OT: The Chevy GM Poll

[Gm0ney]

Ahh yes the good old quantity over quality argument using > 200 games played:

2000 - Came out with zero NHL players. Brilliant use of assets by them here.

2001 - Came out with 2 NHL players a middle of the road 2nd line player and an average starting goalie.

2002 - 3 NHL players. Keith being a stud but the other two being ok players.

2003 - 4 players with Crawford, Seabrook and Buff turning into impact players.

2004 - 4 players including Barker who busted. Two decent players and one depth piece.

2005 - 2 players. Skille massive disappointment for a top 10 pick and Haljmarson who saved that draft.

Despite acquiring all those picks they didn't exactly make the best use of their draft selections especially in the first round other than 2003.

I believe the point is that the more tickets you have in the bag, the better your odds of winning the silent auction prize.

 

[surixon]

I believe the point is that the more tickets you have in the bag, the better your odds of winning the silent auction prize.

I get the point but while they walked the walk with getting picks, they where poor at the talent evaluation and the development aspect which is more important. They ended up wasting assets including multiple high picks.

 

[Gm0ney]

I get the point but while they walked the walk with getting picks, they where poor at the talent evaluation and the development aspect which is more important. They ended up wasting assets including multiple high picks.

But if the Jets are better at talent evaluation than average, it should be even more effective to accumulate picks...

Though I don't think the Jets are really that much better than average at talent evaluation. Good enough that they didn't blow any high picks, but not so good as to regularly unearth any true 2nd-7th round gems. I think that's where you need the scatter-gun approach.

 

[pucka lucka]

But if the Jets are better at talent evaluation than average, it should be even more effective to accumulate picks...

Though I don't think the Jets are really that much better than average at talent evaluation. Good enough that they didn't blow any high picks, but not so good as to regularly unearth any true 2nd-7th round gems. I think that's where you need the scatter-gun approach.

You really don't have to play the god of the gaps game do you?

By no measure is the org performing well. I don't understand the benefit in attempting to demonstrate they are. 6 years of no success with zero significant changes signifies incompetence or indifference. take your pick.

 

[Whileee]

I believe the point is that the more tickets you have in the bag, the better your odds of winning the silent auction prize.

A bunch of those extra "tickets" were in the 7th, 8th and 9th rounds.

 

[pucka lucka]

A bunch of those extra "tickets" were in the 7th, 8th and 9th rounds.

Oh so they should have just passed on them then? gave them to charity?

I wonder if there have ever been any good 7th round draft picks...

 

[surixon]

I do actually and that is just a small example. Obviously you've never been in any kind of management position so you might not know how toxic it is to have someone patrol everything you do.

So are you telling me that as a manager you should have carte Blanche to do whatever you like with no checks and balances?

I think your extrapolating way more out of Chipman's interview then what was there.

 

[Whileee]

Oh so they should have just passed on them then? gave them to charity?

I wonder if there have ever been any good 7th round draft picks...

How many 7th round picks would you give up for a 1st rounder?

How many 9th round picks would you give up for a 2nd round pick?

 

[Weezeric]

How many 7th round picks would you give up for a 1st rounder?

How many 9th round picks would you give up for a 2nd round pick?

Chevys acquired, what? 2 extra 1st rounders? That's gotta be worth like 30 picks in the 7th round!!

 

[CaptainChef]

Oh so they should have just passed on them then? gave them to charity?

I wonder if there have ever been any good 7th round draft picks...

You mean like Luc Robitialle (9th), Fleury (8th), Zetterberg or Gilmour (7th), Datzuk or Brett Hull (6th)

http://thehockeywriters.com/the-best-late-round-nhl-draft-picks/

 

[ps241]

Ahh yes the good old quantity over quality argument using > 200 games played:

2000 - Came out with zero NHL players. Brilliant use of assets by them here.

2001 - Came out with 2 NHL players a middle of the road 2nd line player and an average starting goalie.

2002 - 3 NHL players. Keith being a stud but the other two being ok players.

2003 - 4 players with Crawford, Seabrook and Buff turning into impact players.

2004 - 4 players including Barker who busted. Two decent players and one depth piece.

2005 - 2 players. Skille massive disappointment for a top 10 pick and Haljmarson who saved that draft.

Despite acquiring all those picks they didn't exactly make the best use of their draft selections especially in the first round other than 2003.

There best 2 drafts where funny enough the ones they had the least amount of picks in.

The bolded numbers are not bad though despite their batting average. If anything your point about not making the most of it only supports the fact they are lucky they had the quantity (and later quality) because it seems like they had a lack of scouting talent so they needed all those picks to build their core.

Drafting is a crap shoot and the more irons you have in the fire the better.

 

[JetsFan815]

However, I think you also need to look at the level of picks. I've previously shown that the total value of picks acquired by the Jets has been substantial (1st and 2nd round). Also, I think it would be reasonable to add Armia, Dano and Lemieux to the list of acquisitions. I am quite sure that the Jets could have gotten multiple picks insanother 1st tead of them, but instead preferred to acquire prospects that they had high regard for.

Ps241 is comparing draft picks. You can't just throw in Armia, Dano, Lemieux on the Jets side as then it's no longer an apples to apples comparison. If you wanna include those guys you also have to include on the Hawks' side guys like Ladd and Frolik two high 1st round prospects acquired by the hawks, and Niemi a 1st round talent signed as a free agent out of Europe, and Sharp another 1st round level talent. That's just off the top of my head, I am sure the list goes on. Including acquired assets is not something you wanna talk about if you are trying to favorably compare jets management to the hawks'

 

[Guffman]

It's a year of development but we look worse now
Usually when you're developing you get better(?)

Eventually, you get better. There are obviously growing pains when you inject so much youth in the lineup.

 

[Hunter368]

You mean like Luc Robitialle (9th), Fleury (8th), Zetterberg or Gilmour (7th), Datzuk or Brett Hull (6th)

http://thehockeywriters.com/the-best-late-round-nhl-draft-picks/

I'll add our own Big Buff was a 8th Rd pick himself.

 

[Whileee]

Ps241 is comparing draft picks. You can't just throw in Armia, Dano, Lemieux on the Jets side as then it's no longer an apples to apples comparison. If you wanna include those guys you also have to include on the Hawks' side guys like Ladd and Frolik two high 1st round prospects acquired by the hawks, and Niemi a 1st round talent signed as a free agent out of Europe, and Sharp another 1st round level talent. That's just off the top of my head, I am sure the list goes on. Including acquired assets is not something you wanna talk about if you are trying to favorably compare jets management to the hawks'

You're really mixing apples and oranges. The Jets acquired Frolik too, so they get credit, right?

My point is that the Jets deliberately acquired young, recent high picks as part of trades and could well have added a passel of lower picks instead. I like the fact that they supplemented their drafts with other young prospects drafted contemporaneously. Do you dislike that approach? Would you have preferred more lower picks instead?

That doesn't mean I don't think they should have accumulated more picks, as I have said repeatedly. But there's no need to ignore their efforts to supplement their core with extra first round picks and recent high picks that they liked.

 

[Whileee]

You mean like Luc Robitialle (9th), Fleury (8th), Zetterberg or Gilmour (7th), Datzuk or Brett Hull (6th)

http://thehockeywriters.com/the-best-late-round-nhl-draft-picks/

Cherry picking low picks over the past few decades doesn't really change the overwhelming probabilities in favour of the value of higher picks over lower picks. I'll ask again; how many 7th round picks would you give up for a first or second rounder? Or would you hang on to the 7th rounders because you are going for a Zetterberg?

 

[Whileee]

Chevys acquired, what? 2 extra 1st rounders? That's gotta be worth like 30 picks in the 7th round!!

He also acquired an extra 2nd and Armia, Dano and Lemieux. Going by draft pick values that's actually worth more than 30 7th round picks (a 1st round pick has about 6 times the value of a 7th).

 

[Whileee]

But if the Jets are better at talent evaluation than average, it should be even more effective to accumulate picks...

Though I don't think the Jets are really that much better than average at talent evaluation. Good enough that they didn't blow any high picks, but not so good as to regularly unearth any true 2nd-7th round gems. I think that's where you need the scatter-gun approach.

It's still more efficient to acquire and the nail high picks, or acquire good prospects, than to acquire a large number of lower picks for your scatter gun approach.

I think the Jets could have done more to accumulate picks, but let's not downplay how damaging it is to miss on high picks.

 

[KingBogo]

It's still more efficient to acquire and the nail high picks, or acquire good prospects, than to acquire a large number of lower picks for your scatter gun approach.

I think the Jets could have done more to accumulate picks, but let's not downplay how damaging it is to miss on high picks.

Acquiring good prospects seems to be a real value move IMO. Being able to pick up players on ELC's with 1st round pedigree who have already shown to have a high likelihood of NHL careers based on current development has to be worth dozens of late round picks. This is an area where I'd like Chevy to be even more aggressive.

 

[Eyeseeing]

Eventually, you get better. There are obviously growing pains when you inject so much youth in the lineup.

The Leafs have injected far more youth with better results so far and their team play is definitely far better thanks to Babcock.
Chevy doesn't get a free pass on this argument

 

[KingBogo]

The Leafs have injected far more youth with better results so far and their team play is definitely far better thanks to Babcock.
Chevy doesn't get a free pass on this argument

I think Babcock is the difference in that equation.

 

[surixon]

I think Babcock is the difference in that equation.

Yup especially on special teams.

The teams have very similar 5 on 5 results outside of goaltending.

 

[Eyeseeing]

I think Babcock is the difference in that equation.

Yes agree and the concerns are Chevy extends Maurice that is the whole problem with how this organization thinks.
It's going to change it's going to be different this time .
How will you honestly feel with the same coaching staff next year?

 

[nobody important]

Yes agree and the concerns are Chevy extends Maurice that is the whole problem with how this organization thinks.
It's going to change it's going to be different this time .
How will you honestly feel with the same coaching staff next year?

I know I'll be starting the tank thread even earlier.

 

[Festinator]

I see you're one of those fans who never heard 29 other GM's and organizations say that they are also building through the draft.

Draft and develop is only a part of building a team, something that Chevy hasn't fully grasped yet.

One short playoff appearance in six seasons and you're happy with Chevy's so-called work?

Six seasons in and you're team is 3rd last in the NHL! Your AHL team is 3rd last. Chevy is supposedly building a talent pool, where's the proof?

I'm absolutely mind boggled that people think Chevy should have built a championship team in WINNIPEG in 6 years or less. It's WINNIPEG. You're not gonna attract many top tier free agents no matter what, and any other fans who live outside Winnipeg know the bs that gets said about it all the time. And, believe it or not, it takes time to fill up an NHL roster with mostly players obtained from the draft
Chevy has built a very young squad in the top half of the league when it comes to offensive numbers. Everyone has already agreed, the main problems this team has is goaltending and Coaching (poor defensive systems). The coaching issue was made known this year, but the goaltending was known the entire time, but chevy was given a pass on it because we were waiting for Helle/Comrie to be ready. Helle sh*** the bed this year, Hutch does as well, coaching proves to be poor. NOW is the time for Chevy to act, not before, because no one realized all 3 of those parties would do so poorly. You can all say you knew better, but I saw how happy people were with the lineup at the beginning of the season, you're not fooling anyone.

I am happy with chevys work so far, apparently im the only one but that's fine. Chevy has done fine work building this team for the future, and it's close to being a perennial playoff team. Fixing either the coaching or goaltender gets us in, that's all we need. I won't be disappointed with him until he fails to fix either the coaching problem (whether that be firing maurice or the assistants) or goalie issue (acquire a decent seasoned vet (bishop, halak, fleury) before the start of next season.