GDT: 2019 IIHF World Championship III (OP Warning)

[BenedictGomez]

2012 was the starting point and I just selected the next 5 years. Yes 2008 was a bad example for what I did

So was 2012.

Three of the top-5 picks that year were defenseman.

The logic you're attempting (bashing NHL scouts by using top-5 pick "points" as sole proxy of success) was flawed from the start.

 

[OmNomNom]

@Aethon I mean i agree with you that scouting is faulted, but the % chances of players playing in the NHL (based on round selection) are consistent aren't they? like the earlier you're drafted, the higher the odds are you'll crack the NHL. and those draft positions are based not just on skill, but on individual team need and readiness in size, skill, IQ, etc

granted, gems are found ALL the time, that's why it's not like a 0% chance you'll crack the NHL if you're drafted in the 6th rd. but ranking is pretty much necessary. like what's your endgame point?

 

[Nubmer6]

Just for clarification...I have not made up my mind who I prefer at the moment.. I take exception with idea that Hughes is the clear #1 and firmly believe that that Kakko is well ahead of Hughes right now....
.

That's exactly where I stand, although I've recently started leaning towards heavily Hughes. I still think Kakko should definitely be in the conversation

 

[JimEIV]

So was 2012.

Three of the top-5 picks that year were defenseman.

The logic you're attempting (bashing NHL scouts by using top-5 pick "points" as sole proxy of success) was flawed from the start.

And 4 of the top 10 scorers from that draft are Dmen...2 of the top 6. Just one was a #78

 

[OmNomNom]

for real, what's the point of this discussion right now? i mean that honestly

 

[BenedictGomez]

like what's your endgame point?

Best of luck with this.

 

[JimEIV]

for real, what's the point of this discussion right now? i mean that honestly

Where do the best players come from in the draft and why is it seemingly so haphazard if the science of scouting is so good...But really

Your logical fallacy is appeal to authority

 

[PKs Broken Stick]

it's not really surprising podkolzin fell. It's more surprising so many people had him at #3 before over turcotte/byram. Never understood that.

 

[Missionhockey]

I suppose this was directed at me since I did use the phrase "head and shoulders"...

I did say Kakko right now is head and shoulders above Hughes....I personally don't see how anyone could deny that....but I guess there are some that do? I mean the kid is leading a team averaging a PPG against pro competition...he has shown high level skill, a pro level ability to protect the puck, the ability score on his own, strength of much older player and very good shot. Yet some are suggesting that his ceiling is limited...this seems odd to me from what I have seen.

There seems to be a general thought that Hughes skating and play making ability will eventually surpass Kakko...The context was when will Hughes bridge that gap because Kakko is head and shoulders above Hughes right now and the play we are seeing now confirms that.

Are you actually claiming Hughes is not behind Kakko right now or is your issue with my words and the degree of how far behind he currently is?

I’m sure this has been said before but has this entire argument been based on the WC? Kakko has played seven games at the WC, he’s played over 60 games all year. Basing your conclusions on one tournament is, at best, incomplete.

For the sake of comparison, Hughes has played over 70. There’s no way anyone can say one is “head and shoulders” ahead of the other with out at least combing through a bigger chunk of their games.

 

[Ripshot 43]

Somebody clearly has the past week off/ was on vacation




(And no I’m not talking about Hughes )

 

[None Shall Pass]

So, this is the World championships thread, right?

 

[JimEIV]

I’m sure this has been said before but has this entire argument been based on the WC? Kakko has played seven games at the WC, he’s played over 60 games all year. Basing your conclusions on one tournament is, at best, incomplete.

For the sake of comparison, Hughes has played over 70. There’s no way anyone can say one is “head and shoulders” ahead of the other with out at least combing through a bigger chunk of their games.

Hughes hasn't played over 70 - He has played 50 - USNTDP 24 is included in the USDP...It is actually 24 + 36

Edit: Look how Hockey Db breaks it down Jack Hughes (b.2001) Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

But HockeyDB leaves out the tournements.

USNTDP Juniors	USHL	24	12	36	48	4	17	|
	U.S. National U18 Team “C”	USDP	50	34	78	112	28		|

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[NjDevsRR]

​

 

[Scooooooooooooot]

Hughes hasn't played over 70 - He has played 50 - USNTDP 24 is included in the USDP...It is actually 24 + 36

Edit: Look how Hockey Db breaks it down Jack Hughes (b.2001) Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

But HockeyDB leaves out the tournements.

USNTDP Juniors	USHL	24	12	36	48	4	17	|
	U.S. National U18 Team “C”	USDP	50	34	78	112	28		|

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Hughes has played over 90 games this year based on elite prospects. Jack Hughes at eliteprospects.com

Edit: Nevermind I see what you're saying... Not sure why they bracket it like that. He's played 71 games this year.

 

[Missionhockey]

Hughes hasn't played over 70 - He has played 50 - USNTDP 24 is included in the USDP...It is actually 24 + 36

Edit: Look how Hockey Db breaks it down Jack Hughes (b.2001) Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

But HockeyDB leaves out the tournements.

USNTDP Juniors	USHL	24	12	36	48	4	17	|
	U.S. National U18 Team “C”	USDP	50	34	78	112	28		|

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Okay my mistake although I still feel my point was made. There’s too much information out there to base your opinion on two tournaments, one of which Jack arguably played better than Kakko.

 

[JimEIV]

Okay my mistake although I still feel my point was made. There’s too much information out there to base your opinion on two tournaments, one of which Jack arguably played better than Kakko.

You can make a legitimate argument Hughes wasn't the best on the USNDTP -- I wouldn't make that argument...But it is something to look at....The thing that strikes me is how many good players there are here. And that needs to be factored in when looking at the "Body of work"

2.15 PPG for Turcotte
2 PPG for Hughes
1.5 PPG for Boldy
1.48 PPG for Zegras
1.46 PPG for Caufield
1.18 PPG for York* Dman

#	Player Name	Pos.	GP	G	A	Pts	PIM	+/-	GP	G	A	Pts	PIM	Birthplace	Age
6	Jack Hughes	C	24	12	36	48	4	17						FL: Orlando	17
9	Matthew Boldy	L	28	17	26	43	16	14						MA: Millis	17
13	Cole Caufield	R	28	29	12	41	23	19						WI: Stevens Point	17
11	Trevor Zegras	C	27	14	26	40	34	18						NY: Bedford	17
19	Alex Turcotte	C	16	12	22	34	14	27						IL: Island Lake	17
2	Cam York	D	28	7	26	33	12	40						CA: Anaheim Hills	17

[THEAD] [/THEAD]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Call Me Al]

funny how you could make that argument, and yet quite literally NOBODY is attempting to make that argument

 

[Call Me Al]

seriously, what's the point here, to try and insist that jack won't be as good of a hockey player as everyone says? this conversation is not going to end for months or years because as far as i can tell none of you can predict the future

 

[JimEIV]

seriously, what's the point here, to try and insist that jack won't be as good of a hockey player as everyone says? this conversation is not going to end for months or years because as far as i can tell none of you can predict the future

I don't believe that #1 is a clear, "no brainer" choice. That is the only point.


But 3 out 5 dentist say otherwise.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I don't believe that #1 is a clear, "no brainer" choice. That is the only point.

You've written 1000 posts why you think Kakko should be the #1 pick, yet you've never ACTUALLY said the Devils should pick Kakko #1, because you dont want there to be a record of you saying that when it spectacularly fails a few years from now.

In fact, you'll probably now deny that these prior 1000 posts on the subject means you think Kakko should be #1, even though no reasonable reader could possibly assume anything else from reading your posts.

 

[Better Call Sal]

 

[JimEIV]

You've written 1000 posts why you think Kakko should be the #1 pick, yet you've never ACTUALLY said the Devils should pick Kakko #1, because you dont want there to be a record of you saying that when it spectacularly fails a few years from now.

In fact, you'll probably now deny that these prior 1000 posts on the subject means you think Kakko should be #1, even though no reasonable reader could possibly assume anything else from reading your posts.

No you aren't going to frame my opinion to your liking...It doesn't work that way. All the words are there for anyone to read.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Thank you very much for taking the time to write such a measured response. I don't think my mind is changed in any way in regards to "the scouting community" because they have been so wrong in the past it is almost dumbfounding...here is one example of my point:

"Central Scouting's Chris Edwards
“Adam is one of the best skater’s in this year’s draft -- he has excellent speed and mobility."

This wasn't one guy either there were tons of people that made similar claims...My opinion anyone that called Adam Larsson "one of best skaters" shouldn't have a job. Similarly McLeod's speed was hugely overstated by almost everyone. Just a couple examples but you can do a random sampling of known NHLers and look at their scouting reports and some of the stuff is down right laughable.
I have seen these type of scenario repeated over and over for decades.

I am going to be 49 in July and have loosely been following drafts since the since the Mario Lemieux watch in 1984. Just as a Devils fan wanting to know who we we're getting...I had no access to any information other than the Hockey News but that was good enough for me then...

in the early 1990's I had access to way more information...I was going to school in Boston and I was surrounded by Hockey fanatics...that is when I started to notice how generic and off scouting reports were.

I was no expert just a fan but going to games every single night. With BC, BU, NU, Harvard, U Mass Boston in the area and a shuttle up to Waltham to see some acquaintances play at Bentley there was a game almost every night of the school year. Hell, I even went to a couple of Boston Catholic high school games to see kids play.

Some of the players I saw 20 or 30 times then I would read their scouting reports in a publication and they were almost always generic and lot of times flat out wrong. I mean like so off you almost couldn't believe they were talking about the same person that you just watched for two school years. Especially in the area of skating. Even moreso with Dmen. This wrongness hasn't changed all that much over the years either.

So how good is that data point in someone's database that ranks Larsson as one of the best skaters in the draft? And how the hell do a good number of scouts say the same thing! How off is the total valuation from that clearly wrong assessment? These aren't one off examples either

Without getting too into this, I can say that Central Scouting is the one bureau I ignore completely. I don't even read them or look at their rankings. As I'm your age, I also recall when the CSS and Hockey News were the only sources of draft-day information for the common fan in the USA and it was really difficult to get any info on prospects. But thankfully, that time has past. We all get to flip on the U18 on our TVs and get film/info on prospects via the internet. Thus, scouting services and draft writers have gotten more adept in order to keep up with the times. Do scouts and draft writers make mistakes? Of course. Just a few years ago, Corey Pronman capitulated to foolish pressures caused by post-season tournament play and ranked Patrick Laine over Auston Matthews. He certainly regrets this now -- he's often grilled about it in comments sections by any troll who disagrees with his convictions. But Pronman remains one of the best draft-writers in the business -- continuing to make bold rankings with comprehensive reviews of draft eligibles.

 

[Bcap88]

Hughes, Just another offensive player for Jim to hate on the entirety of his career just like he did with the Russian.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

You can make the argument that Hughes wasn’t the best player on his team like you can make the argument that the earth is flat.