NHL Entry Draft 2019 Entry Draft Discussion (part 3)

[Agent Zub]

Its evaluation and asset managment.

The team no longer values high end skill as we've seen how they draft the past few years and how all our skilled players get dealt or not re-signed.

Dorion also tosses in picks or downgrades in trades at every opportunity. Hoffman trade, Nilsson trade, Duchene trade, Sogaard trade, etc and on and on.

Its a terrible feeling as a fan. The draft table seemed like a safe space for us for so long. Now it's not looking like the case anymore after these past few years. I don't hate every pick but the majority are questionable at best.

agreed, this management will continually pass on guys like Aho, Boeser, Debrinecat etc in favour of the Pintos, Bowers, Lazars, and as much as I like him Colin Whites.

its a huge flaw in this management's scouting ability. we used to be a great team becasue we could identify high end talent and weren't shy about taking them. Now it seems that they only care drafting players who though are well rounded, lack high end ability.

its very conspiracy but do we not want to draft skill because Melnyk doesn't want to pay for skill? its much easier to retain grinders.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Every indication out there is that they had Pinto high and that they felt confident he wasn't making it to their next pick.

Mann - "...the kid that was there was a kid we were a little scared of losing... we knew if we moved back too far we definitely weren't going to get him..."

Maybe they were had some indication LA liked him? That video sure doesn't necessarily mean it was Kaliyev. In fact, I would have expected them to have cut out less than they did (considering what they did show) if it was Kaliyev.

Dorion would make the call. Maybe the Kings wanted Pinto , and so did the Sens .. that would be the only reason not to make the trade... Well that and Dorion did not feel a 6th rounder was enough .. In the end he should have made the deal imo.. This was a very strange draft by the Sens. I still can't make sense of it

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

its all speculation.... its not INSANELY ABSURD to keep your pick cause of a 6th rounder especially if you even thought they might take Pinto

The question is how much more was Pinto valued as a pick over
Kaliyev
Brink
Hoglander
Lavoie
Rees
Afanasyev
Matthew Robertson
Korczak
Nick Robertson

and why?

WE MUST HAVE PINTO ????? I like him but must have him? Pinto is great and all these guys are shite .. How is he so much more coveted than to take an extra pick to move down 1 spot. 1 spot...

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

agreed, this management will continually pass on guys like Aho, Boeser, Debrinecat etc in favour of the Pintos, Bowers, Lazars, and as much as I like him Colin Whites.

its a huge flaw in this management's scouting ability. we used to be a great team becasue we could identify high end talent and weren't shy about taking them. Now it seems that they only care drafting players who though are well rounded, lack high end ability.

its very conspiracy but do we not want to draft skill because Melnyk doesn't want to pay for skill? its much easier to retain grinders.

Dorion seems to like offense out of the defense and defense out of the forwards. Goalies .. I think he has a special affection for..

 

[Icelevel]

Dorion seems to like offense out of the defense and defense out of the forwards. Goalies .. I think he has a special affection for..

Good observations

 

[Micklebot]

The question is how much more was Pinto valued as a pick over
Kaliyev
Brink
Hoglander
Lavoie
Rees
Afanasyev
Matthew Robertson
Korczak
Nick Robertson

and why?

WE MUST HAVE PINTO ????? I like him but must have him? Pinto is great and all these guys are ****e .. How is he so much more coveted than to take an extra pick to move down 1 spot. 1 spot...

I agree, but I do think some of the guys people are most upset about us passing on were likely on our do not draft list. Kaliyev, Lavioe, and perhaps Brink (solely due to size).

Once you eliminate those three, there's only one guy I am upset about passing on, and one guy I'd rather have picked but am not too upset about. The rest I could go either way.

In the end, a 6th round pick is no big deal to miss out on if it means getting your 1st choice instead of your 2nd choice. I do find it hard to believe that both us and LA wanted to go somewhat off the board for Pinto when the three somewhat polarizing picks were available though, and a bunch of other guys that one could reasonably prefer.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I agree, but I do think some of the guys people are most upset about us passing on were likely on our do not draft list. Kaliyev, Lavioe, and perhaps Brink (solely due to size).

Once you eliminate those three, there's only one guy I am upset about passing on, and one guy I'd rather have picked but am not too upset about. The rest I could go either way.

In the end, a 6th round pick is no big deal to miss out on if it means getting your 1st choice instead of your 2nd choice. I do find it hard to believe that both us and LA wanted to go somewhat off the board for Pinto when the three somewhat polarizing picks were available though, and a bunch of other guys that one could reasonably prefer.

Not sure how we can put those players on a DND list. but its possible. IMO it was low risk to move down one spot and the opportunity cost wasn't that high.

 

[BondraTime]

I agree, but I do think some of the guys people are most upset about us passing on were likely on our do not draft list. Kaliyev, Lavioe, and perhaps Brink (solely due to size).

Once you eliminate those three, there's only one guy I am upset about passing on, and one guy I'd rather have picked but am not too upset about. The rest I could go either way.

In the end, a 6th round pick is no big deal to miss out on if it means getting your 1st choice instead of your 2nd choice. I do find it hard to believe that both us and LA wanted to go somewhat off the board for Pinto when the three somewhat polarizing picks were available though, and a bunch of other guys that one could reasonably prefer.

LA's chief of amateur scouting has been gleefully telling everyone how "smart" he is that he picked a D in Bjornfot at 22 because he thought he'd be able to get 1 of 2 forwards at 33, and both were on the board when their pick was up, saying he'd look very foolish if their guys were't there.

 

[Micklebot]

Not sure how we can put those players on a DND list. but its possible. IMO it was low risk to move down one spot and the opportunity cost wasn't that high.

Yeah, it's pretty much the only way I can rationalize passing on them... I mean, from a talent perspective, Kaliyev is a top half of the first round talent, at worst top 20. Him making it to 32 suggests to me that he's on a few DND lists. Brink, well some teams just get really cold feet with small guys, maybe not quite DND cold, but enough for it to effectively be a DND flag. Lavoie surprises me, but someone suggested there is some backstory to him that teams might want to stay away from, not him per say, but rather around him. No clue as to the veracity so idk...

Anyways, to me we should be looking for the next Kucherov or Aho, we currently have a really deep pool so we can afford to swing and miss if it means hitting a grand slam, and I don't think we did ourselves any favours in that regard. Hopefully I am wrong.

 

[ijif]

For those interested, I looked at Corsica's prospect model which goes back to the 2013 draft. The model gives a probability of success and a projected WAR/82. By multiplying the two we can balance both numbers. After doing that, we can look at Kaliyev's closest comparables that played in the OHL. Brown would not actually be comparable, but I added him because we are all familiar with him, and I added Pinto just for easy visual comparison, but I know he did not play in the OHL. I just found all this data (thanks to user @Sens of Anarchy for putting me on MannyElk's draft thread, didn't know he had draft models), but looking over it (briefly), using this model plus eye test would have helped a lot of teams at the draft, especially at the top end. Anyway, here are his comparables:

Basically, the higher the green bar, the safer the pick. The higher the red bar, the greater the potential is. Of course, that is measured by the model. Three of his four comparables are NHL players, and if Brown plays, that'll be four out of five. Monahan and Konecny are good players. Crouse is only comparable because he was a super safe pick, but everyone knew that at the draft. His question was upside, which is/was reflected in the projected WAR/82. Ho-Sang has all the skills to play in the NHL, and although he has attitude issues, those types of issues are different than compete level issues. If a player has attitude issues, it is reasonable to pass on him. However, by all accounts, Kaliyev works on his game off the ice. People just want him to play with more jam and urgency, but you can be a great player without being super intense. In any case, based on the collective eye test of scouts as measured by Bob Mack's list and this model, and any other number of statistics, we reached on Pinto based on players that were available. Of course, that does not mean it was a bad pick. Players that have Pinto level scores have turned into good players.

 

[ijif]

Also, for anyone doubting a statistical approach to drafting, and this has been mentioned before in this thread, but here is the Canucks getting embarrassingly out-drafted (since 2000-13) by a potato (only allowed to take highest scoring CHL forward). Look at the difference for team potato. Not only does the potato get the best player (Giroux), they get 4000+ extra games, 900+ extra goals, and 1000+ extra assists. How many extra drafts would the nucks need to make up that difference?

The article is a bit older, but the Canucks would have swapped Horvat for Mantha, and add J.G Pageau and O.Bjorkstrand to the potato team. Also, team potato misses on Versteeg and ROR by one point. Team potato would not be able to select Hughes or Pettersson due to not being in the CHL, but what can you do you...it is a potato. I'll try and find the more rigorous study I have read before, but it was a long time ago, like a couple years. Anway, the conclsion was something like the potato would outdraft at least half the teams in the league, but I could be remembering wrong.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

Also, for anyone doubting a statistical approach to drafting, and this has been mentioned before in this thread, but here is the Canucks getting embarrassingly out drafted (since 2000-13) by a potato (only allowed to take highest scoring CHL forward). Look at the difference for team potato. Not only does the potato get the best player (Giroux), they get 4000+ extra games, 900+ extra goals, and 1000+ extra assists. How many extra drafts would the nucks need to make up that difference?
View attachment 240335

The article is a bit older, but the Canucks would have swapped Horvat for Mantha, and add J.G Pageau and O.Bjorkstrand to the potato team. Also, team potato misses on Versteeg and ROR by one point. Team potato would not be able to select Hughes or Pettersson due to not being in the CHL, but what can you do you...it is a potato. I'll try and find the more rigirous study I have read before, but it was a long time ago, like a couple years. Anway, the conclsion was something like the potato would outdraft at least half the teams in the league, but I could be remembering wrong.

Why does the potato team have 12 or so extra picks?

 

[ijif]

Why does the potato team have 12 or so extra picks?

To note, the article was made in may 2014.
The reason is because those are the notable players taken. The actual Canucks ran out of notable players. Like i said, they got out-drafted in embarrassing fashion.

To be fair, the Canucks lose Luc Bourdon (R.I.P) due to very unfortunate circumstances, so give them a boost. I see no problem assuming he would have made an impact.

 

[Que]

Pierre Dorion looks like a potato.

That counts for something, right?

 

[R2010]

Also, for anyone doubting a statistical approach to drafting, and this has been mentioned before in this thread, but here is the Canucks getting embarrassingly out-drafted (since 2000-13) by a potato (only allowed to take highest scoring CHL forward). Look at the difference for team potato. Not only does the potato get the best player (Giroux), they get 4000+ extra games, 900+ extra goals, and 1000+ extra assists. How many extra drafts would the nucks need to make up that difference?
View attachment 240335

The article is a bit older, but the Canucks would have swapped Horvat for Mantha, and add J.G Pageau and O.Bjorkstrand to the potato team. Also, team potato misses on Versteeg and ROR by one point. Team potato would not be able to select Hughes or Pettersson due to not being in the CHL, but what can you do you...it is a potato. I'll try and find the more rigorous study I have read before, but it was a long time ago, like a couple years. Anway, the conclsion was something like the potato would outdraft at least half the teams in the league, but I could be remembering wrong.

For work I have to use a lot of analytics and all I can say is that you shouldn't trust any models unless they are explicit about the uncertainties. Most of the models out there in the hockey analytics world do not provide any estimate of uncertainty. No one would take that seriously in terms of an actual science output in most fields and yet people repeat these numbers as if they're gospel. Some of the prominent public analysts have even said they don't know how to estimate the error in their models yet they speak as if they have authoritative knowledge and use precision to decimal points - it's incredible really.

Even the most basic things like corsi comparisons between players it doesn't seem like anyone even includes error bars or any analysis of variability. Is player X with a 50.3% actually statistically distinguishable on a per game basis from player Y with a 49.5%? To quote Alfie - Probably Not.

A final point - in terms of draft strategies there are lots of ways to think about it - some advocate always going for highest potential versus player floor/probability of success. That may work if you have '50' simulations where you can win a few times and have that boom or bust player actually boom but in the real world when jobs are on the line and you get one shot at it you have to trust your eyes and what you hear from the player. Statistics can help guide who to look at but they will not carry a player over the line.

 

[R2010]

That's the thing, we always think someone's is going to take our guy, even when we are reaching 20-30+ picks for them.

We thought someone was going to take JBD.

We thought Soogard was going in the 1st.

We thought 1 team was going to trade up to steal Pinto.

At some point, you need to stop thinking other teams are going to reach for guys like you, when it seems completely insane they would. Did we really think another team was gong to reach into another hemisphere to take Lodin in the 4th when he likely is on nobodies draft list? Same with Burgess. Reaching is perfectly fine, I have no problems with that. We should know that our list is nowhere near common and we have guys higher Than pretty much anyone. A move back a single spot is very safe, especially when there are 4/5 extremely high profile guys left in the board and you are going to be taking a guy ranked towards the 3rd round. We traded up to 37 using an extra pick to take Soogard. Worst case we take him instead and save our other picks.

I think Mann has said that he was told afterwards JBD was going soon after their pick. Sogaard I would not have been surprised if he went before 44. Hard to predict with goalies but I'm fine with him because he seems to have upside. In terms of Pinto - you're certainly more than likely right that Kaliyev was always their target - was just pointing out that the video at the time maybe didn't make it that clear. I do find it surprising they didn't take that 6th.

 

[bert]

Of course he has, he has scored in the leagues he has played in & will score when he attends college,. I never compared him to Stone, I said that the Sens could help him improve his skating as they did with Stone. That doesn't mean I think he will become Mark Stone, it means I think they can help him to be a better skater. That chart SOA put up showed that he was rated high with competitiveness & hockey sense & average skating & puck skills, two things that IMO the Sens can help him improve in. If those two things can be improved upon than IMO the scoring will improve also. That's what I said.

Never scored at a high rate at any level. It wont happen in the NHL it just doesnt happen. With having the 44th pick sitting there I believe this will go down as one of the worst picks in this history of the organization.

 

[bert]

The turning down a free pick rumour/fact? is certainly fascinating, would be interested to hear more context on that.

Interesting that you describe it as fascinating. There are just so many more accurate adjectives that are appropriate.

 

[bert]

I don't understand this one myself, he must have been scared LA was taking Pinto.

The only other thing I can think is that he was offered better deals that he turned down after round 1 or in the morning of Day 2 and he didn't want to look like a jack ass taking something worse.

This seems like the most likely scenario. Dorions insecurities once again make him look like an absolute moron no matter what way you look at it. Once again his pride gets in the way if doing his job to the best of his abilities. This guy has got to go.

 

[ijif]

For work I have to use a lot of analytics and all I can say is that you shouldn't trust any models unless they are explicit about the uncertainties. Most of the models out there in the hockey analytics world do not provide any estimate of uncertainty. No one would take that seriously in terms of an actual science output in most fields and yet people repeat these numbers as if they're gospel. Some of the prominent public analysts have even said they don't know how to estimate the error in their models yet they speak as if they have authoritative knowledge and use precision to decimal points - it's incredible really.

Even the most basic things like corsi comparisons between players it doesn't seem like anyone even includes error bars or any analysis of variability. Is player X with a 50.3% actually statistically distinguishable on a per game basis from player Y with a 49.5%? To quote Alfie - Probably Not.

A final point - in terms of draft strategies there are lots of ways to think about it - some advocate always going for highest potential versus player floor/probability of success. That may work if you have '50' simulations where you can win a few times and have that boom or bust player actually boom but in the real world when jobs are on the line and you get one shot at it you have to trust your eyes and what you hear from the player. Statistics can help guide who to look at but they will not carry a player over the line.

To your first point, yes, I know. Anyone who has taken intro statistics knows this. This is something people need to watch for during election season and polling data; however, it is less important to have for prospect models, than for things like scientific literature. In the end, for prospect models, all that really matters is "is it predicting good hockey players" or "would it have helped me discern between players". You do not need a standard error to know this. however, I will concede it would be nice to have all the things that you point out, and I will concede that the hockey stats community is quite arrogant, and they think they have all the answers. Trust me, I know I am fallible. As my boy BR said "I'd never die for my beliefs. I could be wrong" or something like that.

Second point, literally said in the post above you quoted that the model (mannyelks) + eye test would have helped teams. Notice the + eye test. I know stats are not everything. It is the eye test people who seem to struggle with the eye test isn't everything.

And yes, I have a good grasp of SDT. I know what risk neutral, risk averse, and risk taking choices mean.

Your last argument is incredibly weak. Look, I just showed you evdience that taking the highest CHL scoring player destroyed the Canucks in over a decades worth of drafting, and that is just little potato sitting in front of computer, so why would I be worried about my job if I employed the same strategy (of course, I would test it more)? This is a nonsensical argument that keeps getting repeated all over this board, main or otherwise. It is a lazy excuse for poor thought process at the drafting table.

 

[Knave]

It would be interesting if someone could do that for all teams but I suspect it would be difficult to format the drafts and databases.

You don't need a confidence level or 99.999%. Even the best teams fail much more often than they succeed.

The people who did that comparison did say 11 teams beat their 'draft highest scoring CHL player available' strategy without expanding on how they determined this. I wonder which teams. I wonder if we are one (though our scouting and GM and management has changed considerably since).

I wonder how much better the dummy system could get if you prorated other leagues like the SHL, KHL, lower divisions and US national development program with a set factor. Prorate defensemen points.

I'm normally not a fan of analytics at the player level but scouts arent very successful. Why not use objective criteria like who can score? As opposed to "feelings" or "drafting for need".

 

[Tuna99]

I think Mann has said that he was told afterwards JBD was going soon after their pick. Sogaard I would not have been surprised if he went before 44. Hard to predict with goalies but I'm fine with him because he seems to have upside. In terms of Pinto - you're certainly more than likely right that Kaliyev was always their target - was just pointing out that the video at the time maybe didn't make it that clear. I do find it surprising they didn't take that 6th.

I think they moved up to take Soggard because the pick at #36 was a goalie and they wanted to get a goalie with their 2nd round pick.

To me picking the right prospects was more important then picking the highest rated - we could of taken the small forward with skill but we already have Pageau and Abramov, we could of taken the flashy one dimensional scoring forward but that didn’t work without Hoffman it these players are Cap nightmares relative to their on ice contribution.

Getting big players, competitive players, honest players, team first players to me is the most important thing over skill. Every team in the NHL that wins has determination and team first over skill. Skill wins you shoot outs, team play and intangibles is what wins every night.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

agreed, this management will continually pass on guys like Aho, Boeser, Debrinecat etc in favour of the Pintos, Bowers, Lazars, and as much as I like him Colin Whites.

its a huge flaw in this management's scouting ability. we used to be a great team becasue we could identify high end talent and weren't shy about taking them. Now it seems that they only care drafting players who though are well rounded, lack high end ability.

its very conspiracy but do we not want to draft skill because Melnyk doesn't want to pay for skill? its much easier to retain grinders.

Isn't it obvious?

You can plug in a grinder just about anywhere in the lineup and play him for 100+ games before he flames out. The skill guys can easily bust before making it to the NHL. It's all about inflating the draft stats, aka "we're a great drafting team because 70% (or whatever)of my picks made it to the NHL" kind of statistics. As long as a kid manages to play a few games in the NHL, it's a Big Success where Dorion can claim to be a drafting genius.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Dorion seems to like offense out of the defense and defense out of the forwards. Goalies .. I think he has a special affection for..

This seems to be the “plan” and if it is, I’m fine with it. Clearly there’s some sort of pattern. If he was taking defensive forwards and big. Bruising d men constantly then I would be worried. He’s clearly given his scouts some sort of outline on what he wants.

Now I think it’s obvious Lassi wasn’t our guy. But he fits the mold still of what we’re going for. I mean we’re gettinf a high end talent next year in the top 4 almost certainly, maybe dorion didn’t think the “high skill” guys at 19, 32 were sure things at all this year so he took the more sure thing all round guys knowing we’re getting that superstar next year. I despise dorion, just trying to see what went through his head.

 

[SENATOR]

Ottawa is drafting college players so they can even save on those contracts and not to have them too yearly on the payroll. It is ridiculous to have a drafting strategy like this. Ok, Dorion my boy, draft Pinto we do not have to pay him for awhile. And we can not afford Kaliyev))) This team is something else))