@bert if the sens totally muck up these two picks... if stutzle and sanderson just totally bomb or if Raymond rossi drysdale whoever turn out be simply the better players... CLEARLY. will that be a mistake on sens part. will that be just my expectations were too high? what constitutes an error in scouting is i guess my question. what would it take for anyone to be like "alright the scouts got that one horribly wrong"
(f***ing disclaimer for anyone: I AM NOT SAYING THOSE PLAYERS ARE OR WILL BE BETTER THAN STUTZLE OR SANDERSON
Just curious & this is a general question for everyone. What if those particular players that people wanted that we did not draft do end up being better individually & the players we drafted end up with less points? However, Ottawa's team as a whole improves with the players they drafted & become one of the best team's in the NHL because of it? Who wins & loses in that scenario when the other players we did not draft have more pts, but the players Ottawa did draft make the team better because the players they drafted fit better into this system & team? Of course, this remains to be seen, it's all hypothetical at this point. I think Drysdale will end up much more offensively productive than Sanderson, but IMO Sanderson will make Ottawa's team better with his complete 200' game.
Let's use Washington & OV as an example. OV was & has been a dynamic player for yrs putting up tons of pts & scoring lots of goals. However, it wasn't until Trotz came along that he bought into the team concept & lo & behold (does anyone say that anymore) they win a cup because the best player on the team bought into the team concept & the team as a whole won the SC because of it. The next yr when the new GM did not re-sign Trotz, Wash again lost in the playoffs & seem to be on their way down.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, Trotz & the NYI, his new team, begin to climb their way up the standings. Is it because he is a great coach or is it because he can get the star players to buy into a winning team concept & places the right players in positions to succeed? Do you draft the players who can produce the most pts but are not team players or players who can fit better into the team concept creating team success over individual success? Individual success can get you a bigger contract while a team's success can win you a SC. It's not only interesting to debate but could it also be a part of team strategy when discussing who exactly is the BPA? Whether a player who can produce a lot of pts is more important/valuable than a player's overall game & which player might fit better into what a team is building? OV can outscore Stone, but Stone can make everyone around him better & potentially make the team better because of it.