ISS, could you explain why you consider age that much for the draft?
I mean, an 18 year old could have start his puberty at 15 years old and still have no beard on him while a 17 years old could have start his puberty at 12 and be way more mature physically (almost a man) then the 18 years old who start growing some hormones by 15. I've seen that so many times. Some guys in this draft have finished their growth but there will always be couple of player who will continue to grow quite a bit.
It's not like if everyone would start puberty at the same age. I've seen couple of 15 years old game this year and at every game you see the 6 feet guys with beard on him and the little 5'4'' player with no hormones in him. But the 5'4'' player often become 6 feet 2-3 years later. But, the guy who was 6 feet at 15 has 3 more years of growth in his body by 18 then the 5'4'' guy.
I don't know if you get my point.
I get your point, and to a degree, that is considered. Some players mature faster than others, there's no doubt about it.
Age is just one of those things we consider. It might seem like we place more importance on it, but really, it's just one factor for us. It's not that it is more important than skating or puck skills. It's just that we think age tends to get overlooked by many in evaluating talent, so perhaps our emphasis on it makes it seem like we place more importance on it.
Generally, when comparing prospects, you want to consider not just their age, but also what level of hockey they are playing. Obviously, an 18-year-old such as Pat Kane is going to put up better scoring numbers in major junior than Bill Sweatt is as an 18-year-old freshman in the NCAA or that an 18-year-old Nicklas Backstrom (last year) would put up in the Swedeish Elitserien. Kane is at the mid-range or slightly higher of the age bracket in major junior. Sweatt is at the low range of the U.S. college age bracket. Ditto for Backstrom.
When comparing major junior players, consider their age and how many years experience they've had in the league.
Expect more from an 18-year-old in his third year of major junior than you would from a 17-year-old in his second year.
There's a development curve for players and although it varies from player to player, you generally try not to compare a player when he is further along the development curve (i.e. 18 years old) to a player who is not as far along (17 years old). When you draft the average 17 year-old, he is going to develop more after being drafted than the average 18-year-old. When drafting an 18-year-old, you get the benefit of seeing that first year of development that you don't normally get to see when you draft a 17-year-old. It's really a better age to draft a kid because hockey players develop quite a bit from 17 to 18.
You just have to keep this in mind when comparing players, especially when they're in their third year of major junior, for example. A kid like Drew Doughty, for example, who we are very high on, should really be assessed this year and compared next year to kids like Pietrangelo and Del Zotto. He still comes out ahead, but if Doughty goes ballistic next season with Guelph, it wouldn't be wise to compare his performance as a third-year OHLer at 18 to two sophomores who are 17.
That's how we look at things, anyway.