HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > NHL Draft - Prospects
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

NHL Draft - Prospects Discuss hockey prospects from all over the world and the NHL Draft.

C Mark Jankowski - Providence College, NCAA (2012, 21st, CGY)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2012, 03:33 PM
  #151
nogger
ploffs?
 
nogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,430
vCash: 50
Because those 3 were totally available at 21 ^

edit: @ topchowda

nogger is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 03:34 PM
  #152
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topchowda View Post
But I digress. Janko might have alot of potential and well have to wait and see.

I just laugh at the pick because the Flames are in a win now mode with all of their players aging.

They have a 2-3 gap (closing fast) to be succesful and there were a couple of picks on the board that would have been smarter. They needed a prospect with #1 center potential to play with Iggy.

To me they had 2 choices to make that could have made them very good.

1. TT- smallish center prospect who fell in the draft. About 2 years away from NHL but still boatloads of potential

2. Trade up for Grigs. Definition of what the Flames needed. As per the boards flames fan are content with boom/bust picks (as the are with Jank) Grigs was pegged as a #2 pick most of the year and magically fell (attitude issues I dunno). He could have potentially stepped into the NHL this year and center Iggy while Iggy is still in his prime.

Now they picked Janko, a 4-5 year project. If he ever reaches potential he will enter the NHL when the flames are at their lowest. Iggy will be gone/ not playing at his highest level. Kipper is in the same position. So Jank will only be able to help them get from 29th to 26th place. And his best years will be for nothing

If Feaster wises up, realizes the playoffs are probaly not attainable, and trades Iggy, Kipper and Bouw for prospects/ young roster players then Janko will enter the NHL with a bounty of young players around him.

TL;DR Janko might have alot of potential but not a good fit for the Flames and their win now attitude
They weren't going to get anyone to play with Iginla immediately at 14 or anywhere in this draft, for that matter.
There were plenty of question marks in this draft and even if they did find a center capable of playing in the NHL this season/relatively soon, it's ridiculous to expect them to make a big enough impact to really put the Flames over the top.
Arguing that they should have drafted to fill their current needs makes no sense.
It's a shame that Iginla has went for so long without a true #1C, but that can't be fixed now.

If they had picked Grigorenko or Teräväinen, HF would still be all over them.
Grigs seems to be disliked by the majority of people here and Teuvo is smaller so they'd be lambasted for having a collection of small prospects.
Of course, most would also throw out "they fell for a reason" and continue to say that the Flames suck.

They're obviously in a transition period and they're hoping to build around guys like Bärtschi, Gaudreau, and Jankowski in the future.
The fact that he's a bit further away doesn't matter much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by topchowda View Post
Ya... highest ceiling in a draft that includes Yakupov, Galy, Forsberg
How does a smooth skating, rangy 6'3'' center with high-end hockey sense and vision not have a high ceiling?
Sure he's raw, but that doesn't mean he has a lower ceiling.


Last edited by jfb392: 08-31-2012 at 03:39 PM.
jfb392 is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 03:36 PM
  #153
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topchowda View Post
But I digress. Janko might have alot of potential and well have to wait and see.

I just laugh at the pick because the Flames are in a win now mode with all of their players aging.

They have a 2-3 gap (closing fast) to be succesful and there were a couple of picks on the board that would have been smarter. They needed a prospect with #1 center potential to play with Iggy.

To me they had 2 choices to make that could have made them very good.

1. TT- smallish center prospect who fell in the draft. About 2 years away from NHL but still boatloads of potential

2. Trade up for Grigs. Definition of what the Flames needed. As per the boards flames fan are content with boom/bust picks (as the are with Jank) Grigs was pegged as a #2 pick most of the year and magically fell (attitude issues I dunno). He could have potentially stepped into the NHL this year and center Iggy while Iggy is still in his prime.

Now they picked Janko, a 4-5 year project. If he ever reaches potential he will enter the NHL when the flames are at their lowest. Iggy will be gone/ not playing at his highest level. Kipper is in the same position. So Jank will only be able to help them get from 29th to 26th place. And his best years will be for nothing

If Feaster wises up, realizes the playoffs are probaly not attainable, and trades Iggy, Kipper and Bouw for prospects/ young roster players then Janko will enter the NHL with a bounty of young players around him.

TL;DR Janko might have alot of potential but not a good fit for the Flames and their win now attitude
Yeah, it's a real shame by the time Janks is ready that he'll have no impact wingers to play with.

Gary83* is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 03:40 PM
  #154
Haatley
haatley
 
Haatley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topchowda View Post
Ya... highest ceiling in a draft that includes Yakupov, Galy, Forsberg

Dont really know how you gauge highest ceiling after playing in a high school league. Kyle Turris was supposed to be a phenom after playing in a lower league like the BCHL.

Janko might be a very good player but pump the breaks a bit with all these proclamations of fame
What proclamatiobs of fame? read the articles about him prior to the draft that basically all say what im saying. or are you too stubborn to try and grasp the definition if a boom/bust prospect?

i have no problems with kyle turris. do you?

Haatley is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 11:31 PM
  #155
HarrySPlinkett
Not a film critic
 
HarrySPlinkett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary83 View Post
Yeah, it's a real shame by the time Janks is ready that he'll have no impact wingers to play with.
Don't you know Sven and Gaudreau will have been offer sheeted to the oilers by the time jankowski is ready?

HarrySPlinkett is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 12:00 AM
  #156
CarvinSigX
The Toilet
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 11,837
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoctor10 View Post
Don't you know Sven and Gaudreau will have been offer sheeted to the oilers by the time jankowski is ready?
To contracts worth 8 million that Calgary matches?

CarvinSigX is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 02:51 PM
  #157
GuillaumeLetsundress*
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,363
vCash: 500
how far off is he on the world junior team ?

GuillaumeLetsundress* is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 03:00 PM
  #158
nik-
Registered User
 
nik-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheramone View Post
how far off is he on the world junior team ?
I'd say pretty far off the radar.

nik- is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 04:00 PM
  #159
Rolen
Mikael Ferlund
 
Rolen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pheramone View Post
how far off is he on the world junior team ?
He'll be on it next year, this year he needs a little time to bulk up and get used to better competition.

Rolen is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 04:29 PM
  #160
puckfan13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik- View Post
I'd say pretty far off the radar.
I don't think this guy is a good pick or anything, but Kevin Roy got on the radar after a killer season so if Jankowski puts up good numbers in Hockey East he could be invited to the camp next year. Guys like Joe Colbourne and Riley Nash have made the winter camp before although neither made it. Louis Leblanc made the camp playing at Harvard of all places but didn't make it that year either.

puckfan13 is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 04:38 PM
  #161
Carlzner
Registered User
 
Carlzner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: DC/CO
Country: United States
Posts: 13,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
How does a smooth skating, rangy 6'3'' center with high-end hockey sense and vision not have a high ceiling?
Sure he's raw, but that doesn't mean he has a lower ceiling.
If he had "high-end hockey sense" he wouldn't have been playing at Stanstead College in his draft year.

Carlzner is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 05:15 PM
  #162
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden Carlzner View Post
If he had "high-end hockey sense" he wouldn't have been playing at Stanstead College in his draft year.
Oh, I didn't know that things like hockey sense were determined by where a player is playing.

Thanks for enlightening me.

jfb392 is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 05:18 PM
  #163
tmurfin
So Good! Mony Mony!
 
tmurfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,958
vCash: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden Carlzner View Post
If he had "high-end hockey sense" he wouldn't have been playing at Stanstead College in his draft year.
He was under the radar because of his size. He was always told he was too small, dude grew like 8 inches in a year.. Obviously the kid has talent, he's been given to opportunity to play in the OHL, USHL, and College. He was called a 6'3 version of Johnny Gaudreau by J.Gs former coach, and if you don't think J.G. Has high end hockey sense, you don't have a clue.

But hey, I guarantee(!) you've never seen him play. Guarantee. In development camp he wasnt very far behind Baertschi and Gaudreau, while being better than everyone else.

tmurfin is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 05:51 PM
  #164
Haatley
haatley
 
Haatley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden Carlzner View Post
If he had "high-end hockey sense" he wouldn't have been playing at Stanstead College in his draft year.
Ya a guy whos family has generatiobs of successful hockey players in it has no hockey sense...

Haatley is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 07:46 PM
  #165
puckfan13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,754
vCash: 500
I've brought this up in another thread, but Feaster doesn't exactly have a great track record of keeping tabs on his player evaluation guys and moving swiftly in replacing them. From 2001-2006, Tampa had 60 picks combined and churned out 0 players (zero!!). Now, Feaster isn't from a scouting background, more of the business/contracts side so he obviously has only a secondary role in selections but I think it's very interesting how in 6 years of drafts you can produce literally no NHL players.

Now, Tod Button is Calgary's head scout. He's been in charge since 2001. To be fair, guys from 2007 onwards are still developing, so from 2001-2006 (6 drafts) he's produced 6 full-fledged NHL players that could play on any roster and would fetch you back an asset of even marginal value. His 2005 and 2006 drafts produced zero players in 16 picks. So Tod Button has a drafting record of 6 full-time serviceable NHLers (it's up to you to include Dustin Boyd (KHL) or Adam Pardy (still a 'tweener 8 years after being drafted)) in a span of 58 picks. The players were Kobasew, Moss, Lombardi, Nystrom, Phaneuf, Prust. Draft history via hockeyDB.

Calgary's draft hit rate on "true NHL players" from 2001-2006 is 10.3%, a team like Detroit in that span is 24.5%, Nashville is 22.9%, even Columbus is 18.8%. (For comparisons and convenience sake, Nashville's "true NHL players" are Tootoo, Hamhuis, Upshall, Weber, Klein, Suter, Rinne, Radulov, Santorelli, Hornqvist, Franson - a bit better of a list.)

Furthermore, Jankowski is a top-six forward project pick. In all Button's drafts from 2001-2006, he was never able to pick ONE top-six forward, Backlund has a chance ('07 draft) but I wouldn't say he is quite there yet. His expertise (if you want to call it that) lies in picking players like Prust, Lombardi, Moss, Kobasew and Nystrom - grinders, almost all fourth liners. I think the only players you could call a top-9 player are Lombardi and David Moss.

Now finally, you can say the Flames scouting staff has been focusing on different skillsets and attributes these past few years with the departure of Sutter but they employ almost the same team of scouts, and those are their results.

Just by the numbers - I think I'm going to go with Jankowski busting for now. The Flames haven't drafted a top-six forward in 11 years (Bartschi is still a prospect) but you're going to tell me that the one to break this trend and become a legit #1 centre is a Quebec high school hockey player? Also let me remind you again that Tampa didn't draft one single NHL player (!) under Feaster's tenure (6 entire drafts). Just to run the numbers again - Tod Button ('01-'06): 6 NHL players (0 top-6, 1 top-4 D)/58 draft picks, Jay Feaster ('02-'06): 0 NHL players/46 draft picks. That's a combined 5.8% success rate on drafting... I'll take my odds.


Last edited by puckfan13: 09-01-2012 at 08:06 PM.
puckfan13 is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 08:11 PM
  #166
Sevanston
Registered User
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmurfin View Post
He was under the radar because of his size. He was always told he was too small, dude grew like 8 inches in a year.. Obviously the kid has talent, he's been given to opportunity to play in the OHL, USHL, and College. He was called a 6'3 version of Johnny Gaudreau by J.Gs former coach, and if you don't think J.G. Has high end hockey sense, you don't have a clue.

But hey, I guarantee(!) you've never seen him play. Guarantee. In development camp he wasnt very far behind Baertschi and Gaudreau, while being better than everyone else.
Not really a knock on Mark, but I don't trust when coaches compare players they're coaching/watching today to players that they used to coach. Those kinds of comparisons are almost impossible to live up to, and often just end up being disappointments.

Two examples would be Scotty Bowman comparing Niklas Hjalmarsson to Lidstrom a few years ago. He also compared Nick Leddy to Phil Housley.

Sevanston is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 08:18 PM
  #167
Ashasx
Registered User
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,169
vCash: 500
Did you know, oilsp1ll, that most GMs rarely get to see prospects play? Sure they'll come in an watch the odd game, but this job is divided amongst many other people.

There's more to being a good drafting team than having a good GM.

Feaster may have the final say on who the Flames pick, he's the one who announces it at the draft, but he's not the one who has made these decisions the last 3 drafts, when things started to change for the Flames in terms of drafting.

All a GM does in this position is tell the scouts what kind of players he wants, and then the scouts rank the prospects accordingly.

In 2009, before Darryl Sutter was even fired, it seemed the Flames had a shift in their mindset from drafting big, tough, Western Canadian kids, to more skilled players from any part of the world.

Tod Button has improved his drafting abilities immensely over the last 3 years. We're more excited than we've ever been for Flames draft picks. The Jankowski pick is on Tod Button (along with Weisbrod), along with the Erixon and Baertschi picks. He's had a fantastic last 3 drafts, I see no reason not to have faith in him for this one.

Ashasx is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 08:44 PM
  #168
Carlzner
Registered User
 
Carlzner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: DC/CO
Country: United States
Posts: 13,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haatley View Post
Ya a guy whos family has generatiobs of successful hockey players in it has no hockey sense...
LOL!

Please tell me you're kidding.

Carlzner is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 08:57 PM
  #169
Rolen
Mikael Ferlund
 
Rolen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilsp1ll View Post
I've brought this up in another thread, but Feaster doesn't exactly have a great track record of keeping tabs on his player evaluation guys and moving swiftly in replacing them. From 2001-2006, Tampa had 60 picks combined and churned out 0 players (zero!!). Now, Feaster isn't from a scouting background, more of the business/contracts side so he obviously has only a secondary role in selections but I think it's very interesting how in 6 years of drafts you can produce literally no NHL players.

Now, Tod Button is Calgary's head scout. He's been in charge since 2001. To be fair, guys from 2007 onwards are still developing, so from 2001-2006 (6 drafts) he's produced 6 full-fledged NHL players that could play on any roster and would fetch you back an asset of even marginal value. His 2005 and 2006 drafts produced zero players in 16 picks. So Tod Button has a drafting record of 6 full-time serviceable NHLers (it's up to you to include Dustin Boyd (KHL) or Adam Pardy (still a 'tweener 8 years after being drafted)) in a span of 58 picks. The players were Kobasew, Moss, Lombardi, Nystrom, Phaneuf, Prust. Draft history via hockeyDB.

Calgary's draft hit rate on "true NHL players" from 2001-2006 is 10.3%, a team like Detroit in that span is 24.5%, Nashville is 22.9%, even Columbus is 18.8%. (For comparisons and convenience sake, Nashville's "true NHL players" are Tootoo, Hamhuis, Upshall, Weber, Klein, Suter, Rinne, Radulov, Santorelli, Hornqvist, Franson - a bit better of a list.)

Furthermore, Jankowski is a top-six forward project pick. In all Button's drafts from 2001-2006, he was never able to pick ONE top-six forward, Backlund has a chance ('07 draft) but I wouldn't say he is quite there yet. His expertise (if you want to call it that) lies in picking players like Prust, Lombardi, Moss, Kobasew and Nystrom - grinders, almost all fourth liners. I think the only players you could call a top-9 player are Lombardi and David Moss.

Now finally, you can say the Flames scouting staff has been focusing on different skillsets and attributes these past few years with the departure of Sutter but they employ almost the same team of scouts, and those are their results.

Just by the numbers - I think I'm going to go with Jankowski busting for now. The Flames haven't drafted a top-six forward in 11 years (Bartschi is still a prospect) but you're going to tell me that the one to break this trend and become a legit #1 centre is a Quebec high school hockey player? Also let me remind you again that Tampa didn't draft one single NHL player (!) under Feaster's tenure (6 entire drafts). Just to run the numbers again - Tod Button ('01-'06): 6 NHL players (0 top-6, 1 top-4 D)/58 draft picks, Jay Feaster ('02-'06): 0 NHL players/46 draft picks. That's a combined 5.8% success rate on drafting... I'll take my odds.
Thanks for posting this, next time you post something I'll know not give you any credibility what-so-ever.

First off, you have a biased opinion, obviously, because your an oiler fan. Which I get, you want any Flames prospect to bust.

Now, Jay Feaster has nothing to do with the actual scouting. He brings in the scouting philosophy. He has admitted that during his tenure in Tampa Bay that his drafting was below average, and his philosophy was bad. He has changed that. If you want to go in depth with that, or want to see proof, I can post articles/videos.

2nd off, your using stats from 02-06 for Tod Button... most years of which was under the scouting philosophy of Darryl Sutter. We all know that Darryl went for the western Canadian, big-kids, as if it was the old NHL. Size over skill.

The past 3 first round picks for the flames have been Mark Jankowski, Sven Baertschi and Tim Erixon. Baertschi and Erixon are pretty much guaranteed NHLers. Time will tell for Jankowski. Notable players since 2007 that have been drafted and look to be NHLers: TJ Brodie, Lance Bouma, Greg Nemisz, Mikael Backlund, Max Reinhart

Anyways, think what you want, bring back the old statistics to prove nothing. Calgary's drafting has improved drastically the past few years, and to use statistics from 2001-2006 to prove Jankowski will bust is ridiculous.

Rolen is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 10:04 PM
  #170
puckfan13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
Did you know, oilsp1ll, that most GMs rarely get to see prospects play? Sure they'll come in an watch the odd game, but this job is divided amongst many other people.

There's more to being a good drafting team than having a good GM.

Feaster may have the final say on who the Flames pick, he's the one who announces it at the draft, but he's not the one who has made these decisions the last 3 drafts, when things started to change for the Flames in terms of drafting.

All a GM does in this position is tell the scouts what kind of players he wants, and then the scouts rank the prospects accordingly.

In 2009, before Darryl Sutter was even fired, it seemed the Flames had a shift in their mindset from drafting big, tough, Western Canadian kids, to more skilled players from any part of the world.

Tod Button has improved his drafting abilities immensely over the last 3 years. We're more excited than we've ever been for Flames draft picks. The Jankowski pick is on Tod Button (along with Weisbrod), along with the Erixon and Baertschi picks. He's had a fantastic last 3 drafts, I see no reason not to have faith in him for this one.
I stated multiple times in my post that Feaster doesn't have the scouting background and defers to his scouts. But the main problem is he doesn't pull the plug fast enough when those scouts aren't getting results and/or he has a misguided general draft vision. It's ok to delegate responsibilities if you can do it properly. Most of my post focused on Tod Button's atrocious record as a head scout, it is very clearly historically awful.

And to address Rolen: I used concrete examples from years of hard data and you are defending your stance off the conjecture of potential in the past few drafts. Of course a prospect is going to look better in the years immediately following his draft. I love Bartschi and Erixon as prospects and think they will be good players but I'm not ready to count them if they aren't top-9/top-4 players yet... It's not like I skewed and contorted the numbers to make my point, I literally went from Button's first year to the year where it's fair to say prospects are still developing, it benefits the numbers if anything. For all I know, the 2007-2012 Flames drafts could produce 15 NHL players but you can't really go off of that. And a head scout shouldn't exactly be given 6-7 years just to find his footing, he should be producing results in the first few years or he should be replaced just like any other job.

Edit: With all that being said, it's not impossible the pick works out. John Weisbrod loves scouting obscure leagues, he found Richard Bacchman at Cushing Academy in Massachusetts and went to bat for two overage prospects at small schools in 2010 for the Bruins in Justin Florek and Zach Trotman, it's yet to be determined if that's a successful alternative to more conventional channels but Weisbrod displays intriguing preferences for sure. He obviously has lots of connections in the New England area (coming from Harvard and all) and leans towards high school/college guys. He himself is a product of that route so he has a natural aversion/familiarity/level of expertise/what have you with that kind of hockey.

Weisbrod was obviously very trusted with Bruins brass as they also signed Matt Bartkowski, Carter Camper and Kevin Millar as college free agents and traded for the rights of Colby Cohen and David Warsofsky during the time he was the Director of Collegiate Scouting for the Bruins. While doing some digging on Weisbrod, I came across a prospect Rob O'Gara who was drafted last year fifth round by Boston from Milton Academy with a very similar profile/story to Jankowski albeit as a defenseman - quite obviously a Weisbrod pick. Profile on him here: http://bruins2011draftwatch.blogspot...rob-ogara.html


Last edited by puckfan13: 09-01-2012 at 10:53 PM.
puckfan13 is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 10:35 PM
  #171
HighLifeMan
Registered User
 
HighLifeMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilsp1ll View Post
I stated multiple times in my post that Feaster doesn't have the scouting background and defers to his scouts. But the main problem is he doesn't pull the plug fast enough when those scouts aren't getting results and/or he has a misguided general draft vision. It's ok to delegate responsibilities if you can do it properly. Most of my post focused on Tod Button's atrocious record as a head scout, it is very clearly historically awful.

And to address Rolen: I used concrete examples from years of hard data and you are defending your stance off the conjecture of potential in the past few drafts. Of course a prospect is going to look better in the years immediately following his draft. I love Bartschi and Erixon as prospects and think they will be good players but I'm not ready to count them if they aren't top-9/top-4 players yet... It's not like I skewed and contorted the numbers to make my point, I literally went from Button's first year to the year where it's fair to say prospects are still developing, it benefits the numbers if anything. For all I know, the 2007-2012 Flames drafts could produce 15 NHL players but you can't really go off of that. And a head scout shouldn't exactly be given 6-7 years just to find his footing, he should be producing results in the first few years or he should be replaced just like any other job.
Todd Button had very little, to no say at all in the drafting philosophy of the Flames under Darryl Sutter. It has been well documented just how much control Darryl had over the organization in all managerial aspects.

If you followed the situation closely you would see just that. Hell, Button himself has flat out stated that there has been a HUGE shift in the way both he and the organization approach both drafting and development since Sutter "stepped down".

I would also completely disagree with you previously stating that the scouting staff has remained relatively unchanged. That is just not true. The Flames have largely revamped the entire scouting staff over the past two years. The biggest changes however came with the resignation of Darryl, and the hiring of both John Weisbrod and Michel Goulet.

Since last summer alone the scouting staff has expanded to 17 members. This is a far cry from the usual eight or nine they have had in the past. These eight gentlemen were all added in the past year and a half in some scouting capacity.

- John Weisbrod
- Michel Goulet
- David Volek
- Rob Summer
- Jim Cummins
- Frank Anzalone
- Mike Addesa
- Craig Conroy

Maybe from an outside perspective there is a cause for pessimism, but as a Flames fan I see first hand the changes that are being made to significantly change the future of this team. I just dont see the relevance in posting nearly decade old statistics in an area (scouting) that has grown in leaps and bounds.

HighLifeMan is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 11:31 PM
  #172
Gary83*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden Carlzner View Post
If he had "high-end hockey sense" he wouldn't have been playing at Stanstead College in his draft year.
Loooool

Gary83* is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 11:52 PM
  #173
RA9
Registered User
 
RA9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilsp1ll View Post
I stated multiple times in my post that Feaster doesn't have the scouting background and defers to his scouts. But the main problem is he doesn't pull the plug fast enough when those scouts aren't getting results and/or he has a misguided general draft vision. It's ok to delegate responsibilities if you can do it properly. Most of my post focused on Tod Button's atrocious record as a head scout, it is very clearly historically awful.

And to address Rolen: I used concrete examples from years of hard data and you are defending your stance off the conjecture of potential in the past few drafts. Of course a prospect is going to look better in the years immediately following his draft. I love Bartschi and Erixon as prospects and think they will be good players but I'm not ready to count them if they aren't top-9/top-4 players yet... It's not like I skewed and contorted the numbers to make my point, I literally went from Button's first year to the year where it's fair to say prospects are still developing, it benefits the numbers if anything. For all I know, the 2007-2012 Flames drafts could produce 15 NHL players but you can't really go off of that. And a head scout shouldn't exactly be given 6-7 years just to find his footing, he should be producing results in the first few years or he should be replaced just like any other job.

Edit: With all that being said, it's not impossible the pick works out. John Weisbrod loves scouting obscure leagues, he found Richard Bacchman at Cushing Academy in Massachusetts and went to bat for two overage prospects at small schools in 2010 for the Bruins in Justin Florek and Zach Trotman, it's yet to be determined if that's a successful alternative to more conventional channels but Weisbrod displays intriguing preferences for sure. He obviously has lots of connections in the New England area (coming from Harvard and all) and leans towards high school/college guys. He himself is a product of that route so he has a natural aversion/familiarity/level of expertise/what have you with that kind of hockey.

Weisbrod was obviously very trusted with Bruins brass as they also signed Matt Bartkowski, Carter Camper and Kevin Millar as college free agents and traded for the rights of Colby Cohen and David Warsofsky during the time he was the Director of Collegiate Scouting for the Bruins. While doing some digging on Weisbrod, I came across a prospect Rob O'Gara who was drafted last year fifth round by Boston from Milton Academy with a very similar profile/story to Jankowski albeit as a defenseman - quite obviously a Weisbrod pick. Profile on him here: http://bruins2011draftwatch.blogspot...rob-ogara.html

You do not know what your talking about whatsoever.

Darryl Sutter WANTED those players, realize how the flames drafting philosophy changed after he was fired? How the flames started drafting, more skilled, quicker players? (Ie bartschi,gaudreau,jankowski) rather than, the always bigger, stronger, "safer" picks? (Ie nemisz,chucko,?).

Sutter pretty much had all the say in who the flames drafted, button and his scouting team (how little they were) went where he wanted them to ( the whl, for good ol grinders). Feaster, has changed the philosophy. He realizes the NHL is now a faster league, so he is drafting more skillfull, faster players.

flames drafting has changed, tenfold. the prospect pool is much more full of talent, than it was, say 2 years ago. a lot has changed, sure it's not going to compare to the oilers, or the kings prospect pool, but its getting better.

yes feaster hasn't had the best track record in drafting, but i'll let the last couple of drafts and possibly the future, speak for themselves.

Btw im addressing your earlier posts, not this one.

RA9 is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 02:38 AM
  #174
superhakan
Gaudreauby Baker
 
superhakan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,653
vCash: 500
Not too completely jump into this argument, but if you look up the first page (and later) of the "underrated prospects thread" you will see the names:

Max Reinhart
Mark Jankowski
Markus granlund
Peter Holland

as well as

Sven Baertschi
TJ Brodie
Tim erixon

(mostly not by Flames Fans)

None of these picks earlier than 2008, and this doesnt even include some underrated guys like Michael Ferland or Laurent Brossoit or even some moderately overrated prospects like Johnny Gaudreau and Patrick Sieloff. The Flames drafting has taken a huge step forward over the last few years, which coincides not only with a change of draft strategy, but an increase in the scouting department funding period. Using data from 5-10 years ago just doesnt apply to an argument, and using teams who have had good success in the drafting department (like Detroit and Nashville) is also a poor argument since these teams successful scouting has lead to less turn over than that the flames SD endured. We wont truly know how the flames have drafted till the revamped regimes draft classes has had time to develop and make an impact.

superhakan is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 06:55 AM
  #175
puckfan13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superhakan View Post
Not too completely jump into this argument, but if you look up the first page (and later) of the "underrated prospects thread" you will see the names:

Max Reinhart
Mark Jankowski
Markus granlund
Peter Holland

as well as

Sven Baertschi
TJ Brodie
Tim erixon

(mostly not by Flames Fans)

None of these picks earlier than 2008, and this doesnt even include some underrated guys like Michael Ferland or Laurent Brossoit or even some moderately overrated prospects like Johnny Gaudreau and Patrick Sieloff. The Flames drafting has taken a huge step forward over the last few years, which coincides not only with a change of draft strategy, but an increase in the scouting department funding period. Using data from 5-10 years ago just doesnt apply to an argument, and using teams who have had good success in the drafting department (like Detroit and Nashville) is also a poor argument since these teams successful scouting has lead to less turn over than that the flames SD endured. We wont truly know how the flames have drafted till the revamped regimes draft classes has had time to develop and make an impact.
Well, look at it from my perspective. What else do I have to judge Tod Button by? Isn't the track record supposed to be exactly that, a record of past performance? I understand Sutter was an idiot but you can't just get a free pass forever. If Button is good at picking out talent, it's not like big Canadian kids that can hit aren't of value to NHL teams, he just never found any. And yes those players look nice and they're tracking decently but how many do you expect to actually make impacts at the NHL level? I know the Oilers have a very "deep" prospect pool right now, I'm not expecting all 8 of our top 8 prospects to make an NHL impact. For a Detroit or Nashville, 1/5 picks is a success. That is the class of the league - this is an extremely inexact science. I wouldn't suspect Calgary to have a rate increase of 5% to 25% immediately just because you changed "drafting philosophies."

So you say the philosophy changed in 2009 when Erixon was picked, there's been 4 drafts since then, let's assume a generous increase to a 15% hit rate on those 24 picks, you're still looking at 3.5, so 3 to 4 real NHL players. Of the prospects you named, Bartschi and Erixon look on track and then you will have one or two more if you are lucky and one of them is probably going to be a fourth line/bottom pair. That's just the way drafting works, not all your prospects reach their upside.

puckfan13 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:42 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.