Richer's Ghost
Bourbonite
Conte has been horrendous at drafting decent goalies the past 15 years. Not a single one has stuck in the NHL since Clemmer in '97.
What a bum.
What a bum.
2010 NHL Draft: New Jersey Devils get few selections, fewer rewards at 2010 draft
- Thread starter HF Article
- Start date
Missionhockey
Registered User
Exactly. How can I take you seriously if you haven't done the work that they have? You pick information posted after the fact and act like you know better with out putting in the effort that a scout does.
I've said several times, my philosophy on rebuilding through the draft requires you to grab as many picks as possible. With the exception of the last year, the team hasn't been hoarding draft picks and it's been hamstringing the New Jersey's efforts to build through the draft. Nobody knows how an 18 year old will mature or progress. It's like playing darts with just one dart.
Devils Dominion
Now we Plummet
I agree on that no doubt.
Let's hope that Shero is on board with that philosophy as well.
At least for me, it's not so much blind loyalty as it is understanding that projecting 17/18/19 year olds isn't exactly an exact science (in hockey, other sports, or life in general). You make it seem like it should be obvious that one player will be better than another when the professional scouts will admit that they're doing well if they're even hitting on 15% of their picks.
When you criticize Conte, you seem to give off the impression that he's the only scout to have ever missed on a late 2nd round pick. Or when you make baseless accusations like "The Devils rely too heavily on Central Scouting." And then you repeat it enough times to where it's almost like you're referencing yourself as a source. A thread about the 2010 Draft degenerated into an Anton Kadeykin discussion seems a bit silly.
For me, it's most of a defense on scouts than any particular scout.
JimEIV
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2003
- 66,192
- 28,543
Are you serious? Trying to project 18 year olds with a success rate of around 20% in the 2nd round?
It is as if some people here expect to pick the best player with every pick... and the kicker is when the Devils do pick the absolute best player, I can't recall a single person signing the praises... NO ONE...Seriously not a SINGLE Person saying anything positive.
Like for instances
Paul Martin was probably the best Defesneman taken from the 3rd round on...Maybe you can argue Vishnovsky...But I'm going Martin.
The Devils winning the Cup and trading up to get Parise was pure magic(with the help of the St. Louis penalty of course) -- It wasn't only brilliant, but when you look at the players we might have had an opportunity at if we stayed in our position like Eric Fehr, Mark Stuart, Marc-Antoine Pouliot, Mike Richards, Anthony Stewart, Brian Boyle, Jeff Tambellini, Patrick Eaves, and last but not least OUR ACTUAL spot Shawn Belle and his 20 NHL games played the move and pick kept us competitive for another decade. --- Zajac and Parise should STILL be the poor mans Getzlaf and Perry -- That is not the scouts fault.
Travis Zajac is one of 2 players to play 600 games from his draft position throughout the rest of the draft in 2004
Fayne in 2005 was one of the best draft picks in the entire 5th round on ward..
Henrique in 2008 was the absolute best player of the entire draft from his position down
Jon Merrill is probably the best Defensemen taken from his draft position onward through the entire draft, although it is too soon to really tell. But he is and will be certainly better than Dylan McIlrath take #10 overall.
Severson at #60 is a ridiculous home-run.
And nobody ever wants to talk about the gems we found like Greene, Oduya and Clarkson.
Whether you like it or not the scouting staff has absolutely provided enough talent to keep this team competitive... if we were winning not a single person would mind....I know because I was on this site when we were winning cups, trading draft picks and drafting next to nothing. Nobody minded and these conversations didn't really exist (not like this anyway).
- Feb 5, 2010
- 47,814
- 18,635
I said I'm not going to criticize him as much as DD. I respect and acknowledge the good picks he's made. I just don't like when people make a ton of excuses for failure. Just own it. He's made some good picks and he's made some terrible ones. He should get all kinds of credit for guys like Severson, but he deserves the criticism for his crap drafts too.
JimEIV
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2003
- 66,192
- 28,543
Failure is an inherent part of drafting...You are playing a game where success is one decent player in 7 picks and almost nothing ever comes from 4 of those 7 picks...
So you are looking 200+ picks a year and maybe 30 of them will become decent NHLers...That means 85% of any given draft is a miss. Pull out the top 15 picks from any draft year and the draft would look super grim. Everything is Failure...Success is the exception.
- Feb 5, 2010
- 47,814
- 18,635
And he's paid to find the exceptions. I don't think he's a bad scout but it's fair to criticize a miss.
Better Call Sal
Salnalysis
But as you even acknowledged, it's one thing to criticize certain misses. It's quite another to over-analyze every single one.
Some people seem to think drafting is some exact science. Maybe with the benefit of hindsight, it is.
JimEIV
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2003
- 66,192
- 28,543
In context, of course it is.
But If I went around calling Mark Cuban poor or broke because he is number 603(which is pretty close to the bottom) on Forbes 2015 billionaire list you'd probably think I was an idiot.
- Feb 5, 2010
- 47,814
- 18,635
You guys are right. I'm not arguing that. It's just that these arguments go such that someone over criticizes, then someone under criticizes. It's probably somewhere in between as usual.
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
People need to re-assess their perspective on scouting. People generally tend to look back and say that a guy like Kucherov was a good pick, while a guy like Connolly was a questionable one. They're results oriented without delving further into process that was used to make the pick. If Tampa were so smart, how come they didn't draft Kucherov in the first round and Connolly in the second round?
The reality is that you're picking a bunch of weighted coins in a draft. The guys in the upper end of the 1st round probably odds of getting a head of 50%+. The guys in the second round at 25%. Third round at 15%. And so on. There are no absolutes. Just because a player turns out to be a star or a bust doesn't mean his odds were significantly different when he was drafted.
No matter how much you may like a player's skillset or his production, there is no guarantee that they become good NHL players. So the best drafting teams are the ones who picked the better weighted coins.
But like with any coin toss, there's a huge amount of luck. Some teams will get rewarded for bad decisions and others will be penalized for smart ones. Over the long run things should even out, and the handful (and I stress handful) of teams that are slightly (and I stress slightly) better at drafting will have an advantage.
How many teams have been able to churn out consistently successful draft picks without picking in the top half of the 1st round? Possibly Detroit, however they had an extended dry spell in the mid 2000s.
The process of going back to each draft and seeing who was picked after a given pick is just plain stupid. As I said earlier, if Detroit thought Zetterberg was going to amount to much, they would have drafted him in the 1st or 2nd round. They took him in the 7th. By the logic of some posters, shouldn't they be idiots for passing on him in each previous round?
The reality is that you're picking a bunch of weighted coins in a draft. The guys in the upper end of the 1st round probably odds of getting a head of 50%+. The guys in the second round at 25%. Third round at 15%. And so on. There are no absolutes. Just because a player turns out to be a star or a bust doesn't mean his odds were significantly different when he was drafted.
No matter how much you may like a player's skillset or his production, there is no guarantee that they become good NHL players. So the best drafting teams are the ones who picked the better weighted coins.
But like with any coin toss, there's a huge amount of luck. Some teams will get rewarded for bad decisions and others will be penalized for smart ones. Over the long run things should even out, and the handful (and I stress handful) of teams that are slightly (and I stress slightly) better at drafting will have an advantage.
How many teams have been able to churn out consistently successful draft picks without picking in the top half of the 1st round? Possibly Detroit, however they had an extended dry spell in the mid 2000s.
The process of going back to each draft and seeing who was picked after a given pick is just plain stupid. As I said earlier, if Detroit thought Zetterberg was going to amount to much, they would have drafted him in the 1st or 2nd round. They took him in the 7th. By the logic of some posters, shouldn't they be idiots for passing on him in each previous round?
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
I don't like the Devils' recent drafting style, but it's interesting to note just how good they were in the 1990s. No other team came close.
So I don't believe Conte suddenly went from being a skilled scout to an unskilled scout. More like maybe they were ahead of the times in analysis previous and are a bit behind now, and are probably regressing to the mean from all the ridiculously good mid and late round selections they had.
Finding gems in the draft is like trying to make money being a uneducated investor in the stock market. Better to keep things general and non-reactionary and maybe you'll make a bit of money, because there's no real way to get ahead by overrating your abilities to pick lottery tickets.
Cheddabombs
Status Quo
- Mar 13, 2012
- 24,735
- 31,546
All I ask from our scouting staff is that they do their due diligence, and a little beyond that hopefully. If the guy they are picking in the third round is the guy they truly believe has the best chance at making it, who am I to argue? I can read about these players sure, but they do more than that. Unless Conte and co are severely slacking, which we will never know, then they're doing their job as far as I'm concerned.
NJDevs26
Once upon a time...
- Mar 21, 2007
- 67,435
- 31,772
The Devils draft defensemen up the wazoo as it is and we're debating a late second-round pick which like twenty plus teams passed on twice?
If anything my problem with their drafting in the last few years is it's been too one-sided using almost every high pick on D. I mean, did they REALLY need Josh Jacobs after having Severson/Larsson/Gelinas/Merrill/Santini?
But killing specific picks is an exercise in second-guessing, unless the Devils clearly reached on someone or made picks just so out of whack with what they need like all the first-round goalies in the late '90's.
If anything my problem with their drafting in the last few years is it's been too one-sided using almost every high pick on D. I mean, did they REALLY need Josh Jacobs after having Severson/Larsson/Gelinas/Merrill/Santini?
But killing specific picks is an exercise in second-guessing, unless the Devils clearly reached on someone or made picks just so out of whack with what they need like all the first-round goalies in the late '90's.
Last edited:
I agree, but I'm apparently one of the few posters here who still has faith in our scouts. Like I've said about our first this year, there are several players I like, but I'm ok with whoever our scouts like best (as long it isn't something crazy).
As far as drafting so many D's lately, I think that's on Lou more than Conte. The scouts are there to tell who the best players are, but it's management's job to determine the draft strategy.
- Apr 20, 2005
- 2,618
- 1,489
Agree with the bold, disagree with the rest. To your point re: uneducated investor - that's why index funds exist. If there was a real belief in the draft as "throwing darts", then why not axe the amateur scouting department and pocket the cash / spend it on coaches, etc.? Scouts are hired to evaluate talent and to maximize the value of a pick, trade, etc.
The big issue is what you noted: the change from the 90s to the 2000s. Much of this is due to Lou trading away picks. But, the scouting group needs to take some heat. I disagree with Jim that scouts have provided enough talent.
The lack of forwards from 1999 - today is very apparent. The only forwards of note are Parise, Zajac, Clarkson, and Henrique. That's four forward in 11 - 13 years (if you discount the last few as too recent). That includes forwards the Devils traded (Bergfors was a bust and Halischuk is fourth line fodder).
Meanwhile, there are other teams who have done well: Detroit, Anaheim, even the NYR. Sure, it's a small number, so yes it's definitely hard. Also, a good bit of their success is luck. But if you believe it is possible to evaluate talent, then there's likely some skill involved as well.
I don't know how Lou used scouting, analytics, or other tools re: player evaluation and development. But, for a team like the Devils where the front office (and the "process") was more the star than any of the players, I would have liked to have seen more flexibility and innovation on the management front. Lou certainly showed his own innovation over the years (hiring Lemaire, the various "Loupholes"), but the lost decade of the 2000s IMO was a missed opportunity for Lou to revamp the organizational approach to identifying, acquiring, and developing talent.
Devils Dominion
Now we Plummet
That is a solid point because Jacobs wasn't exactly lighting up the USHL and some promising forwards like Aube-Kubel & Karabacek were still on the board.
**I won't include Dvorak because in his draft year he was injured and put up low numbers, even though I recall some folks here saying we should pick him at 41 before the draft.
Another thing to watch is Jacobs vs Bergman over the next few years.
Last edited:
- Apr 20, 2005
- 2,618
- 1,489
p.s., things may be changing in the past few years. The acknowledgement that the Devils collect and use their own proprietary analytics, the hiring of Sunny Mehta - these all seem like positive steps.
I'm still not sold on how the organization runs Albany, though. The organization doesn't seem to produce a string of good coaches from it's minor leagues (look at Pitt and Detroit as examples of good coaching development pools). I also don't know if the organization has a clear philosophy regarding forwards (size? speed? hockey IQ? shot? drive / motor?). The outcome, IMO, is mediocre picks with indifferent minor league development resulting in minimal NHL impact.
I'm still not sold on how the organization runs Albany, though. The organization doesn't seem to produce a string of good coaches from it's minor leagues (look at Pitt and Detroit as examples of good coaching development pools). I also don't know if the organization has a clear philosophy regarding forwards (size? speed? hockey IQ? shot? drive / motor?). The outcome, IMO, is mediocre picks with indifferent minor league development resulting in minimal NHL impact.
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
I believe some scouts are more or less throwing darts. It appears like they aren't, because they couch their opinions in typical scouting lingo, however the reality is that you could have beat every NHL team over the last 20 years in the draft by using a simple adjusted PPG formula to draft.
Seeing the players live and interviewing them obviously needs to happen. But it should go hand in hand with statistical analysis. If the second part isn't there, then it is more or less throwing darts (I mean, it still is throwing darts even with the statistical analysis, but to your point, it's more like investing in an index fund than stock picking). Teams that draft earlier in the first round have a bigger bulls-eye.
JimEIV
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2003
- 66,192
- 28,543
No, No, No! Just stop it -- What of these prospects...
Josef Boumedienne, Sascha Goc, rights to Anton But Returned Andrei Zyuzin
Andre Lakos Returned Valeri Kamensky
Jean-Francois Damphousse, Petr Sykora and Igor Pohanka Returned Maxim Balmochnykh, Jeff Friesen, Oleg Tverdovsky
Christian Berglund, Victor Uchevatov Returned Viktor Kozlov
Aleksander Suglobov Retuned Ken Klee
Cam Janssen retuned Bryce Salvador
Niclas Bergfors, Patrice Cormier, Johnny Oduya , 2010 1st round pick (#24-Kevin Hayes)
2010 2nd round pick (#54-Justin Holl) Returned Ilya Kovalchuk, Anssi Salmela, Jon Merrill
Matt Halischuk Returned Jason Arnott
Mark Fraser and Rod Pelley reutned Kurtis Foster who with
Nick Palmieri returned Marek Zidlicky
That is about a dozen forward prospects returning Hard assets during the time you mention.
Oneiro
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2013
- 9,477
- 11,067
We just rebuilt a defense in uncharacteristically quick fashion.
And people are still mad at Conte? Does anybody remember all the debates about not having puckmoving D on the roster? How devastating the losses of Neidermayer, Rafalski, Martin and Oduya have been?
It's not like they don't know where the holes are. If you ask me, the timing for a forward rebuild couldn't be more perfect. By the time these hypothetical forwards contribute, we'll have the guys on the back-end hitting their prime.
I am not worried about competence, although I do think that Conte seems to draft for a guy's floor rather than his ceiling in the later rounds.
And people are still mad at Conte? Does anybody remember all the debates about not having puckmoving D on the roster? How devastating the losses of Neidermayer, Rafalski, Martin and Oduya have been?
It's not like they don't know where the holes are. If you ask me, the timing for a forward rebuild couldn't be more perfect. By the time these hypothetical forwards contribute, we'll have the guys on the back-end hitting their prime.
I am not worried about competence, although I do think that Conte seems to draft for a guy's floor rather than his ceiling in the later rounds.
Drafting for prospect floor probably has a lot to do with Jim 's post above. Lou has had a lot of success turning relatively average prospects into real assets via trade.
Feed Me A Stray Cat
Registered User
I still don't understand Bergfors. I thought he could have been a very good 2nd line winger. Uncharacteristically strong on his skates and a good cycler. Great shot.
I wouldn't mind bringing him back.
Anyone have a link to the shift where Zubrus/Bergfors just dominated on the cycle and eventually scored?
I wouldn't mind bringing him back.
Anyone have a link to the shift where Zubrus/Bergfors just dominated on the cycle and eventually scored?
Did a quick search of the forum and there were two mentions of Dvorak before the draft, both by Devils1029, and in relation to our 3rd round pick not our 2nd:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=86670887&postcount=63
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=86855607&postcount=919
