2019-20 Prospects Thread
- Thread starter Zombotron
- Start date
Debrincat93
Registered User
He was an RFA, and I doubt the Canucks would have qualified him....so he just left early.
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 22,129
- 14,052
Yup. Not an NHL player without the puck. And not good enough with the puck to compensate for his very poor play without it.
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,440
- 3,418
Listening to the scrimmage radio broadcast and checking some video highlights, Lind is doing quite well today through the first two periods. 1G, 1A and making plenty happen. His goal was on a breakaway, nice shot right under the crossbar. Smart decision on his assist to fire a low shot from the slot that forced a rebound toward the side where two of his teammates were unchecked.
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,456
Great, then let's expand the sample size to a point where it's meaningful. Click around other rosters on hockeydb. It isn't always clear at what point in a season an AHL player gets a stint in the NHL, so the appearance of 100 or more consecutive AHL games may not always be entirely accurate, but it's usually near the end of a season.
Alec Martinez -- played 120 AHL games before hitting the league, not a regular until 23, peaked as a top-pairing defender.
Jonathan Marchessault -- played about 300 AHL games and 4 NHL games to start his career, not a regular until 23, peaked as a 1st line forward.
Conor Garland -- played at least 110 AHL games before playing an NHL game, not a regular until 22, 2nd line forward.
Michael Grabner -- played about 150 AHL games before playing in the NHL, not a regular until 23, peaked as a standout 2nd line forward and scored 25+ goals three times.
Tyler Bertuzzi -- played over 100 AHL games before playing in the NHL, not a regular until 22. Solid 2nd line forward.
Anthony Mantha -- played over 100 AHL games before playing in the NHL, not a regular until 22. borderline 1st line forward.
This is just looking at a handful of teams, and doesn't even mention that many other good players played in comparable minor leagues at the same age before making the NHL.
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,147
- 5,456
There are three top-6 forwards on Tampa's roster alone who played more than 100 AHL games before playing a single game in the NHL -- Ondrej Palat, Yanni Gourde, and Tyler Johnson. Everyone's heard of Mike Hoffman, of course. Tomas Tatar and Phillipe Danault both played well over 100 AHL games each before making the league at 22. They were Montreal's two leading scorers this season. Almost every team has forwards like this. They aren't outliers or unicorns.
In fairness to MS it has not been something that ever as happened in Vancouver. Rarely if ever has team had depth and prospects at the same time. It will be shortlived with cap crunch but team has a lot of depth with good prospects right now.
1) Nobody has ever said that 'nobody ever spends 100+ games in the AHL and becomes a good NHL player'. What I'm saying is that the odds are very low, and that when you take your examples against the totality of drafted players who played 100+ pro games and then didn't make it ... these guys represent a very small percentage.
2) Defenders are slightly different and can spend a bit longer. I'd use ~150 games instead of 100.
3) A guy playing, like, 110 games in the AHL and then making it doesn't exactly disprove my 'around 100 games' hypothesis.
4) Some of the guys you've listed were impacted by the 2012-13 lockout and played more AHL games than they otherwise would have had that situation not occurred.
5) When you look at your examples, a huge percentage are total late bloomers who either weren't drafted at all or were drafted very late, and then had to battle just to get decent looks and playing time in the AHL. The experience and development curve of Yanni Gourde or Jonathan Marchessault doesn't really have anything to do with the experience and development curve of Kole Lind at #33 overall. Late bloomers can occasionally be a thing. High-drafted early developers then also being late bloomers is not really a thing at all. I remember trying to identify a first-round pick who was also a late bloomer in the context of the Derrick Pouliot acquisition a couple years ago, and it was nearly impossible - you had Riley Nash and then you had Daniel Cleary like 20+ years ago. Philippe Danault is a unicorn who can now be added to this list.
6) A large percentage of 'exceptions' come from Detroit's system, where they've always had a different philosophy of 'overcooking' and slowly developing guys. You listed Tatar, Bertuzzi, and Mantha, and you can also add Nyquist. The results of that organization are completely different from the other 30 organizations.
Pip
Registered User
“Most 3rd round picks don’t work out”
“but look at this list of successful NHL players drafted in the third round!”
“but look at this list of successful NHL players drafted in the third round!”
Lol. They most definitely are outliers. You can debate the degree to which they are outliers, but the fact that you can find one dozen or so of them against hundreds of players that don’t work out and play over 100 AHL games pretty clearly shows they are outliers.
Last edited:
xtra
Registered User
Also like MS said that lockout season does skew the numbers for players in the analysis right now.
You also have to look at the age the guys step into the AHL. For example, Kole Lind stepped into Utica as a teenager in his draft +2 season, whereas a guy like Zack MacEwen turned pro at 21. 12-18 months can make a huge difference at that point in a players development.
Sure, but MS was only ever stating a general rule. The intention was never that it would literally apply to every situation, and this was pretty obvious. It’s good that MS even bothers to try to ground expectations around here. As someone who has been around this forum since the early 2000s, I can tell you that people are generally overly optimistic.
ChilliBilly
Registered User
Guilty. Though many are overly pessimistic too
It’s easier to be right if you’re pessimistic especially with the picks that aren’t top 10. Odds are pretty good that most will bust.
Frankie Blueberries
Allergic to draft picks
- Jan 27, 2016
- 9,161
- 10,639
I feel like the best mentality with non-top 10 prospects is "hope for the best, expect the worst." Sounds cynical but I think it's the best way to not get your hopes up. We've seen too many Jensen, Schroeder, Rodin, etc. situations.
The flipside of that is that both players started playing major junior at the exact same time.
MacEwen is a really unusual case because he was playing such low-level hockey so far into his late teens. In terms of 'hockey age' I'd say he's a couple years younger than his birthdate. He isn't the same thing as a different 1996-born guy who was playing on U-16 national teams since 2011 and drafted at the top of the 2014 draft.
I don't think I've ever seen a poster here who was overly pessimistic on prospects.
I'm singled out for being negative, but if anything I've been overly *optimistic* historically.
People get fooled because every player *seems* to improve after being drafted and that makes it easy to craft a narrative that 'this is a good pick that I should be excited about'. And of course pretty much every player *does* improve, especially considering they spend another couple years getting older relative to their CHL competition or spend years in the NCAA getting older relative to that competition, or go to the AHL and have a better 2nd year than their first year.
The trick is to be able to separate 'progress' that is actually totally average and not leading anywhere from the guys who are actually separating themselves and dominating. If you're looking at a Tyler Madden who moved up levels and dominated in the NCAA and WJC and would probably go in the top 30-40 picks in a re-draft, that's a player to get excited about. If you're looking at some CHLer who went from a 50-point guy to a 65-point guy in two years after being drafted ... not so much. Despite what seems like improvement, that player is still tracking to bust.
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,440
- 3,418
Exactly. A 2nd-round draft pick has to develop at a higher than normal rate to become a full-time NHL player. The standard rate of development makes them quality AHLers who get a chance or two in the NHL but don't stick and thereafter appear only as call-up guys for when injuries strike (e.g., Justin Bailey). The below-average developers never see the NHL (Dylan Blujus is a prime example; strictly AHL contracts since his ELC expired, not even a single 2-way NHL deal). Gets even tougher when dropping to the 4th & 5th rounds.
Exactly.
People don't really seem to grasp the numbers. Roughly 25% of 2nd rounders stick in the NHL, and maybe only 10% as top-6/top-4 actual real quality assets. Out of 30 players, that's 7 that make it and 3 that actually are assets with real value. But 25 of 30 players seem to be 'improving' to casual fans. Those 3 obvious hits are normally really obvious right away and clearly separate themselves as elite prospects who should have gone much higher. But fans convince themselves that some middling 2nd rounder who's the 15th-best out of 30 guys taken in that round is actually a really good pick because his junior numbers got a little better, when in fact he's tracking to bust. Jett Woo right now is an example of this - his season last year was a disaster and he isn't tracking well at all, but as soon as you say this people jump down your throat.
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,440
- 3,418
In aggregate, perhaps, but sometimes people react too strongly to a slow start or one tough season and write off a prospect too soon. Anybody in any league can have an off-year for a variety of reasons and then bounce back. It's the double-disaster of consecutive seasons with questionable development that is the sign of serious trouble for a prospect.
Using Blujus as an example again, I'm fairly confident that when Tampa signed him to his ELC two years after they drafted him they already knew that he was a real long shot. Whereas with Jett Woo-- prefacing my remarks by noting that I rarely watch junior hockey, I've seen him play two games which is exactly the number that I saw Lind play in junior after he was drafted-- I think there's probably still some kind of hope because people seemed to be satisfied with his development in his D+1 season. Different franchise, different role, and only one season that maybe didn't go as well as expected.
ChilliBilly
Registered User
You do detailed analysis with valid explanations as to why you place your levels of expectation that you do. You are a tad on the negative side but definitely not overly negative. What I was talking about are those that seem to set themselves up to be able to say I knew he was going to be a bust.
Statements like “Try will never come back” or “Rathbone will never sign”.
Podkolzin scored a couple goals in a 4-2 win for his team today.
Here’s hoping he can pick up where he left off.
Here’s hoping he can pick up where he left off.
