2015-16 San Antonio Rampage (AHL) and Ft Wayne Komets (ECHL) Part II

[StayAtHomeAv]

Nobody wants me to get into it but the bottom line is this especially isn't true. You don't give a damn about the AHL team winning or losing so how can you say this? People can talk to me and justify by saying how worthless Bleackley is and while it's true the org might have decided that, I believe with every fiber of my being that this is not true and was not the right decision. I know what Ive seen in his game, I know the state the AHL team is in and will be in and if they could have used a player like him. I don't like what it says about their organizational and development philosophies, how they evaluate prospects. You don't decide 18 months after a draft a first round pick is worthless, period. It's extremely short sighted, it's a mistake. It goes beyond just using an asset in a trade, many people see that side of it, which is fine they can evaluate it how they want through the lense of their priorities but as someone who cares about the system and the pipeline and results at every level it's wrong. It's funny to me that so many people think getting rid of Pracey just eradicated the drafting problem, like he's the only guy who has any input. The whole scouting staff is still there, the WHL guy who probably saw Bleackley more the last few years than his own children is still there, using the same criteria he used to evaluate him on subsequent drafts. If anyone thinks the pick itself was the problem, this should be alarming to you. What's alarming to me is an organization with a depth and talent problem just so casually throws away and writes off young assets, like they've earned any sort of right to be so arrogant about it. If it's any org that needs to cultivate anything they can get their hands on its this one.



Whatever random European or AHL vet they find, I don't think so.

I honestly believe there is more to it than just his game. I'm guessing they looked at him as the RoR replacement, both on and off the ice. But then he came in that first offseason out of shape. And then this past year he was stripped of his C.

 

[chet1926]

Nobody wants me to get into it but the bottom line is this especially isn't true. You don't give a damn about the AHL team winning or losing so how can you say this? People can talk to me and justify by saying how worthless Bleackley is and while it's true the org might have decided that, I believe with every fiber of my being that this is not true and was not the right decision. I know what Ive seen in his game, I know the state the AHL team is in and will be in and if they could have used a player like him. I don't like what it says about their organizational and development philosophies, how they evaluate prospects. You don't decide 18 months after a draft a first round pick is worthless, period. It's extremely short sighted, it's a mistake. It goes beyond just using an asset in a trade, many people see that side of it, which is fine they can evaluate it how they want through the lense of their priorities but as someone who cares about the system and the pipeline and results at every level it's wrong. It's funny to me that so many people think getting rid of Pracey just eradicated the drafting problem, like he's the only guy who has any input. The whole scouting staff is still there, the WHL guy who probably saw Bleackley more the last few years than his own children is still there, using the same criteria he used to evaluate him on subsequent drafts. If anyone thinks the pick itself was the problem, this should be alarming to you. What's alarming to me is an organization with a depth and talent problem just so casually throws away and writes off young assets, like they've earned any sort of right to be so arrogant about it. If it's any org that needs to cultivate anything they can get their hands on its this one.

Ok first of all just because you were picked in the first round doesn't mean you were a good pick or even picked in the proper round. Bleackley was ranked in the mid 30s by most publications. The Avs reached on him, plain and simple. He should never have been a first round pick. It was a mistake. Just like it was a mistake to take Wood in the 3rd when he was projected as a 4th/5th round guy. Look at Mitchell Heard as a great example of this. Drafted 2nd round, was a projected 4th/5th round pick. It was a mistake. The type of mistake you just can't have.

Unfortunately Rick Pracey and company did this a lot of "character" guys with less skill, guys like Bleackley. I agree that him being gone isn't going to magically change our drafting. But you don't know how much influence Pracey had when it came to making the final decision on guys. The Avs philosophy was clearly different last year than the past with Pracey. We didn't make any drastic reaches except for maybe Greer, but somebody obviously really did their homework on that guy.

My second point to you is you are just assuming it is poor asset management because we aren't going to re-sign Boedker. What happens when we do re-sign him? Then you turned two guys you weren't going to sign into a top 6 NHL winger. I'd call that great asset management.

You're more than welcome to have your opinions on Bleackley and Wood and what kind of players they are going to be and how useful they could have been, just as much as I'm entitled to my opinions on them. Like I've mentioned before I could care less what the record is in San Antonio, just as long as the guys down there are getting coached well and developing their skill set. Bleakley and Wood were not going to make or break this AHL season. They weren't key cogs in a championship run. Both will be replaced by veterans or Euro signings, which is perfectly fine with me because as I said as long as our prospects that are there are getting well coached that is all we can hope for in an AHL team.

 

[cgf]

Kyle Wood was a great pick, and trading him was dumb. No matter how you want to spin it.

 

[tigervixxxen]

I'm not even talking about AHL vets or Euros... players like Stephen Harper who can step right into a middle 6 AHL center role and has bottom 6 potential. Or Greg Betzold, Michael Joly, or Parker Bowles. There are options to get a couple players like that, that have similar upside. Bleacks is a better prospect than any of them, but the difference isn't all that great.



And it is a valid concern, but there have been steps in the right direction... they are just not coming as fast as people like. With the old Avs... Z, Bigras, nor Rantanen would have touched AHL ice and would have been thrown to the wolves. All 3 played a majority of their time down in the AHL. Even if Compher gets fast tracked (that is okay and deserved on his end), that doesn't mean they don't care about the AHL club... it means they care about the NHL first. Building a pipeline also means making the NHL roster better. Once the NHL roster has true depth, then the AHL roster will gain depth. The Avs are not going to believe in making the AHL roster better before the NHL roster... you can disagree with that philosophy, but that isn't how this organization is going to operate (nor 25+ other NHL organizations). Once the NHL roster has a solid top 9/top 4, then the transitions that were immediate before, 1 year now, will start becoming 2 years and then maybe 3.

Still if there is a player that is going to be a top 6/top 4 sort... they are not going to stick in the AHL long-term. That just doesn't happen most anywhere. Top end talent always gets expedited and rarely spends more than a season or two in the AHL.

I see the big praise for Tampa's system (and for good reason) and people clamoring to be like them... look at how much AHL time their players spent... Johnson - 2 seasons, Kucherov - 17 games, Palat - 2 seasons, Killorn - half season, Namestnikov - 2.5 seasons, Brown - little over 1 season, Sustr - 20 games, Paquette - 1 season. They don't hold their prospects in the AHL nearly as long as people think... mostly less than 2 seasons.

If we get Harper or the like that will help but hasn't happened yet.

I certainly don't have issue with the top talent being fast tracked. I want to see that talent in the NHL sooner than later. I'm just saying when Z, Bigras, Rantanen are given as examples of why the pipeline strong it's a bit of a mirage.

 

[tigervixxxen]

Ok first of all just because you were picked in the first round doesn't mean you were a good pick or even picked in the proper round. Bleackley was ranked in the mid 30s by most publications. The Avs reached on him, plain and simple. He should never have been a first round pick. It was a mistake. Just like it was a mistake to take Wood in the 3rd when he was projected as a 4th/5th round guy. Look at Mitchell Heard as a great example of this. Drafted 2nd round, was a projected 4th/5th round pick. It was a mistake. The type of mistake you just can't have.

Unfortunately Rick Pracey and company did this a lot of "character" guys with less skill, guys like Bleackley. I agree that him being gone isn't going to magically change our drafting. But you don't know how much influence Pracey had when it came to making the final decision on guys. The Avs philosophy was clearly different last year than the past with Pracey. We didn't make any drastic reaches except for maybe Greer, but somebody obviously really did their homework on that guy.

My second point to you is you are just assuming it is poor asset management because we aren't going to re-sign Boedker. What happens when we do re-sign him? Then you turned two guys you weren't going to sign into a top 6 NHL winger. I'd call that great asset management.

You're more than welcome to have your opinions on Bleackley and Wood and what kind of players they are going to be and how useful they could have been, just as much as I'm entitled to my opinions on them. Like I've mentioned before I could care less what the record is in San Antonio, just as long as the guys down there are getting coached well and developing their skill set. Bleakley and Wood were not going to make or break this AHL season. They weren't key cogs in a championship run. Both will be replaced by veterans or Euro signings, which is perfectly fine with me because as I said as long as our prospects that are there are getting well coached that is all we can hope for in an AHL team.

Look again, Bleackley was not a reach in the first round and was expected to go right around where he was picked.

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2014-nhl-draft-prospect-rankings/

Heard was a double overager, there is no way his situation is comparable. Wood was a riskier pick but by the end of the third picks are going to be all over the place.

Draft pedigree lessens with each year but not even 2 years out of a draft the org isn't going to find a guy with the same upside at his age. If the shoe was on the other foot and another org dumped their first round forward and we could potentially get him for a low pick we'd be all over that. Everyone was perfectly happy to give Grigo a second chance with his pedigree. It's not about the trade, it's about the org deciding a 19 year old was worthless not even 2 years after all sitting around the table deciding he was their top choice in a draft. That's a concern.

 

[henchman21]

Kyle Wood was a great pick, and trading him was dumb. No matter how you want to spin it.

I wouldn't call trading Wood dumb, the Avs had to spend to get Boedker... he wasn't coming in for free at the deadline. Wood was just a part of that cost. I agree that Wood was a great pick.

If we get Harper or the like that will help but hasn't happened yet.

I certainly don't have issue with the top talent being fast tracked. I want to see that talent in the NHL sooner than later. I'm just saying when Z, Bigras, Rantanen are given as examples of why the pipeline strong it's a bit of a mirage.

Yet is the key word there. The Avs are working on some things, most of which will never reach the public. They are not sitting on their hands in that area, not at all.

I'm saying those 3 spending the time they did in the AHL shows a change in philosophy and movement towards more development and more emphasis on the AHL team. These things don't happen over night, and the complete lack of depth on the NHL team will cause players to be fast-tracked. Once the Avs build that up, you'll see more of the 2 year sort of players in the AHL... we have already seen the transition to 1 year.

It's not about the trade, it's about the org deciding a 19 year old was worthless not even 2 years after all sitting around the table deciding he was their top choice in a draft. That's a concern.

They didn't think he was worthless, but that a 2nd round pick was worth more than Bleackley (Arizona agrees BTW). I agree it is absolutely a concern, but they have taken at very least some measures to correct it. It remains to be seen if it works.

 

[StayAtHomeAv]

Kyle Wood was a great pick, and trading him was dumb. No matter how you want to spin it.

If we re-sign Boedker for a decent amount then it would have been worth it. But, yeah, looking like a bad trade right now.

As for Wood being a bad pick in the 3rd, he has shown that he probably should have went even higher.

 

[chet1926]

Look again, Bleackley was not a reach in the first round and was expected to go right around where he was picked.

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2014-nhl-draft-prospect-rankings/

Heard was a double overager, there is no way his situation is comparable. Wood was a riskier pick but by the end of the third picks are going to be all over the place.

Draft pedigree lessens with each year but not even 2 years out of a draft the org isn't going to find a guy with the same upside at his age. If the shoe was on the other foot and another org dumped their first round forward and we could potentially get him for a low pick we'd be all over that. Everyone was perfectly happy to give Grigo a second chance with his pedigree. It's not about the trade, it's about the org deciding a 19 year old was worthless not even 2 years after all sitting around the table deciding he was their top choice in a draft. That's a concern.

I remember Bleackley being a little lower for some reason, but most lists had him in the 25-30 range, except for one guy who randomly had him at 15, but I can't take his list seriously when he had Larkin, Milano, Kapanen all below Bleackley.

My problem with your assessment is that none of us know what went into the Bleackley pick. We really have no idea how they ended up with Bleackley. In my opinion, it's looking more and more like it was a Pracey decision that Roy and Sakic weren't huge on. And if that is the case the player should never have been drafted by the organization. It's Roy and Sakic's fault for agreeing to draft the kid if they weren't big on him to begin with. It was a mistake on everyone's part and Roy/Sakic should have just stood up to Pracey at the draft and said no we aren't drafting him. It was a mistake made by two very green guys that were just trying to figure out how to run an organization. They have to learn from the mistake and move on.

These are the kind of errors that need to be addressed. If Sakic/Roy want to be part of the draft process, and don't trust our head scouts to make a 100% decision, then they need to be part of the decision making. Stop drafting players you aren't big on in the first place. **** if anything I trust Roy/Sakic on talent evaluation more than pro scouts. What better evaluators than two guys that are hall of famers. Obviously it can't fall all on Sakic and Roy or what would be the point of having scouts. There has to be a happy median where both management and scouts work together to get players that everyone is high on.

 

[tigervixxxen]

Yes that is one of the root problems where they drafted guys they don't believe in. Especially with a high pick that should not happen. And yes they know the game a lot better than most of the people on the planet but that doesn't mean they are the best at evaluating talent. That's not their job, that's what they hire people for to do that and provide them information. I will have to dig and find the radio interview where Riy said he didn't think Pickard was a NHL goalie after his first camp with Roy. Everyone makes mistakes, it's human. I get that there is bad picks, decisions, etc but the idea is to minimize that as much as possible. This org doesn't have a lot if room for error and they can't really afford to give up on guys they put a high investment in with still a lot of time and unknown ahead of them.

 

[Bubba Thudd]

Maybe Army gets demoted/promoted to SA head coach, and we get someone new (better) with the Avs. Maybe?

 

[Coach Nate]

Really unoriginal I know, but I'm hoping it's Ladoceur. I firmly believe he was calling the shots the last month of the season.

 

[cgf]

Really unoriginal I know, but I'm hoping it's Ladoceur. I firmly believe he was calling the shots the last month of the season.

That would make sense and I would be fine with it. There's bigger names who are probably better for the job, and I'd like to see the team bring in an outsider for the job; but promoting him seems like a reasonable decision and the type of move we'd make.

 

[tigervixxxen]

Really unoriginal I know, but I'm hoping it's Ladoceur. I firmly believe he was calling the shots the last month of the season.

It's a strong possibility. They just said it was Dean relieved of his duties, not the whole staff. And rarely do they bring anyone in from the outside.

I'm ready to see them bring someone in from the Q. Unless they **** up the pipeline even more they should be adding in some top talent from the Q in the following year, having a coach that they could jive with right off the bat might be helpful. I believe whoever they pick is going to be a strong bet as the successor to Roy, (or if they replace Tim Army with someone). They need to get some talent and ambition at the position, not just status quo.

 

[cgf]

For someone so creative and innovative, Pep's conservatism in big matches never ceases to amaze me. He's such a coward sometimes.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Personally, I never liked nor wanted the Bleackley pick. However this entire forum voted for him over Larkin, so I think we kind of reap what we sow in that regard. Not to mention I really wanted Siemens, so we're not all perfect.

That being said, the problem with the pick wasn't that he was a reach, it was that they were drafting a player that by all accounts had already peaked. And just about everyone in the world knew it. He was pegged as a 3rd line center from day one. You can't draft a player in the 1st round whose upside is a 3rd line center, it's a complete and utter waste.

It's a shame we finished so high that year, I loved it at the time. But 14-23 resulted in some really good prospects. I suppose McCann, Pastrnak, Scherbak, Goldobin, Ho-Sang and Kempe (all taken after Bleacks) are no slouches either.

 

[The Mars Volchenkov]

Voted for Bleackley over Larkin? Was Larkin ever even considered to drop anywhere close to our pick?

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

For someone so creative and innovative, Pep's conservatism in big matches never ceases to amaze me. He's such a coward sometimes.

Maybe, he should coach the AHL team?

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Voted for Bleackley over Larkin? Was Larkin ever even considered to drop anywhere close to our pick?

Not realistically, but he was available on the forum vote we had. It was some kind of mock draft between fanbases if I remember. I say that because I remember posting specifically about it in that thread.

Alright, found it. Although, I remembered it being a bit more lopsided than it was. Still, 50/50 is far too close whether from hindsight or not.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1692379

 

[S E P H]

Kyle Wood was a great pick, and trading him was dumb. No matter how you want to spin it.

I think Chet is undervaluing Wood, he was a good pick, but he won't become the second coming of Parayko (no it was not dumb to trade him). Not only that, but he still requires a lot of work like a rebuilding Arizona club can deal with that Avs can't. Getting Boedker back for Wood was a successful trade, sometimes you gotta give up some stuff for good stuff. That's how I see it, Wood was good enough to get a top 6 forward in a trade. Out of the defenders he was the most expandable with some value.

 

[cgf]

Maybe, he should coach the AHL team?

As long as he didn't drive all of those players into the ground it might work...

 

[henchman21]

I think Chet is undervaluing Wood, he was a good pick, but he won't become the second coming of Parayko (no it was not dumb to trade him). Not only that, but he still requires a lot of work like a rebuilding Arizona club can deal with that Avs can't. Getting Boedker back for Wood was a successful trade, sometimes you gotta give up some stuff for good stuff. That's how I see it, Wood was good enough to get a top 6 forward in a trade. Out of the defenders he was the most expandable with some value.

This... Meloche, Bigras, or Zadorov were complete non-starters. I doubt Arizona wanted much to do with Mironov... so it was basically Wood left.

 

[ABasin]

Wood is the only player they tossed that was in the plans. They paid a fair price for Boedker and we don't know if it was for 20 games at this point (entirely possible).

My money is bet on him not coming back. Not really sure I want him back, honestly. He really wasn't anything special.

Point is though, the Avs should not have been buyers at the deadline.

Bleacks can be replaced in the system with a smart signing or two this summer.

Even if Bleackley was a bombed pick, he is still another 2nd round draft pick wasted.

 

[ABasin]

I see the big praise for Tampa's system (and for good reason) and people clamoring to be like them...

I was just quoting Patrick Roy. He's the one who cited Tampa originally when talking about what he wanted Colorado's development system to look like.

 

[tigervixxxen]

Personally, I never liked nor wanted the Bleackley pick. However this entire forum voted for him over Larkin, so I think we kind of reap what we sow in that regard. Not to mention I really wanted Siemens, so we're not all perfect.

That being said, the problem with the pick wasn't that he was a reach, it was that they were drafting a player that by all accounts had already peaked. And just about everyone in the world knew it. He was pegged as a 3rd line center from day one. You can't draft a player in the 1st round whose upside is a 3rd line center, it's a complete and utter waste.

It's a shame we finished so high that year, I loved it at the time. But 14-23 resulted in some really good prospects. I suppose McCann, Pastrnak, Scherbak, Goldobin, Ho-Sang and Kempe (all taken after Bleacks) are no slouches either.

It's funny, McCann was listed as a disappointment by several in the draft+2 thread on the prospects board, Scherbak too. The Europeans, it's nice that they were afforded the opportunity to play in the AHL and play pro in their +1 and +2 years.

This is now the issue with folks wanting us to draft McLeod, a defensive center with upside concerns. Yet everyone loves his motor and his compete. Sound familiar?

A lot of this is about perception, it colors a lot on our viewpoints for sure.

BTW, I know we need a new thread for this. Give me a chance to put something together

 

[henchman21]

My money is bet on him not coming back. Not really sure I want him back, honestly. He really wasn't anything special.

Point is though, the Avs should not have been buyers at the deadline.



Even if Bleackley was a bombed pick, he is still another 2nd round draft pick wasted.

I don't blame them for being buyers at all... they had a good chance at the playoffs. They just bombed at the end. This core needs to start making the playoffs if they are ever going to round into anything. The front office needs to find ways to help them... Matthias and Boedker was doing exactly that.

I was just quoting Patrick Roy. He's the one who cited Tampa originally when talking about what he wanted Colorado's development system to look like.

I think they do, but it isn't going to happen overnight. It took Tampa a while to build up their system (they had a decent base setup) and the talk of them keeping a bunch of prospects in the AHL and winning a ton just isn't the reality of what they have done. They had one fantastic season, but the others have mostly been not in the playoffs or lost in round 1. Yzerman has also thrown away a lot of picks in trades too.

The biggest trick that Tampa has used to their advantage better than anybody else... ELC UFAs. Sustr, Johnson, Brown, and Conacher have had lasting impacts on that organization.