Let this be a lesson to you draft newbies

[KL*]

Other than the butchering of the pronounciation, what is so funny about drafting Blat'ák? He's been a pretty solid dman for Hamé Zlín and was a big part of their championship season.

...and how has that helped Detroit?

The Wings aren't drafting Czech league players. They are drafting for the NHL. The guy could be the Bobby Orr of the Czech League, but if he's not doing it in the NHL, he's not helping the Wings.

 

[Wisent]

...and how has that helped Detroit?

The Wings aren't drafting Czech league players. They are drafting for the NHL. The guy could be the Bobby Orr of the Czech League, but if he's not doing it in the NHL, he's not helping the Wings.

Still no need to ridicule him.

 

[Epsilon]

...and how has that helped Detroit?

The Wings aren't drafting Czech league players. They are drafting for the NHL. The guy could be the Bobby Orr of the Czech League, but if he's not doing it in the NHL, he's not helping the Wings.

You could say this about basically any player, from any league, who isn't playing in the NHL yet.

 

[Kaizer]

Yes, and he'll be right. Imo, of course

 

[Epsilon]

Yes, and he'll be right. Imo, of course

Of course, it's not like the guy Colorado picked right afterwards has done anything better at this point. If you are going to laugh at other teams' draft picks, don't follow up by immediately taking a laughable stiff of your own.

 

[Kaizer]

Of course, it's not like the guy Colorado picked right afterwards has done anything better at this point. If you are going to laugh at other teams' draft picks, don't follow up by immediately taking a laughable stiff of your own

Of course, for Colorado this guy helped in the same way as Blatak for Detroit.

 

[Form and Substance]

I for one totally expeted some surprises and got them.

 

[PecaFan]

This is why I don't understand the criticism of San Jose trading up to get Setoguchi.

Why should they sit on their hands or cross their fingers hoping he's available if they know who their man is? Its called being pro-active.

I'm all for being pro-active. I think this is one of the main reasons New Jersey drafts so well, they size up the situations perfectly, slide down a few spots and still get their their guy, other times slide up a few spots to nail Parise, etc.

But they key is to do it right. To assess the situation properly. Jersey was absolutely correct in that Parise had fallen some already, and was almost surely not going to fall any further. I don't believe that was the case for Setoguchi. He hadn't fallen, because no one expected him to go yet. There weren't even any rumours about him going that high from plugged in folks like McKenzie etc, as far as I'm aware of.

In short, I think San Jose bit on some trolling by GM's, tossing out fake rumours of guys they might pick just to throw others off. Brian Burke has admitted he used to do this, I'm sure it's fairly common.

Only time will tell if we're right, or San Jose was.

 

[Transplanted Caper]

l and Pierre McGuire goes crazy as Parise continues to fall.

.

Parise and Phaneuf in the same draft, Maguire almost had a heart attack.

 

[ginnungagap]

It has? And it has?

Richardson, Wolski, Svatos, McCormick, Budaj, Collins and Hemingway, and that is before Saturday's draft. Not at all pitiful. Just because you haven't heard of them doesn't mean that they aren't good. You didn't know who Hejduk or Drury were in 1997. You know who they are now. The Avs have graduated more players to the NHL over the past decade than any other team in the NHL.

And Detroit has only picked *four* players since 1993 that have become anything more than 4th liners/3rd pairing DMen or backup goaltenders (18 for the Avs). Holmstrom, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Fischer. Yeah, their drafting improved, but it's not hard to improve when you graduated one player in five years that became anything more than a plugger.

Is this the return of KL?

The bottom line to me is you're an Avalanche fan and I'm a Red Wings fan. You're going to want Avalanche prospects to turn out, I'm going to want Red Wings prospects to turn out. No matter how loud you shout out that Colorado's prospect system isn't as bad as the vast majority of the hockey world believes I think I'm pretty comfortable going with my opinion coupled with that of 95% of the folks out there. I'll be the first to admit that Detroit had a stretch of 10 years or so that they were miserable at the draft but I also knew and admitted as much at the time. I'll also be the first to admit that I think Colorado had a good draft this year, especially considering a bad bounce in the lottery. With the exception of Wolski though, I think their prospect pool is in bad shape- and I'm definitely not alone there. I used to begrudgingly think Lacroix was one of the best GM's in the NHL, but I think he's been slipping steadily the past 3-4 years and now to me he's on the verge of going over the edge. Draining the prospect pool for rentals, losing Forsberg and Foote and replacing them with Turgeon and Brisebois... unless the NHL opens way, way up signing two guys that soft to replace two guys who battled that hard is just plain pitiful.

 

[Roughneck]

Parise and Phaneuf in the same draft, Maguire almost had a heart attack.

If the Panthers hadn't taken McArdle, he probably would have run onto the stage and strangled Mike Keenan.

 

[clefty]

I'm all for being pro-active. I think this is one of the main reasons New Jersey drafts so well, they size up the situations perfectly, slide down a few spots and still get their their guy, other times slide up a few spots to nail Parise, etc.

But they key is to do it right. To assess the situation properly. Jersey was absolutely correct in that Parise had fallen some already, and was almost surely not going to fall any further. I don't believe that was the case for Setoguchi. He hadn't fallen, because no one expected him to go yet. There weren't even any rumours about him going that high from plugged in folks like McKenzie etc, as far as I'm aware of.

In short, I think San Jose bit on some trolling by GM's, tossing out fake rumours of guys they might pick just to throw others off. Brian Burke has admitted he used to do this, I'm sure it's fairly common.

Only time will tell if we're right, or San Jose was.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[SJeasy]

clefty or anyone else,

Scoutingwise, do any organizations do psychological (IQ, personality, etc.) testing of draft candidates?

 

[Hiishawk]

clefty or anyone else,

Scoutingwise, do any organizations do psychological (IQ, personality, etc.) testing of draft candidates?

A few may do some sort of official testing (i.e., a set paper test or some sort of psychologically revealing quiz) but most (in my experience) try to get a feel for a player's mentality simply by meeting with him and talking in general- without recourse to actual prepared tests. Interviews with coaches etc help too in assessing a player's mental make-up and are quite common as a part of getting a well-rounded view of a player.

But 'feel' about a personality still remains the bottom line for most. And the products of a players' mental make-up are usually visible on the ice, after repeated viewings.

 

[J-D]

I can't remember a draft not having surprises.

It's the same every year.

[...]

You're my hero.

 

[Hiishawk]

I for one totally expeted some surprises and got them.

The biggest surprise of all would be if the draft went very close to what Redline, ISS, Young Guns or McKeen's thought. Nothing against any of those services. I'm sure they don't expect the draft to follow their prognosis' anyway.

 

[SJeasy]

A few may do some sort of official testing (i.e., a set paper test or some sort of psychologically revealing quiz) but most (in my experience) try to get a feel for a player's mentality simply by meeting with him and talking in general- without recourse to actual prepared tests. Interviews with coaches etc help too in assessing a player's mental make-up and are quite common as a part of getting a well-rounded view of a player.

But 'feel' about a personality still remains the bottom line for most. And the products of a players' mental make-up are usually visible on the ice, after repeated viewings.

I really appreciate the info. With where I am and have been, I see the NHL, but not the youngsters. At the games, some of the issues are obvious to a practiced eye, but they are young adults not teens.

The reason for the question, is that last season I saw several players who, although very skilled, had questionable value for their team. There was continued and obvious interpersonal conflict within the team. Talking with my daughter (she's more of a fan than I), who haunts one of the puckbunny boards, my observations were confirmed. With my educational background, the predictiveness of the MMPI (written test) seemed that it would have given the team a warning before the issued reared itself. The other way of approaching a problem like this is to deal with it while the player is in juniors or the AHL with consulting/coaching/mentoring.

To wrap this up, it looks like the core (more than one player) of the problem has moved on, but in seeing the BB's, it looks as if very few people take this as a valuable part of drafting, training and building a team.

 

[Hiishawk]

I really appreciate the info. With where I am and have been, I see the NHL, but not the youngsters. At the games, some of the issues are obvious to a practiced eye, but they are young adults not teens.

The reason for the question, is that last season I saw several players who, although very skilled, had questionable value for their team. There was continued and obvious interpersonal conflict within the team. Talking with my daughter (she's more of a fan than I), who haunts one of the puckbunny boards, my observations were confirmed. With my educational background, the predictiveness of the MMPI (written test) seemed that it would have given the team a warning before the issued reared itself. The other way of approaching a problem like this is to deal with it while the player is in juniors or the AHL with consulting/coaching/mentoring.

To wrap this up, it looks like the core (more than one player) of the problem has moved on, but in seeing the BB's, it looks as if very few people take this as a valuable part of drafting, training and building a team.

The question is- is a player just being a teenager (for example- he has a girl problem or two, drinks too much at a high-school party) or does he have anything that might be a real long-term issue (i.e., temper/violence control, refuses to be criticized, doesn't take care of himself). If it's the latter- teams will want to try and check that for themselves or at least confirm it with more than one person associated with the player or team. But detailed psychological tests are still very rare (as far as I know). After all, we're not dealing with counselees here.

 

[SJeasy]

By no means am I criticizing you or how effective you are. Your experience and maturity alone make you aware of a lot. To do testing on the number you look at would raise eyebrows especially if it was a single organization. There are some professions (not related to psychology) that demand the testing. If anything, it's something you could look into if you were suspicious of something on a prospect that was otherwise a lock.

Mentoring would probably be the best way of addressing a behavioral issue, a big brother kind of relationship.

All people have various issues, but most won't affect the workplace dramatically as these did. One player had serious drinking issues (I know that's common), another refused to be criticized to the point of infantile retaliation and there was a temper issue (multiple incidents that were not hockey fights). From my standpoint, if I can see it as a remote although educated observer, its a pretty big issue. If you were at the games, you probably would have seen it. My daughter was only confirmation. It is telling that the above are no longer with the team while most (about 90%) of the rest of the team is intact.

Again, your information is truly welcome.

 

[thestonedkoala]

The biggest surprise is if Minnesota didn't reach for a player...They've been doing that terribly bad now for three years...

Kolusz in 03, Kassian in this draft, Jones and Boogaard in 05...

Yeesh it's like they have a dart board and putting up names...

Boogaard was no surprise but come on!

KASSIAN?

 

[Hiishawk]

By no means am I criticizing you or how effective you are. Your experience and maturity alone make you aware of a lot. To do testing on the number you look at would raise eyebrows especially if it was a single organization. There are some professions (not related to psychology) that demand the testing. If anything, it's something you could look into if you were suspicious of something on a prospect that was otherwise a lock.

Mentoring would probably be the best way of addressing a behavioral issue, a big brother kind of relationship.

All people have various issues, but most won't affect the workplace dramatically as these did. One player had serious drinking issues (I know that's common), another refused to be criticized to the point of infantile retaliation and there was a temper issue (multiple incidents that were not hockey fights). From my standpoint, if I can see it as a remote although educated observer, its a pretty big issue. If you were at the games, you probably would have seen it. My daughter was only confirmation. It is telling that the above are no longer with the team while most (about 90%) of the rest of the team is intact.

Again, your information is truly welcome.

Yup. These reasons are some of those why certain talented players get selected much later in the draft (or not at all) than fans and/or casual observers think they should. Coaches and other connections to the team are great sources for this. The bigger issues are usually known to scouts. On the other hand, one must also watch out for exaggerations or false rumours too.

 

[X-SHARKIE]

I like this thread Steblik... After the Habs took Price the whole message board came down on them and I thought it was foolish.

WHo knows, mabey the kid developes into a stud #1 goalie and is a franchise goaltender down the road

Same with the Sharks taking Setoguchi, some say comments with no truth like he has no hands, then say he will only be a third liner..no ifs...no buts... I think it's rediculous.

Now I can pat a team like Colorado and CHicago on the back for putting together good drafts from what I can tell...but to go on and say a specific team is absolutely clueless and idiotic for makign a pick ..... I just think it's way to early.

The house came down when WHeeler went 5th, but I saw him a half dozen times now in Greenbay and I love the package of size, pure skating ability, and his offensive instincts. I can see why he was a top 5 pick now, but people who have never seen him, or barely seen him wanted to call for the jobs of the Coyotes staff.

I think Steblick, you put together a good post here and I hope people follow suit and lay off of teams, and players for out of the loop draft choices, because some times they turn out to be excellent selections.

Example: Don't you think the New York Islanders rather have Brent Burns right now then swedish junior stud and top end prospect in 03 Nilsson?

But on draft day it was the Wild that were crazy, not the Islanders.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Wellllll Burns was a borderline 2nd rounder...

 

[Hiishawk]

Just a couple of other points about the draft which might be of interest to fans:

1. Many teams make a draft list of only 80-120 players for the draft. This means that a lot of players that ranking services and casual fans might have placed in the 2nd (and even 1st) round might not even be on some teams' lists.
The logic behind this is my 2nd point:

2. Most NHL (I'm making an educated guess here) want a list of players who their scouts think CAN EVENTUALLY PLAY IN THE NHL. This is very different from a "list of best players" ranking.

For example, let's say there's player X, a center, 1987 birthdate, in the OHL, 6'0 180, who scored 20 goals and 25 assists in 70 games, a decent two-way guy with some grit but no outstanding feature. Just looking at this, he might a decent 4th or 5th round prospect. But if the scouts just cannot project him as a future NHLer, instead a good AHLer or Euro-pro then he simply won't even be on their list. I've seen lists where projected 1st rounders (according to Redline, ISS etc.) are not on an NHL team's list at all.

Most teams (again, a pretty educated guess) would prefer to spend a pick on say, player Y, an AJHL guy with one or two enticing attributes, who hasn't had too much exposure, but with 4 years to develop in college, it is POSSIBLE (according to scouts) that he could contribute AT THE NHL LEVEL somewhere down the line. So, despite the fact that the OHL player X looks like the better prospect to many fans and ratings agencies (and maybe even another NHL team or two), that NHL team will have player Y rated much higher on their list.

This is why, say, relatively unknown Andrew Kozek goes in the 2nd round while WJC regular Risto Korhonen goes in the late 5th. The consensus must be that Korhonen will not go beyond being a good pro in Finland even though most NHL GMs would probably choose Korhonen over Kozek if picking sides for a game tomorrow.

And, by the way, I've never heard of a case where every player on a team's list - even with only 100 players- has been chosen.

 

[Hawky]

A few may do some sort of official testing (i.e., a set paper test or some sort of psychologically revealing quiz) but most (in my experience) try to get a feel for a player's mentality simply by meeting with him and talking in general- without recourse to actual prepared tests. of a players' mental make-up are usually visible on the ice, after repeated viewings.

Only know about one drafted player, but he had to take several intensive written and verbal psychological tests...and he's pretty well-balanced with no noticable problems...so there didn't seem to be any specific reason for the tests, except to create a profile.