Our big busts compare quite nicely to the rest of the NHL, given the low percentage chance of players even in the first and second round making the NHL as a long term career, I'd say we do pretty good.
The consensus opinion amongst pros is that Zadina doesn't have higher potential than BT, he has a different skill set but not a better prospect, and I don't think Formenton fits that list either given how well he's progressed since drafting him. We picked up guys like Chabot and Brown who also don't fit your 'bunt' theory, neither did Puemple.
It looks like our staff identifies players that have high hockey skill potential (all of them) and a high likelihood of making the NHL. You can have all of the potential in the world, but if that doesn't project to the NHL it's a bad first round pick, and you'd be first in line to lambaste the team for a wasted pick.
To me it looks like every fan could pick a drafting adjective 'bunt', skill, safe pick, bust, and there would be a group of players drafted that would slot into all of those categories. When people make generalizations like yours they have to leave out a bunch of names, or try and make them the exceptions. The reality is that we draft BPA and when all things are equal we seem to take the guy who has higher intangibles, but we don't have a draft board based on them, we want to pick the very best NHL possible at each pick.
You know your stuff Bondra, but I don't think it's a fair characterization to say our team goes safe and plug every year. It just isn't the case. BT is hardly a bunt, he has the potential to be one of the biggest impact players from the draft if he lives upon to his potential.