Prospect Info: 2016 Maple Leafs Draft Pick - 92nd Overall - Adam Brooks - C - Regina Pats [5-10/171]

[Mess]

The bolded is how I view drafted overagers as well. If we drafted them at that spot in their first draft eligible year, would we be very satisfied with how they developed so far? If the answer is yes, it's a good pick.

Very true, but it feels like cheating.

The goal is to draft BPA at time of draft and that usually means taking 18 year olds and projecting them into the future including 2 years later and beyond as that is what separates scouts from the rest. If you draft that 20 year old (overager) then the guess work has been removed when they are now a productive player and you see what you get.

The opportunity loss comes into play here because you essentially drafted wrong/poorly 2 years previous, and now looking to compensate your prospect pool via back-filling previous draft eligible years by drafting players passed over in the past. The cost however comes at the current draft expense where instead of grabbing 18 year olds with potential you're fixing the past and creating new holes in the future.

If you get an NHLer in the process its good as that is the goal, but if you have good scouting and reputation to find talent then drafting 18 year old Brooks you will be praised when 2 years later he leads his league in scoring with 120 points. If you're drafting when he is already a 120 point player and 20 years old then anyone can do that essentially because your not forecasting potential and draft eligible BPA but rather looking at the scoring leaders in the present and using that as your draft rankings.

 

[saltming]

Very true, but it feels like cheating.

The goal is to draft BPA at time of draft and that usually means taking 18 year olds and projecting them into the future including 2 years later and beyond as that is what separates scouts from the rest. If you draft that 20 year old (overager) then the guess work has been removed when they are now a productive player and you see what you get.

The opportunity loss comes into play here because you essentially drafted wrong/poorly 2 years previous, and now looking to compensate your prospect pool via back-filling previous draft eligible years by drafting players passed over in the past. The cost however comes at the current draft expense where instead of grabbing 18 year olds with potential you're fixing the past and creating new holes in the future.

If you get an NHLer in the process its good as that is the goal, but if you have good scouting and reputation to find talent then drafting 18 year old Brooks you will be praised when 2 years later he leads his league in scoring with 120 points. If you're drafting when he is already a 120 point player and 20 years old then anyone can do that essentially because your not forecasting potential and draft eligible BPA but rather looking at the scoring leaders in the present and using that as your draft rankings.

It feels like good assets management to me.

It increases the chance that a 4th rounder becomes a nhl player thus increasing the team value.
All fair in love and war .... and the nhl

 

[Johny Drama]

The bolded is how I view drafted overagers as well. If we drafted them at that spot in their first draft eligible year, would we be very satisfied with how they developed so far? If the answer is yes, it's a good pick.

Heard people saying he should be putting up amazing numbers due to being older. How many players put 120 points in junior regardless of age? Without doing research would have to think that is a tough thing to accomplish regardless of the player's age.

 

[ULF_55]

Heard people saying he should be putting up amazing numbers due to being older. How many players put 120 points in junior regardless of age? Without doing research would have to think that is a tough thing to accomplish regardless of the player's age.

This is his 20 year old season, and he was scoring leader last year why is he is junior?

What does he have to learn in junior?

Seems like a waste of a year.

 

[Discoverer]

If you get an NHLer in the process its good as that is the goal, but if you have good scouting and reputation to find talent then drafting 18 year old Brooks you will be praised when 2 years later he leads his league in scoring with 120 points. If you're drafting when he is already a 120 point player and 20 years old then anyone can do that essentially because your not forecasting potential and draft eligible BPA but rather looking at the scoring leaders in the present and using that as your draft rankings.

So anytime someone is drafted with unexpectedly impressive stats it's only because of those stats? It seems like you're assuming that either a) good scouting teams don't make mistakes, or b) you should never change your opinion of a player.

 

[Mess]

It feels like good assets management to me.

It increases the chance that a 4th rounder becomes a nhl player thus increasing the team value.
All fair in love and war .... and the nhl

If you draft a 5-7" 18 year old draft eligible Connor Brown in the 6th round 156th overall coming off a 53 point season and 2 years later he is leading the OHL in scoring with 128 points and now a productive NHLer that is good drafting and scouting.

If you draft a 20 year old Adams Brooks in the 4th round when he has just put up 120 points and leads the WHL in scoring then anyone on this board could make that pick simply based on drafting BPA by ranking current CHL scoring leaders.

Many teams prefer to sign these overagers as "free wallets" that have been passed over in previous drafts and not use draft picks on them preferring to invest selections into 1st time eligible.

If you do use a valuable draft pick on an overager he better amount to something to validate the use of drafting verses UFA signing him and drafting others that can't be signed but need to be drafting to obtain their rights.

That also factors into the asset management discussion because you could potentially have both in your prospect pool.

 

[67Cup]

IIRC, Brooks had a nagging injury during at least the first part of training camp and didn't have the opportunity to compete at his best for a Marlies spot. Still, I'm a bit surprised that he wasn't assigned to Orlando. Dubas once said Orlando would be used for development purposes, like the lower classifications in minor league baseball. I would have thought that Brooks would have fit that role.

 

[Bullseye]

This is his 20 year old season, and he was scoring leader last year why is he is junior?

What does he have to learn in junior?

Seems like a waste of a year.

Numbers game.Lou knew he was going to send down several vets. If we weren't so well(over) stocked he would be learning with the Marlies now - exactly as Timashov is.

 

[Discoverer]

If you draft a 5-7" 18 year old draft eligible Connor Brown in the 6th round 156th overall coming off a 53 point season and 2 years later he is leading the OHL in scoring with 128 points and now a productive NHLer that is good drafting and scouting.

If you draft a 20 year old Adams Brooks in the 4th round when he has just put up 120 points and leads the WHL in scoring then anyone on this board could make that pick simply based on drafting BPA by ranking current CHL scoring leaders.

Many teams prefer to sign these overagers as "free wallets" that have been passed over in previous drafts and not use draft picks on them preferring to invest selections into 1st time eligible.

If you do use a valuable draft pick on an overager he better amount to something to validate the use of drafting verses UFA signing him and drafting others that can't be signed but need to be drafting to obtain their rights.

That also factors into the asset management discussion because you could potentially have both in your prospect pool.

And what if your scouts have watched the player, liked what they've seen all season, think it was a mistake for teams to let him slip by undrafted, believe he's developed extremely well over the past year, and project a further step forward this year that will increase league interest and create a lot of competition for him as a UFA?

If the organization believes he's the best player available, should they not draft him at all and just hope no one takes him and that they're able to sign him as a free agent? Or should they just take him and make sure they get him into their system since they believe he can contribute down the road?

 

[MLSE]

The points dont matter. Watch his game.

He's good, he definitely needs work. I wouldnt bet on his game translating well but it's not a bad pick for where he was drafted.

Pretty good shot, I'd want him to work more on his stick handling being a smaller guy.

 

[saltming]

If you draft a 5-7" 18 year old draft eligible Connor Brown in the 6th round 156th overall coming off a 53 point season and 2 years later he is leading the OHL in scoring with 128 points and now a productive NHLer that is good drafting and scouting.

If you draft a 20 year old Adams Brooks in the 4th round when he has just put up 120 points and leads the WHL in scoring then anyone on this board could make that pick simply based on drafting BPA by ranking current CHL scoring leaders.

Many teams prefer to sign these overagers as "free wallets" that have been passed over in previous drafts and not use draft picks on them preferring to invest selections into 1st time eligible.

If you do use a valuable draft pick on an overager he better amount to something to validate the use of drafting verses UFA signing him and drafting others that can't be signed but need to be drafting to obtain their rights.

That also factors into the asset management discussion because you could potentially have both in your prospect pool.

Valid arguments.
I would guess there is much more to it than simply drafting an overager.
Maybe he was also being scouted by other teams and we didn't want to chance losing him? Perhaps instead of taking a chance we could sign him as a free wallet the team decided he was worth the risk of a 4th? Or that he was BPA at that time?
So many variables. Imo it was a 4th and it looks well spent.

 

[Mess]

And what if your scouts have watched the player, liked what they've seen all season, think it was a mistake for teams to let him slip by undrafted, believe he's developed extremely well over the past year, and project a further step forward this year that will increase league interest and create a lot of competition for him as a UFA?

If the organization believes he's the best player available, should they not draft him at all and just hope no one takes him and that they're able to sign him as a free agent? Or should they just take him and make sure they get him into their system since they believe he can contribute down the road?

Its a gamble but my point is that by using a pick on an overager you expect to have him become something more then drafting an 18 year old and having him bust down the road.

I like Brooks and hope he works out and get to watch him in the WHL out West here and he is a good Junior player but not sure how much of an NHL future he might have.

Him being sent back the WHL as a 20 year old instead of playing on the Marlies does send up a Red Flag on his potential as he is now one of the oldest players in the WHL this year after leading the league in scoring last year and in his 5th junior season.

 

[zeke]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

 

[Bullseye]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

Is a free agent worse than an over-ager? Many successful free agents in the NHL over the years.

 

[AngryScotsman]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

Was Connor Brown not an overager?

 

[zeke]

Was Connor Brown not an overager?

nope.

 

[4thline]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

Brouwer, Callahan, Giordano, Wideman. It's rare but it does happen. In any case I wouldn't be in a hurry applying "rules of thumb" based on the Leafs prospect personnel decisions right now.

That rule of thumb is based on the assumption that if a player is playing their overage year in junior they weren't Pro calibre, not taking into account a massively stocked system and a hitch in the rules that that makes them ineligible for the slide rule. I think along with his injury his being in ht dub instead of the A has a lot to due with delaying his ELC and getting 4 years of development from him.

Canada4Gold has a better handle on this part of the CBA than me but I believe being drafted out of his U20 if we had've signed him to his elc it would have burned a year because he would have been too old at the time of signing.

Of course, if they really wanted him with the Marlies without burning a year he could be on an AHL only deal, but I think playing time was a major concern. We're too deep right now, it's starting the canibilization too early

 

[White Shadow]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

Tanner Pearson, Ondrej Palat, Tyler Johnson

 

[Walshy7]

Is a free agent worse than an over-ager? Many successful free agents in the NHL over the years.

not that I agree or disagree with him, A free agent overage draft pick costs you nothing except a contract slot and if he only gets a marlies contract not even that.

 

[ObscureAlien]

Kind of but not really.

I think of it like Connor Brown. He put up solid statistics in his Draft +2. Adam Brooks put up solid numbers in his Draft +2 season if you consider his original year of eligibility as his draft year.

If we draft Brooks in the same year as Nylander in the 4th round we would be ecstatic right now. I don't think it changes because we drafted him 2 years later. He is also still producing and I'd argue he should have been with the Marlies this year. At the same you could argue he is a late bloomer and could use another year of dominating junior too. It was also a numbers game as well.

At the very least it looks like we got a real player with some good potential.

Bolded is the way I see it. The player they did draft in the 4th round in 2014 was J.J. Piccinich and he has scored 10+19=29 this year while Brooks has a 120 point season under his belt and has scored 9+29=38.

 

[zeke]

Tanner Pearson, Ondrej Palat, Tyler Johnson

Pearson and Palat were never overagers.

But good call on Tyler Johnson. That gives some hope.

 

[zeke]

Brouwer, Callahan, Giordano, Wideman. It's rare but it does happen.

nice calls.

 

[4thline]

Bolded is the way I see it. The player they did draft in the 4th round in 2014 was J.J. Piccinich and he has scored 10+19=29 this year while Brooks has a 120 point season under his belt and has scored 9+29=38.

Personally I liken it to the 6th rounder we lost in a deadline deal. Taking Brooks in the 4th with the draft year he had would have been crazy, but in the 6th... savant like flyer

 

[barilko05]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

I would guess the odds of an overager making it are about as good as ANY 4th rounder, so what's the difference if he's an 18 yr old or overage? How many times have members of this fan base gone bonkers on the scouting staff for "playing it safe" in the later rounds and not taking a chance on high risk player? So now we draft an overager with obvious scoring potential in the 4th round, and people are still complaining? Never change, HF boards.

 

[Patmac40]

As much as I trust our scouting staff, overagers never turn into good players.

That's flat-out false