draft players that if they don't hit their potential they can be solid 4th liners.

The Flyers draft guys whose upside is strictly a 4th liner.

Jtown is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 06:19 PM
  #89
Haanz
Registered User
 
Haanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 70
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
By the way, according to this article, the Flyers had Goulbourne rated exactly where they took him... number 72.

http://flyers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=678285
If that's the case, then it's interesting that the Flyers did not stick strictly to their list. There's no way the players taken with the first 71 picks were all in the top 71 on the Flyers' list. It must have been one of those on-the-spot decisions where they decided they simply liked him more than some of the players they had ranked higher on their list.

Haanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 06:57 PM
  #90
Jtown
Registered User
 
Jtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Posts: 10,228
vCash: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haanz View Post
If that's the case, then it's interesting that the Flyers did not stick strictly to their list. There's no way the players taken with the first 71 picks were all in the top 71 on the Flyers' list. It must have been one of those on-the-spot decisions where they decided they simply liked him more than some of the players they had ranked higher on their list.
if that was the case then he would have been ranked higher.

Jtown is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 07:15 PM
  #91
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haanz View Post
If that's the case, then it's interesting that the Flyers did not stick strictly to their list. There's no way the players taken with the first 71 picks were all in the top 71 on the Flyers' list. It must have been one of those on-the-spot decisions where they decided they simply liked him more than some of the players they had ranked higher on their list.
They had both Jimmy Lodge & Oliver Bjorkstrand as second round grades (same as most public scouting services) on their board, both were selected after the Goulbourne pick. They either didn't want to go upside with the pick or they wanted to go with the safer route of just getting an eventual NHL player even with very limited upside. I guess Mark Greig (WHL Scout) really pushed for this one.

I don't agree with the pick but I'm not going to cry about it. I would have went with the upside personally but I really think the Rinaldo comparison is a little off base when it comes to Goulbourne as pointed out by others here.

He already plays the PK for Kelowna & is a pretty good skater from what I could see. He racked up 135 PIM last year but 95 of them were fighting majors (19 fights) so he doesn't seem as much of loose cannon as Rinaldo was at that age.

If he reaches the NHL & becomes a Brandon Prust type of player I would call it a success.

LegionOfDoom91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 08:21 PM
  #92
Larry44
FlyersTankNation
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
Goulbourne was a reach, which is not debatable, so this post is in no way defending the pick. However, Holmgren really did a disservice in calling him Z2. Rinaldo and Goulbourne are different players by what I read and according to stats.

Here is Rinaldo's stat line as a 19 year old: 60 games 25 pts 255 pim.

Here is Goulbourne's 19 year old line : 64 games 27 pts 135 pim.

Rinaldo was a goon in juniors who has worked very hard to become a useful NHL player. Goulbourne, for a fighter had very few penalty minutes. Also, it was said he was deployed as a defensive specialist and on the penalty kill. I think Holmgren could of soften the rage if he described him as a future Lapierre or Betts instead of Rinaldo part 2.
Rinaldo was much more than a goon in Jr. He was a penalty-killer for London and Barrie, and played a regular shift too. He played a similar role to what he does now, except he got a lot of misconducts from yapping the refs. I'd love to see a breakdown of how many of his PIMS were misconducts, because they weren't all fighting.

People are going overboard about Goulbourne's pick. The draft is partly about picking the guys you want to go to war with. They clearly liked him better than the 147 pound weaklings being touted as alternatives.

They would have seen Bjorkstrand many times, while scouting Leier, so if it came down to him or Goulbourne and the collective answer of the scouts was Goulbourne, so be it. The Flyers think he's going to be an NHL player. Chances are they are right.

A lot of people on these boards didn't think Rinaldo was ever going to make the team, let alone be a fixture on the roster. See what they know?

Larry44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 09:12 PM
  #93
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
They would have seen Bjorkstrand many times, while scouting Leier, so if it came down to him or Goulbourne and the collective answer of the scouts was Goulbourne, so be it. The Flyers think he's going to be an NHL player. Chances are they are right.
Riddle me this batman.... how is the "collective answer of the scouts" ranked precisely 21 spots lower on the Philadelphia Flyers draft board?

Is the draftboard like Coatsie's rankings that they hang up there, then come to consensus while they draft?

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2013, 11:12 PM
  #94
Larry44
FlyersTankNation
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
Riddle me this batman.... how is the "collective answer of the scouts" ranked precisely 21 spots lower on the Philadelphia Flyers draft board?

Is the draftboard like Coatsie's rankings that they hang up there, then come to consensus while they draft?
Because the list is one thing, it's another thing when it's live, you're on the clock, and you have to take other intel into it.

Pryor said this was the guy they really wanted but were hoping would be available in the 5th. They didn't have a 4th and got some info that another team was planning to take him before their pick in the 5th - so they picked him in the 3rd.

http://flyers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=676082

Quote:
By Anthony SanFilippo - Philadelphia Flyers Inside Reporter

The biggest criticism the Flyers are getting after the draft is their third round selection of Tyrell Goulbourne of the Kelowna Rockets in the WHL.

The complaints seem to stem from general manager Paul Holmgren referring to Goulbourne as “Z2” or a Zac Rinaldo clone.

The argument being made is that the third round is too early to take a player who might end up being an energy guy in the NHL.

Maybe that’s because the Flyers drafted Rinaldo in round six, and this looks like a complete stretch.

However, the Flyers don’t view it that way, and Chris Pryor, the director of player development made a very salient argument in Goulbourne’s favor.

“We didn’t have a fourth round pick and we knew [from talking to other teams] that he wouldn’t have been there when we picked in the fifth round,” Pryor said. “He may only be a role guy in the NHL, but we think he has a real good chance to play in the NHL, which is the biggest thing. Look at the percentages of guys playing in the league. It gets less and less each round. So, we wanted to jump up a little bit to grab him because we feel he’s going to be in the NHL and anytime you can get a guy who’s going to play at that level, it doesn’t matter where you take him.”

To Pryor’s point, In the draft years between 2003 and 2008 (players who would be between 23 and 28 in the NHL currently) only 33 out of the 186 players selected in the third round have played at least 100 NHL games.

That’s a success rate of a mere 17.7 percent.

So, to identify a player who they feel will make it to the NHL, regardless of his role, and be confident that he’ll fall into that small percentage was a good enough reason to draft him at pick No. 72.
If this was the guy they really wanted, I think it's better to take him in the 3rd than take someone else, miss out on him, and end up with two players they didn't really want or weren't sure of in the 3rd and 5th.

It's not really that hard to figure out. They liked this player, so they took him.


Last edited by Larry44: 08-12-2013 at 11:20 PM.
Larry44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 05:59 AM
  #95
RinaldoZac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 212
vCash: 1046
I think we all agree that WE wouldnt have taken Goulbourne, but WE are not the GM of the Philadelphia Flyers.

RinaldoZac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 07:35 AM
  #96
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,286
vCash: 500
The problem with the pick is that you're taking a guy in the 3rd with a good shot of making the NHL, but only ever being a 4th line defensive specialist/pker/fighter. That is a player that can be had every offseason as a FA, or even in season as a waiver wire pickup.

Would you trade a 3rd round pick for Adam Hall? The only way this works out is if he turns out to be more along the lines of Talbot.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 08:15 AM
  #97
dawkins121
Registered User
 
dawkins121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
The problem with the pick is that you're taking a guy in the 3rd with a good shot of making the NHL, but only ever being a 4th line defensive specialist/pker/fighter. That is a player that can be had every offseason as a FA, or even in season as a waiver wire pickup.

Would you trade a 3rd round pick for Adam Hall? The only way this works out is if he turns out to be more along the lines of Talbot.
It's much cheaper to just pull a guy up from your own system though. On the one hand I get the rationale, you need to have balance in your system between high upside projects and guys that actually have a safer chance of seeing NHL action one day. As much as fans would all love to fill out the farm system with lottery tickets and hope we luck into the next Chara or Datsyuk, you need to mitigate the risk of not having enough NHL ready guys in case you need to plug someone into the lineup in an emergency down the road.

That being said, you shouldn't be reaching for those guys in the 2nd or 3rd round. They can be had in the 5th-7th or even as college/undrafted free agent signings.

dawkins121 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 08:56 AM
  #98
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawkins121 View Post
It's much cheaper to just pull a guy up from your own system though. On the one hand I get the rationale, you need to have balance in your system between high upside projects and guys that actually have a safer chance of seeing NHL action one day. As much as fans would all love to fill out the farm system with lottery tickets and hope we luck into the next Chara or Datsyuk, you need to mitigate the risk of not having enough NHL ready guys in case you need to plug someone into the lineup in an emergency down the road.

That being said, you shouldn't be reaching for those guys in the 2nd or 3rd round. They can be had in the 5th-7th or even as college/undrafted free agent signings.
Yea but you always have players that can be called up in case of an emergency. They're all relatively the same player. Some may be more offensive, some more of a pker, but they're all interchangeable. Guys like Hall or Betts cost as much as an AHL player, and most 4th liners are paid $600k ~ $1m. That's in the ballpark of a lot of guys salaries from the AHL.

The point isn't to stock up a bunch of lottery picks because that's not feasible, but you should be picking on potential and hoping to luck into a Datsyuk. If you luck into 1 Datsuyk in the 3rd round every decade and fail 9 other times, that's a hell of a lot better than picking 10 guys that all make it to the NHL as 4th liners.

It has to do with availability. You can get an AHL call up, you can get a waiver wire guy, you can sign a FA and all it costs is money and cap space. You can't get a Datsyuk without giving up a lot more. I'd rather fail 10 out of 10 times in a decade in shooting for the moon in the 3rd or 4th round than taking a guy that looks like a sure fire 4th liner.

Again the only way this works is if he's more than a typical 4th liner. A Lappy or Talbot, someone who contributes more than the average 4th line role player.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 09:05 AM
  #99
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd2210 View Post
I wouldn't argue FOR the Ghoul pick but the amount of time spent throwing around the Klotz pick is getting ridiculous (overall, not this thread). Bellamy isn't exactly tearing it up. What about Morrison, Berlitsson or DeSerres? In fact who have we drafted in the last 10 years in the third round that has gone on to have a decent NHL career at all? I seriously think the word "Klotz," must be the most overused word on this forum. (Sunshine at #2, and Hyka #3)

Anyone who makes the NHL outside of the first 2 rounds is a bonus and the Flyers went for who they thought had the best chance of making it once they got past the second round.

I know this was supposedly a deeper draft then some years, but everyone pretty much agreed that the talent dropped off near the end of the second round. Everyone picked after that comes with an asterix of some kind.

I think that because this team did a great job getting Ghost and Cousins in back to back years with third round picks, that now people expect to strike gold every third round and that just usually isn't the case.

I was hoping to see the youngest Subban picked in that spot so I'm not overly happy with Ghoul myself just for the record. I'm just tired of the whole "Klotz was a junk pick" argument. Also for the record, Klotz and Rinaldo (I don't know about Ghoul) do not play at all the same game in any way shape or form.
This is the bass ackward thinking the Flyers shouldn't have. When you buy a Powerball ticket, you don't say "I hope I get the Powerball right and get my money back". Go for the homerun. If it doesn't work out, so be it. But if you get that one homerun pick, it could put the franchise ahead years. But to draft a guy who projects to be a 4th line energy guy is head scratching. You can sign those guy as UFAs for league minimum.

Snotbubbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2013, 11:49 AM
  #100
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
They had both Jimmy Lodge & Oliver Bjorkstrand as second round grades (same as most public scouting services) on their board, both were selected after the Goulbourne pick. They either didn't want to go upside with the pick or they wanted to go with the safer route of just getting an eventual NHL player even with very limited upside. I guess Mark Greig (WHL Scout) really pushed for this one.

I don't agree with the pick but I'm not going to cry about it. I would have went with the upside personally but I really think the Rinaldo comparison is a little off base when it comes to Goulbourne as pointed out by others here.

He already plays the PK for Kelowna & is a pretty good skater from what I could see. He racked up 135 PIM last year but 95 of them were fighting majors (19 fights) so he doesn't seem as much of loose cannon as Rinaldo was at that age. If he reaches the NHL & becomes a Brandon Prust type of player I would call it a success.
Reading this made me wonder -- because I'm all about the controversy! -- about the nature of balancing the scouts' recommendations and egos when deciding whom to choose with the different picks. I'm not saying Paul Holmgren would think, much less say out loud, that "Okay, the 3rd round pick is Greig's, so his favourite guy gets chosen no matter who's still on the board." Consider for fun this hypothetical narrative around the Flyers' picks: the Q guys were really, really high on Morin, even above arguably more valuable (at least on the "official" lists) defensemen. So the 1st round pick -- which is even more important since the Flyers very rarely choose so early -- is used on Morin, and the Q scouts are thrilled. The 2nd round is a bonus because a player whom the Flyers considered to be a 1st rounder is still on the board when their pick comes around. The 3rd round is coming up and they all know they don't have a 4th. Mark Greig has been pumping (my hypothetical) Goulbourne at around this pick, so Holmgren tosses him a bone by going with the guy. Arguably, few people expect 3rd rounders to become impact players, and this kid fits the Flyers' mold, so why not support one of your scout's hard work?

Plausible? Ridiculous? I'm just wondering about how this angle of employee (ie, scouts) management plays into the final decisions. And remember, I'm an Official Team Blogger, so my opinion is more important and more valid than yours.

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.