wallstreetamigo Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 I have really seen it all when people suggest that the canucks have drafted as well as the hawks and wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 The canucks core is built around a 2nd and 3rd overall pick and a 23rd overall pick. You are arguingvthat the canucks have draftedcas well as the hawks and wings in the past 10 years? And not needing players to fill roles is the worst excuse for the canucks drafting record I have ever seen. Drafting good players consistently helps in many ways.....like giving your team valuable assets to trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 "Five years ago we came in here and reset this organization." Please..... keeping the incumbent coach and letting an aging captain walk is not "resetting the organization". Keenan reset the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 I have really seen it all when people suggest that the canucks have drafted as well as the hawks and wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Wait a minute.... It seems to me you are laying blame on our current GM all the while glorifying Chicago's late round picks. What I showed was since MG was hired Chicago hasn't been any screaming hell at late picks themselves. So you go back a decade and longer for Chicago examples long before MG was ever hired. Some not really what you'd call big successes either. Should we not then wait a decade to examine MG's drafting as some of his late picks may yet pay off? I'm not saying our drafting has been fantastic. But I think the drafting of other teams is often exaggerated. For example, over the past six years Detroit hasn't drafted a single player to play an entire season. Their best is 3rd round from 2007 Andersson who has played a whopping 43 games. Did they get lucky with Datsyuk and Zetterberg? You bet. But the year Zetterberg was drafted their 4th, 5th and 6th were all busts (they didn't have any higher picks that year). Zetterberg was a lucky 7th round pick. And Datsyuk in the 6th round would also have to be considered a lucky pick when their two 2nd's, 3rd, 4th, 5th and other 6th that year were also all busts. There is some luck involved in drafting. Particularly in the later rounds. You can say, "what a pick" getting Holmstrom was in the 10th round in 94 but in 95, 96, and 97 Detroit went 0 for 27 on their draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bananas Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Let's get one this out front here: Gillis was trying to save his skin with that season-ending press conference, plain and simple. That's why you heard him making promises about resetting the team, defending the moves he has made, and deflecting blame in any number of directions when it comes to why we didn't achieve success this year, or in years past. He is trying to paint a picture in which he has done everything in his power to make us a winner, and circumstance (lockout, injuries, etc.) have kept us from achieving this goal. When it comes to an actual rest, whether it's MG or a new GM, what needs to be reset is the attitude, culture, and comfort level of these players, coaches, and management. - The players, GM, and media all feel so comfortable with AV, because he is a nice guy and pleasant to deal with. - The team is pampered compared to others around the league, and have every necessity at their disposal and extra luxuries. The team has become complacent, and in their complacency, they have been taken advantage of by teams like San Jose and L.A., who have come to kick the door down. The players (aside from Kesler, apparently) do not want the boat to be rocked and for a new regime to change the environment. Well, I hope that FAQ is ensuring that the environment does change, whether that's with the ousting of both MG and AV, or just AV and a swift kick in the pants to MG, reminding him what's at stake here and that his window for creativity and experiment is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 I am not blaming gillis for the previous drafting decisions at all. He did keep the same scouting staff though so it is pretty obvious he endorses their decision making skill. God knows why but whatever. Zetterberg etc were not lucky picks so much as they were developed properly much like chi has done. Drafting is certainly some part luck but not all luck as many canucks fans seem to say to justify our drafting record. I am not really surprised at detroits current usage of their prospects and that not many have played full time. They alwalways leave their guys for a long time. Gillis is trying to emulate that for sure but the canucks are not all that good at developing later picks. Drafting good ones to start with certainly helps though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 You used 40 nhl games in your example so I stuck with that. Take Porter out and it makes no difference at all. The hawks still slaughter the canuckd in regards to building their team through drafting. What is your opinion if the quality of the other list of players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 So Detroit developed Datsyuk properly by leaving him in Russia and never having him in their system here. And then they developed Zetterberg properly by leaving him in Europe and his never playing a game in their system. So what you're saying is the proper way to develop draft picks is not have them in your own system at all. So what was their problem from 95 to 97 when they went 0 for 27? Maybe they tried using their own farm system to develop those guys which would explain not bringing Datsyuk and Zetterberg over from the 98 and 99 drafts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Some good points there - and the Ballard deal was actually a conditional pick - Vancouver agreed to send their 2010 first because the player they wanted with that pick had been selected - they weren't looking for Howden - my guess is that the guy they wanted went 19th or 22nd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 15, 2013 Share Posted May 15, 2013 Rumoured to be Tinordi, but they may have had their eye on other picks a little higher as well. I doubt it would have been Kevin Hayes, Chicago's 1st rounder that year. It certainly wasn't any of the players the Blackhawks drafted with their four 2nd round picks that year either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Yeah, Bjugstad at 19 and Tinordi at 22 make sense - Howden, yet another left wing, at 25th, was not exactly what the organization needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Interesting how the point about Howden leads back to a year where Chicago's drafting was not particularly good. 5 picks in the first two rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 I only used 40 so Saad would be on the list as his 48 games is pretty good for a 2011 2nd round pick. Although I'm not sold that 2nd round picks should be included as "late round" picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Yeah, if you go back to 2008, the equivalent of Gillis' tenure here, Chicago's drafting isn't terribly impressive... Saad Shaw Kruger Not a whole lot to envy there. 2007 they took Billy Sweatt in the 2nd round! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Saad and Shaw especially are way better than the full time nhl players the canucks have developed in that time though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 So 2nd round picks are equivalent to say top 5 overall picks? Because my original reason for bringing up chicagos drafting recordbin thefirst place was to refute the point made that they only built by tanking for a decade. Their drafting after the first round for that decade clearly debunks that theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 This is redundant. Five years ago the NHL looked headed in the direction of the new rules - skill and speed and lack of tolerance of obstruction and garbage hockey. Gillis sought mobile defenseman like Hamhius and Ballard and didn't see the need to build a forward core of giants. Five years later - reversion to dead puck era, arguably with the NHL planting it's head in the sand, but too consistent to ignore.. Reset means looking at the trend realistically as one that has taken root, and changing course accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 So 2nd round picks are equivalent to say top 5 overall picks? Because my original reason for bringing up chicagos drafting recordbin thefirst place was to refute the point made that they only built by tanking for a decade. Their drafting after the first round for that decade clearly debunks that theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 If you are reduced to looking for trends..................you are already washed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.