Toggle sidebar

GDT: Around the League 2023-2024 "Off Season??!! What off season??!!"

Status
Not open for further replies.
CantHaveTkachev

CantHaveTkachev

Cap Space > NHL players
Nov 30, 2004
52,387
34,442
St. OILbert, AB
TheNumber4 said:
No it doesn’t always mean better. But the results will speak to which staff is better. And our results aren’t looking great right now. So criticizing the lack of resources we have in that department is warranted when the results aren’t there.

We’ll see how the Yotes drafting goes moving forward; their GM only took the role in 2023.

Hollands been adequate. Trending towards bad.
Click to expand...
what results are you looking for? the Oilers have drafted in the top 8 once in Holland's tenure here (and yes, it's still too early to give up on Broberg)....everyone knows if you're drafting outside the top 10, the quality of NHLer goes down

plus, they've hardly have any draft picks to speak of....3 picks this year and 4 last year

the Yotes, on the other hand, had TWELVE draft picks this year and TEN in 2022 including 3 first rounders and 2 second rounders...they better be able to find NHLers with that many picks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB12, Oilhawks and harpoon
TheNumber4

TheNumber4

Registered User
Nov 11, 2011
44,760
55,768
K1984 said:
He blamed COVID for lacking in the areas he is here to build, but in reality I just don't think we had anyone at a high enough authority level in the organization that is familiar enough with modern sports management methodology to effectively implement anything.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It’s a nice and politically smart way of framing it. But any lack this organization has should be squarely at Holland’s feet. He didn’t need to bring Wright over, he could have done a job search. Same with Henderson. Not sure who hired the previous Analytics “department” but it was obviously lacking under Holland. Holland seems to think how they ran things in Detroit is good enough. Even though Detroit wasn’t even that good his last 5 years.
 
TheNumber4

TheNumber4

Registered User
Nov 11, 2011
44,760
55,768
CantHaveTkachev said:
what results are you looking for? the Oilers have drafted in the top 8 once in Holland's tenure here (and yes, it's still too early to give up on Broberg)....everyone knows if you're drafting outside the top 10, the quality of NHLer goes down

plus, they've hardly have any draft picks to speak of....3 pick this year and 4 last year

the Yotes, on the other hand, had TWELVE draft picks this year and TEN in 2022 including 3 first rounders and 2 second rounder...they better be able to find NHLers with that many picks!
Click to expand...

Better draft picks and better pro scouting would be nice. Not a fan of Wrights work. Yeh he has less top picks to work with but before Wright arrived we were getting more promising picks in the later rounds it seems.

On the pro scouting front it was a complete fail under Archie. It only got better when Archie was fired.
 

K1984

Registered User
Feb 7, 2008
15,617
17,444
TheNumber4 said:
Agreed. It’s a nice and politically smart way of framing it. But any lack this organization has should be squarely at Holland’s feet. He didn’t need to bring Wright over, he could have done a job search. Same with Henderson. Not sure who hired the previous Analytics “department” but it was obviously lacking under Holland. Holland seems to think how they ran things in Detroit is good enough. Even though Detroit wasn’t even that good his last 5 years.
Click to expand...

The frustrating thing is we actually did pretty good in the few drafts leading up to when Wright took over. It was change for no reason really.

From 15-18 we drafted all of the following players that have varying degrees of NHL success, but we were producing NHL players (I'll leave out McDavid, that one is different):

- Jones
- Bear
- Marino
- Desharnais
- Niemelainen
- Puljujarvi (a fail, but only with benefit of hindsight)
- Yamamoto
- Skinner
- Bouchard
- McLeod
- Kesselring

And guys that still have some degree of NHL potential:

- Kemp
- Rodrigue
- Brind'Amour

That is a pretty good haul over a 4 draft stretch. Then shifted gears just because. This isn't a star studded cast, but there are a few top line talents combined with a fairly constant stream of depth options that were all picked in various rounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mav3rick07 and CycloneSweep
TheNumber4

TheNumber4

Registered User
Nov 11, 2011
44,760
55,768
K1984 said:
The frustrating thing is we actually did pretty good in the few drafts leading up to when Wright took over. It was change for no reason really.

From 15-18 we drafted all of the following players that have varying degrees of NHL success, but we were producing NHL players (I'll leave out McDavid, that one is different):

- Jones
- Bear
- Marino
- Desharnais
- Niemelainen
- Puljujarvi (a fail, but only with benefit of hindsight)
- Yamamoto
- Skinner
- Bouchard
- McLeod
- Kesselring

And guys that still have some degree of NHL potential:

- Kemp
- Rodrigue
- Brind'Amour

That is a pretty good haul over a 4 draft stretch. Then shifted gears just because. This isn't a star studded cast, but there are a few top line talents combined with a fairly constant stream of depth options that were all picked in various rounds.
Click to expand...

I know. I actually looked at that recently, we were decent at drafting before bringing in Tyler Wright. Like you said, none of them were stars or anything, but there was value being brought in that could be used at the very least as trade chips. Wright was supposed to be an “upgrade” brought over from Detroit. I also looked at Wrights work in Detroit (posted in the Wright hired thread if you’re curious), and it really makes you wonder how Holland thought this was the right guy to bring over. He had ample evidence to move on from Wright. Same with Henderson, but he still brought those plugs over here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneSweep
joestevens29

joestevens29

Registered User
Apr 30, 2009
54,065
17,192
K1984 said:
The frustrating thing is we actually did pretty good in the few drafts leading up to when Wright took over. It was change for no reason really.

From 15-18 we drafted all of the following players that have varying degrees of NHL success, but we were producing NHL players (I'll leave out McDavid, that one is different):

- Jones
- Bear
- Marino
- Desharnais
- Niemelainen
- Puljujarvi (a fail, but only with benefit of hindsight)
- Yamamoto
- Skinner
- Bouchard
- McLeod
- Kesselring

And guys that still have some degree of NHL potential:

- Kemp
- Rodrigue
- Brind'Amour

That is a pretty good haul over a 4 draft stretch. Then shifted gears just because. This isn't a star studded cast, but there are a few top line talents combined with a fairly constant stream of depth options that were all picked in various rounds.
Click to expand...
You get that from Chia's resume? :laugh::laugh:
 
Fourier

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
26,753
22,424
Waterloo Ontario
Stoneman89 said:
Unfortunately, the first 2 are great but don't necessarily guarantee any type of on ice success, as we've seen during his ownership time. The last one is the key and makes the first two relevant, and he's failed badly in those up until hiring Holland and then subsequently Woodcroft.
Click to expand...
I actually disagree that the first two are negated by the third. All three are important. Look no further than the Coyotes to see what it is like to operate on a shoe string budget in a facility that is not up to snuff.
 
Stoneman89

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
28,509
24,066
K1984 said:
Sadly I think that Bob Green lead those drafts and is still somewhere in the organization, but not doing anything of relevance as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
Green's biggest claim to fame was pushing for the Griffin Reinhart trade, telling everyone that he remembered Reinhart was a pretty good player in junior when he last saw him. Trouble is, Reinhart was in his 2nd year of pro and had levelled out and even dropped against men.
 
Last edited:
Stoneman89

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
28,509
24,066
Fourier said:
I actually disagree that the first two are negated by the third. All three are important. Look no further than the Coyotes to see what it is like to operate on a shoe string budget in a facility that is not up to snuff.
Click to expand...
I never said they weren't important, but without the 3rd one being competent, what do you have? A team piling up high draft picks with a sold out rink and an enthusiastic owner spending to the limit, but still finishing near the bottom most years. We were a living example of that, not sure how anyone can argue against that, it was reality for a number of years. The Coyotes are bad at all three, so they literally have no chance at this point of getting up the ladder much.
 
Fourier

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
26,753
22,424
Waterloo Ontario
TheNumber4 said:
I know. I actually looked at that recently, we were decent at drafting before bringing in Tyler Wright. Like you said, none of them were stars or anything, but there was value being brought in that could be used at the very least as trade chips. Wright was supposed to be an “upgrade” brought over from Detroit. I also looked at Wrights work in Detroit (posted in the Wright hired thread if you’re curious), and it really makes you wonder how Holland thought this was the right guy to bring over. He had ample evidence to move on from Wright. Same with Henderson, but he still brought those plugs over here.
Click to expand...
I honestly think that there is a misunderstanding of what constitutes good drafting in the NHL. Some guy will hit on a few late picks in a couple drafts and then get a reputation for being a talent hound. A lot of it is really luck in the sense in those same drafts that same guy will have misses in earlier rounds that are dismissed because of this success. Then that late round success can't be duplicated but the rep sticks.

(See Chicago's draft history from 2000-2009).

This does not mean that there are not good talent scouts and bad ones. But one of the things that analytics might be able to do is to give a more accurate picture of who is actually good and who just got lucky.

Stoneman89 said:
I never said they weren't important, but without the 3rd one being competent, what do you have? A team piling up high draft picks with a sold out rink and an enthusiastic owner spending to the limit, but still finishing near the bottom most years. We were a living example of that, not sure how anyone can argue against that, it was reality for a number of years. The Coyotes are bad at all three, so they literally have no chance at this point of getting up the ladder much.
Click to expand...
The third is certainly the most visible of the three conditions I mentioned and it is crucial to team success. But without the first two the franchise is not even in the city anymore.
 
Stoneman89

Stoneman89

Registered User
Feb 8, 2008
28,509
24,066
Fourier said:
I honestly think that there is a misunderstanding of what constitutes good drafting in the NHL. Some guy will hit on a few late picks in a couple drafts and then get a reputation for being a talent hound. A lot of it is really luck in the sense in those same drafts that same guy will have misses in earlier rounds that are dismissed because of this success. Then that late round success can't be duplicated but the rep sticks.

(See Chicago's draft history from 2000-2009).

This does not mean that there are not good talent scouts and bad ones. But one of the things that analytics might be able to do is to give a more accurate picture of who is actually good and who just got lucky.


The third is certainly the most visible of the three conditions I mentioned and it is crucial to team success. But without the first two the franchise is not even in the city anymore.
Click to expand...
Once again, not speaking to viability or the franchise being in a city or not, or what is most important or not. Just that you can hit a homerun in the first 2 and not be considered a completely successful franchise without the 3rd. Unless you're the one collecting the money coming in I suppose. Sorry, I'll have to drop out of this conversation, as it seems we're going around in some kind of circle now, and I'm feeling dizzy.:D
 
Fourier

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
26,753
22,424
Waterloo Ontario
Stoneman89 said:
Once again, not speaking to viability or the franchise being in a city or not. Just the on ice success of it. Sorry, I'll have to drop out of this conversation, as it seems we're going around in some kind of circle now, and I'm feeling dizzy.:D
Click to expand...
No problem. Your point is certainly very reasonable.
 
McShogun99

McShogun99

Registered User
Aug 30, 2009
18,857
15,552
Edmonton
TheNumber4 said:
Better draft picks and better pro scouting would be nice. Not a fan of Wrights work. Yeh he has less top picks to work with but before Wright arrived we were getting more promising picks in the later rounds it seems.

On the pro scouting front it was a complete fail under Archie. It only got better when Archie was fired.
Click to expand...
I wanted Wright gone after the team traded down to gift Wallstedt to Minnesota.
 
Mav3rick07

Mav3rick07

Registered User
Jul 28, 2007
11,858
11,445
Flames.png


It was a fairly dirty hit he took, too. As much as I hate the Flames, I hate seeing those types of hits in pre-season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RegDunlop
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom
X