Prospect Info: 2013 Draft Thread | "Falling Flat for Horvat"

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Any interest in Adam Tambellini?

I'm not joking.

Could he be a decent 3rd/4th round pick?

If he's there in the 4th, I could see the Oilers going out there. He'll have to bulk up a little, 6'2"? Nice. 158lbs? lol is that even possible for a competitive hockey player, lol

 

[AlowlyMcOilersfan]

If he's there in the 4th, I could see the Oilers going out there. He'll have to bulk up a little, 6'2"? Nice. 158lbs? lol is that even possible for a competitive hockey player, lol

Wow, he's scrawny.

 

[I am the Liquor]

Of course the Pendergrast era is iirrelevant. There is a new head scout in charge now so Pendergrast being a failure doesn't mean that Stu will be a failure.

And yes, it's too early to judge Stu's picks. All of his picks are between roughly 18-23 years old.
Hartikainen who was in his 1st draft i believe is still a developing player, it's too early to call him a bust.
Guys like Lander, Marincin, Pitlick, Musil etc. Are still very early in their pro careers and some aren't even out of junior yet.
It's going to take time to evaluate his draft performances.

Prendergast was hired in 2000 and was replaced by Stu in 2007.

Prendergast is unanimously seen as a huge failure here, yet he only was on the job for eight years. Stu has been on the job for seven years.

But it is too early to judge.

 

[Senor Catface]

Since it's early enough to say some players aren't looking like good picks, then I think it's fair to say that since 2008 we have some players that are looking good.

Klefbom
Marincin
Rajala
Khaira
Rieder (I know he's gone, but still our pick)
Gernat (you can't ignore 17 points in 22 playoff games)


These are all players that have either treaded up this year, or in the least, have kept up their play. (Not counting Klefbom's body exploding)

We try so hard to point out what's not working (Hamilton, Bunz, etc etc) that we fail to attribute the successes, like Rajala turning into a tradeable asset. He might not have a home here, but a PPG rookie in the AHL and a great playoffs will gather attention in the NHL.

Just my two cents.

 

[CupofOil]

Prendergast was hired in 2000 and was replaced by Stu in 2007.

Prendergast is unanimously seen as a huge failure here, yet he only was on the job for eight years. Stu has been on the job for seven years.

But it is too early to judge.

He was seen as a failure mainly after he was gone when it was apparent that a lot of his guys were busts.

Which of Stu's picks do you consider a surefire bust?
It's too early to tell. Sure, some of his picks look underwhelming but i don't see any busts in the bunch just yet.
Even if a couple of the non-1st rounders become NHL regulars, that in itself is somewhat of a success.

 

[Fourier]

People really understate the significance of the advantage of drafting 1st or high in EACH round not just the 1st. The Oilers should be hitting well above average on their 2nd rounders and even 3rd rounders for this reason.

Actually they don't. There may be a marginal advantage in picking high in the second round but not much. From there on there really is no evidence that picking earlier in a round has much influence on success.

 

[Seachd]

But we bypassed them in the third round. For a Euro goalie. How's he doing btw?

I would agree that problems with prospects have more to do with draft issues than development issues.

But it gets kind of silly to say they missed out by taking this guy when that guy was still available, especially when we don't know how any of them will turn out.

You can do that any number of times for any team for any draft.

 

[I am the Liquor]

I would agree that problems with prospects have more to do with draft issues than development issues.

But it gets kind of silly to say they missed out by taking this guy when that guy was still available, especially when we don't know how any of them will turn out.

You can do that any number of times for any team for any draft.

According to the table I posted we were well in the bottom third for drafting (24th) between 97-06. I havent seen much evidence lately to suggest there has been any improvement during the "MacGregor" years.

 

[Fourier]

Irrelevant? I dont think so. We are in the bind we are in now in large part due to our futility at the draft table.

Way too early? What is an acceptable time frame? Stu's first draft was five years ago. Should we wait seven years? Ten? Fifteen?

The post you quoted of mine was specifically addressing Stu's record since I was responding to a claim that the current regime has been poor at the draft. I actually stated in post #936 which you quoted that the Prendergast years were a disaster.

Stu's first draft was 2008 and in that draft he picked Eberle at #22 and Hartikainen in the 6th. They did not have a second rounder.

Lander was picked in the 2nd round in 2009. Of the roughly 120 players picked in the second rounds between 2009 and 2012 exactly 3 have played more games in the NHL than Lander. They are ROR, Justin Faulk and Kyle Clifford. So perhaps there is some evidence that it is too early.

 

[Fourier]

According to the table I posted we were well in the bottom third for drafting (24th) between 97-06. I havent seen much evidence lately to suggest there has been any improvement during the "MacGregor" years.

That chart you posted includes first round picks. I think Hall, Nuge, Eberle, Yakupov, Klefbom and Paajarvi pretty much covers that bet.

 

[I am the Liquor]

The post you quoted of mine was specifically addressing Stu's record since I was responding to a claim that the current regime has been poor at the draft. I actually stated in post #936 which you quoted that the Prendergast years were a disaster.

Stu's first draft was 2008 and in that draft he picked Eberle at #22 and Hartikainen in the 6th. They did not have a second rounder.

Lander was picked in the 2nd round in 2009. Of the roughly 120 players picked in the second rounds between 2009 and 2012 exactly 3 have played more games in the NHL than Lander. They are ROR, Justin Faulk and Kyle Clifford. So perhaps there is some evidence that it is too early.

Like I said in an earlier post, Prendergast had eight years on the job while Stu has had seven.

Games played is a bit of a misleading stat when you consider how the Oilers have thrown their prospects into the fire due to lack of depth. What we should be looking at is who is or will likely be an effective player in the league. Lander may turn into that but he is not that yet.

 

[I am the Liquor]

That chart you posted includes first round picks. I think Hall, Nuge, Eberle, Yakupov, Klefbom and Paajarvi pretty much covers that bet.

Klefbom has yet to play a game and the jury is still out on Paajarvi. If you want to throw three first overall picks into the mix then feel free, but after that (and Eberle) there is nothing to get excited about.

Considering that Stu has had the advantage of picking before almost everyone else in the league in the first round as well as every round after that, he should be doing better than he has been.

 

[Fourier]

Like I said in an earlier post, Prendergast had eight years on the job while Stu has had seven.

Games played is a bit of a misleading stat when you consider how the Oilers have thrown their prospects into the fire due to lack of depth. What we should be looking at is who is or will likely be an effective player in the league. Lander may turn into that but he is not that yet.

You used the same measure to support your argument in your chart. These numbers use games played as the measure of success.

 

[Fourier]

Klefbom has yet to play a game and the jury is still out on Paajarvi. If you want to throw three first overall picks into the mix then feel free, but after that (and Eberle) there is nothing to get excited about.

Considering that Stu has had the advantage of picking before almost everyone else in the league in the first round as well as every round after that, he should be doing better than he has been.

Again, what would be evidence for you. Discounting Klefbom weakens your case. Or would I be reasonable in saying that the 2012 draft was an absolute bust beyond the first round since no first rounder has yet made a regualr contribution to their team.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[The Nuge]

Like I said in an earlier post, Prendergast had eight years on the job while Stu has had seven.

Games played is a bit of a misleading stat when you consider how the Oilers have thrown their prospects into the fire due to lack of depth. What we should be looking at is who is or will likely be an effective player in the league. Lander may turn into that but he is not that yet.

And over those 8 years, we wound up with talents in the 1st round such as Mikhnov, Niinimaki, Pouliot, Schremp, Plante, and Nash. You can complain that our 2nd round and later picks aren't panning out quite as well as we'd hoped, but at least Stu isn't wasting 1st round picks

 

[Neilio]

Prendergast was hired in 2000 and was replaced by Stu in 2007.

Prendergast is unanimously seen as a huge failure here, yet he only was on the job for eight years. Stu has been on the job for seven years.

But it is too early to judge.

I think we have a clearer picture in hindsight. But KP had some pretty bad first round busts. Mikhinov, Niinimaki, Pouliot, Schremp, Plante and Nash come to mind. But the real story with those picks is who they left on the board when they chose these guys. That's what really sank him. And us.

 

[I am the Liquor]

It was your chart. These numbers use games played as the measure of success.

Not my chart, it was borrowed, but again we suck either way.

Again, what would be evidence for you. Discounting Klefbom weakens your case. Or would I be reasonable in saying that the 2012 draft was an absolute bust beyond the first round since no first rounder has yet made a regualr contribution to their team.

You can't have it both ways.

Im not going to jump up and down proclaiming Klefbom a success until he is actually successful in the nhl.

We dont have to look at 2012, we can look at 2008-2011 if you like. Or any point inbetween or along the way. We suck every step of the way outside of Eberle and the first overalls, and possibly Klefbom. All first round picks. After than, it is a barren desert where we are forced to hold up Lander and Hartikainen as evidence of success at the draft table. Pretty underwhelming if you ask me.

And over those 8 years, we wound up with talents in the 1st round such as Mikhnov, Niinimaki, Pouliot, Schremp, Plante, and Nash. You can complain that our 2nd round and later picks aren't panning out quite as well as we'd hoped, but at least Stu isn't wasting 1st round picks

Pretty hard to do since the last flat out first overall bust was 14yrs ago. Eberle was a home run. Paajarvi is teetering between good and bad. The rest were gimmies.

We need more than that. We should expect more than that.

 

[BarDownBobo]

Seeing as this is nearing 1,000 posts, I nominate 'Shoe In for Nichuschkin' as the slogan for the new thread.

 

[McDNicks17]

Seeing as this is nearing 1,000 posts, I nominate 'Shoe In for Nichuschkin' as the slogan for the new thread.

Sounds good to me.

 

[McDoused]

Can you say they arent being developed properly? What would be your reasons/basis for that?

I've always felt that OKC puts too much of an emphasis on winning instead of developing their prospects. Honestly, I think winning at the AHL is slightly overrated. I'll probably get blasted for that but I don't see a guy like Arcobello ever being a meaningful oiler. I mean, it's hard to become a top 6-9 player at the NHL level when you aren't even given the opportunity to be a top 6 player at the AHL level.

Both Pitlick and Hamilton looked great in Junior and for whatever reason couldn't make the jump to the AHL. Both were well over P/G players in the WHL just 1 year after they were drafted.

 

[BarDownBobo]

I've always felt that OKC puts too much of an emphasis on winning instead of developing their prospects. Honestly, I think winning at the AHL is slightly overrated. I'll probably get blasted for that but I don't see a guy like Arcobello ever being a meaningful oiler. I mean, it's hard to become a top 6-9 player at the NHL level when you aren't even given the opportunity to be a top 6 player at the AHL level.

Both Pitlick and Hamilton looked great in Junior and for whatever reason couldn't make the jump to the AHL. Both were well over P/G players in the WHL just 1 year after they were drafted.

It creates the winning mentality. I agree with it in that regard, but you've gotta find the balance. Right now I think they've found it though, they've got Rajala and Lander as their top players, and Marincin is anchoring the back end. Guys like Pitlick and Hamilton just haven't panned out for whatever reason, still too early to say they're busts. I think OKC is actually doing a really good job right now. You can't just give those kind of guys the ice just because they were high picks, still have to make them earn it.

 

[Fourier]

Not my chart, it was borrowed, but again we suck either way.



Im not going to jump up and down proclaiming Klefbom a success until he is actually successful in the nhl.

We dont have to look at 2012, we can look at 2008-2011 if you like. Or any point inbetween or along the way. We suck every step of the way outside of Eberle and the first overalls, and possibly Klefbom. All first round picks. After than, it is a barren desert where we are forced to hold up Lander and Hartikainen as evidence of success at the draft table. Pretty underwhelming if you ask me.



Pretty hard to do since the last flat out first overall bust was 14yrs ago. Eberle was a home run. Paajarvi is teetering between good and bad. The rest were gimmies.

We need more than that. We should expect more than that.

Agin you ignore the point that it is still way to early to make this claim. If you go back to 2009 there are only a very small number of the 100's of player picked after the first round that have established themselves in the NHL.

 

[McDNicks17]

At 1k.

New thread here: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1430185