2010 again?
Gudbranson was bust in terms of him getting picked that high. He was a miss. He shouldnt have been taken that high, but he has still, and is still, playing games. The fact that he is still playing games doesnt make the pick a fail.
The fact that Gudbranson was traded by another GM doesnt automatically make draft a failure. I am sure MANY looked back at the Dadonov pick as a waste before this year as he didnt play that many games for the team.
****, take a look at the Canadiens drafting history. you can count on one hand how many players actually ended up playing a *respectable* number of games.
Just because you do not get the best player in the draft, which is decided YEARS after a draft has taken place, does not mean you failed at that draft. That is just not how you are supposed to look at drafts. This is not a realistic outlook. The % of players picked that actually stay in the league is extremely low. Players getting traded shouldnt change that.
Hell, GM's MAY know that a goalie is going to be a franchise #1...but they STILL wouldnt spend an early pick, even a 2nd, on them because they wont reap the fruits of that pick till years and years later when they may not even be the GM of said team. That's just the reality of drafting.
Gudbranson was a *MISS*. Many teams miss at a drafting position. But the fact that these players actually play means the GM didnt fail.
Does that mean that every team that didnt draft Lundqvist failed at that draft? Hell no. They just didnt Win the draft.
if you really want to look at whether he failed at that draft, you have to see ALL the picks regardless if they got traded or not. A player not wanting to play for a team can hardly be blamed on the GM. Hell, Ill blame the the organization for being the way it was.
Gudbranson, Bjugstad, Petrovic, Donskoi, Hyman. thats 5 player that have played over 100 games. Brickley is still playing and will likely break that marker. That's 6 players. That is exceeding draft expectations by a WIDE margin.