GDT: 2023 Caps NHL Draft Thread

[twabby]

I appreciate your approach, and while I am an old school eye test guy when it comes to hockey, I get the value in analytics and believe there is a place for them.

I do have a question to add, specifically the % chance of becoming a Star metric. Do you have the placards, or can you get the percentage of being a star values this algorithm produces for all the Caps we consider stars just before they were drafted? Can the vales be backward calculated?

I would especially like the see how that metric assessed Wilson, Oshie, Carlson, Orpik, etc.

I my field, verification of model prognostication is really important.

Oshie and Orpik fall outside of the window. It only goes back to 2007.

Carlson was roughly 70% to make the NHL, but 0% to be a star. I suspect that this was some sort of error importing data into Tableau because I’ve never seen anything approaching a 0%/70% star/NHL split.

Wilson was 1% star/9% NHLer.

Full data here, up until 2021:

https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/topdownhockey/viz/NHLEquivalencyandProspectProjections/ProspectProjections

This is for the TopDownHockey model.

 

[ArmadilloThumb]

FWIW, I screamed "Yes!!!" loudly when we announced Tom Wilson as our pick.

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

After reading scouting reports most the day on Ryan Leonard. Its hard not to like his game. Hes a strong player in the neutral zone. He a clutch player with a nose for the front of the net. He has size and will throw his body around and is a Team USA leader at a young age.

My comp is a more talented Mike Knuble

 

[NobodyBeatsTheWiz]

Damn. Looking at the history, NHLe tool is worse than I thought as a standalone evaluation.

 

[Cush]

Doesn't look like they'll be a scrimmage at the end of dev camp, just a 3 on 3 tournament

 

[ArmadilloThumb]

My grade is more general...

GMBM and the scouting staff have improved the Caps chances of a successful rolling re-tool, with this first step of improving the prospect pool.

Looking forward to hopefully some positive surprise performances at Development Camp next.

 

[usiel]

Doesn't look like they'll be a scrimmage at the end of dev camp, just a 3 on 3 tournament

Not really too surprising since the dev camp has been mostly about the DEV versus the rookie camp before main camp.

Capitals release 2023 Development Camp schedule

Not only will the Washington Capitals be turning its focus to free agency on July 1, but it will also host the…

russianmachineneverbreaks.com

 

[Roshi]

Doesn’t this same argument apply to every aspect of a prospect and not just skating? They’re going up against NHLers who will take advantage of anywhere a player is deficient. Low IQ players are taken advantage of. Bad skaters are taken advantage of. Small players are taken advantage of. Poor shooters are taken advantage of. Low motor guys are taken advantage of.

There’s not a compelling argument that Cristall’s particular deficiencies should make his path to the NHL more difficult than others, given his scoring rate.



See the above for why this applies to this post as well.

All the attributes just dont have the same value. You dont see this?

Edit. Its like saying it doesnt really matter if a NASCAR car doesnt have tires if that car has a great engine and body. It does not matter what engine the car has if it cant get out of the starting line.

 

[Kalopsia]

But again, if his skating is so bad then wouldn't he have some less than stellar production in the WHL?

The case needs to be made that his poor skating is going to disproportionately affect his NHL impact compared to other attributes where he shines, and that case hasn't really been made. I suspect it's because that case can't be made.

I’m going to try to rapid fire through these posts. Apologies if I miss one.

I’m not saying the scouts are wrong about his skating being suspect but I don’t know that it has any predictive value when taken in combination with a prospect’s equivalency rating. Of course in general you’d prefer a better skater because in general better skaters score more than worse skaters. But if I was given two prospects with the same projection based on equivalency, and one was clearly a better skater than the other, I’d be indifferent about who’s better. Because the worse skater must clearly be better in some other respect(s) than the better skater, otherwise the better skater would outrate the worse skater.

I'm gonna try to come at this from the stats side rather than the hockey side. The flaw in your approach here (and it's a flaw in most hockey modeling from what I've read) is that you're treating player attributes like they're independent of each other and not accounting for interactions between them. The conclusion you're drawing only works if how different skills play is independent of the league the player is in, i.e. that if two players are equal in all other aspects except that one's an above average skater and the other is average, then the faster skater will outscore the slower skater by the same proportion in a junior league as they will in the pros. That's probably not the case though - when they get to the pros and suddenly the first player is average but the other player's well below average, the slower player might not even be able to catch up to the play or put themselves in the right spots in order to utilize their other skills, and suddenly they fall even further behind the faster player than they were in the juniors. In order to properly account for that, you need to factor the interaction into your model, but if your model is looking solely at point production without factoring in the underlying attributes there's obviously no way to do that. If you have reason to believe the predictors in your model aren't independent, you've got to check for interactions and include any significant ones in your model.

The truly skilled scouts are factoring in those interactions between skills and how they play in different leagues based on the intuition they've developed over years of watching players grow, progress, stall, adapt, etc. That can definitely have its own flaws, but I think it's generally better to at least try factor them in than to just pretend they don't exist.

 

[YippieKaey]

But again, if his skating is so bad then wouldn't he have some less than stellar production in the WHL?

The case needs to be made that his poor skating is going to disproportionately affect his NHL impact compared to other attributes where he shines, and that case hasn't really been made. I suspect it's because that case can't be made.

In the CHL most players are unfinished products weighing in at 160-180 lbs and some work to do on their defensive reads, so if you have good vision and can pass well that can get you points.

In the NHL, most players are 190-210 lbs with great skating and much better tactical ability. So there you need to have a way to overcome that and be competitive, for instance by greater skating, greater size or whatever.

 

[Silky mitts]

When your guy lasts 5 more picks you lose the argument.

 

[LesDiablesRouges]

Twabby, I hate to break it to you, but advanced analytics and statistics are still not as important as you think they are in hockey today, nor will they ever be. Have they become a growing part of the process? Absolutely, but they are far from the be-all and end-all - and they are FAR from perfect.

Anyone that has played competitive sports in their lifetime knows that sports are far more than statistics, analytics, and underlying metrics.

There is so much more that goes into success/failure, boom/bust, stud/average in hockey than JUST analytics.

I would still argue that over half of the talent evaluation process is - and forever will be - focused on the eye test, talent trajectories and ceiling projections of potential, non-quantifiable factors and qualities, as well as circumstances outside of the control of each individual player.

Everyone these days wants to get solely 110% wrapped up in the shiny new toy, which are analytics, but there needs to be a healthy medium between traditional talent evaluations AND analytics - which again, I guarantee you, teams still operate in this fashion, unlike many of the near-obsessive analytics posters on this entire forum.

An organization completely run by analytics would never win the Stanley Cup, IMO. Traditional scouting, the eye test, unquantifiable factors, and team circumstances will FOREVER matter and reign supreme. Happy Friday.

 

[DangeRouss]

The thing about Keller is that -- for people like us that don't do this for a living -- you really had to want to see him play. You get the international feeds for a tournament, there's always more than 1 game going on, and you typically pick one that doesn't have France in it because France is to hockey what France is to just about everything else, except body odor and being an asshole.

So I've seen him maybe a half dozen times over the years and all that I can say is that he gets shelled a lot and has gotten consistently better. So it's one of those situations where he let 4 in, but it was on 55 shots and he got hung out like a dozen times.

He's a goalie with shitty stats for shitty teams, but he's also the guy you credit when they win one. Very hard to pin down what he'd be literally anywhere else. He'd have been fine for me as a "Why not?" kind of pick, but that they moved to get him might mean they see something.



But if that happens it means all our other C prospects shit the bed. How bout he stays where he is and becomes a 1W alongside a C prospect that's also crushing it?

He has the defensive effort and vision to play center, but I have no idea if he has any faceoff game, and it's a boon to have a wing that plays D and drives play. Move him to C if you have to, but it'd be a luxury to have someone like him on the wing.

Coming from a guy like you it's an honor to be insulted this way

That said happy to see Antoine drafted by the Caps
Don't really know his ceiling but the kid is making rapid progress and looks promising
A low risk -maybe who knows- reward
Just hope he is the next Cristobal Huet for our NT

 

[Portable Mink]

It sucks we didn’t get MM because we feel we have an advantage over every other team with the Ovi Russian factor. Yeah so close… but I like this kid. Some of his plays are elite hockey IQ which cannot be taught. Not many all round players also have elite IQ and from what I’ve seen Leonard does. That is enticing.

McM and Lap are also not big big so hoping Protas can go even half Tage and round that top end out.

For a team that has been up the top for a long time, our prospects are underrated. Go Caps.

 

[PlushMinus]

Wow, there's a lot to decompile from that paragraph.

Of those 96 players, how many are actually first liners? Most teams spread talent out to make the best top 6 they can, and many have great players at the same position.

So your #8 only has to crack the top 6 and get substantial power play time (and earn both) to make the cut you're picturing in your head. There are serious offensive stars that are second-line players, in other words.

I also think "huge failure" is an overstatement at #8 by your metrics, because it's so boxcar-reliant and there's way more to hockey than that. If you've got a guy that puts up 55 points and gets Selke votes, that's huge. Huge. Those guys tilt the ice just as much as anyone else, and they're the guys you lean on when a team's tilting it against you.

So if Leonard was a one-dimensional offensive player and he didn't become a 60+ point guy, sure. That's a bummer. But he's a complete player. 200 feet, high motor, did all the dirty work for a few other 1sts this year while also putting up the boxcars you want to see from someone playing where he is.

Focus too much on the "compete level" comments if you really want to, but this kid brings it in transition, possession, and on D. He's a play driving wing. How many of those in the NHL? If he can make THAT translate, he'll be everything his draft position suggests he should be, full stop.

Yes that was kind of a rushed post on my part and I shouldn't have said "1st line players".

It would have made more sense for me to say "top 3 forward" from an individual team perspective.

So on that basis (and admitting I have now changed the criteria somewhat), it's still my opinion that in a deep draft a player selected 8th overall, is fully expected to be a top 3 forward on that team within several years. And if he fails to become one, that should be considered a huge failure. Not necessarily just on the player himself, but a combination of things, including the development program within the team, coaching, etc.

 

[PlushMinus]

When your guy lasts 5 more picks you lose the argument.

I'm just going to leave this here:

Check out the top 4 OA picks that year.

Hey, there's Forsberg at 11, Wilson at 16, Hertl at 17 and oh shit it's Vasilevskiy at 19th!!

There's a reason why doing "redrafts" is a fun and popular thing.

 

[twabby]

I'm gonna try to come at this from the stats side rather than the hockey side. The flaw in your approach here (and it's a flaw in most hockey modeling from what I've read) is that you're treating player attributes like they're independent of each other and not accounting for interactions between them. The conclusion you're drawing only works if how different skills play is independent of the league the player is in, i.e. that if two players are equal in all other aspects except that one's an above average skater and the other is average, then the faster skater will outscore the slower skater by the same proportion in a junior league as they will in the pros. That's probably not the case though - when they get to the pros and suddenly the first player is average but the other player's well below average, the slower player might not even be able to catch up to the play or put themselves in the right spots in order to utilize their other skills, and suddenly they fall even further behind the faster player than they were in the juniors. In order to properly account for that, you need to factor the interaction into your model, but if your model is looking solely at point production without factoring in the underlying attributes there's obviously no way to do that. If you have reason to believe the predictors in your model aren't independent, you've got to check for interactions and include any significant ones in your model.

The truly skilled scouts are factoring in those interactions between skills and how they play in different leagues based on the intuition they've developed over years of watching players grow, progress, stall, adapt, etc. That can definitely have its own flaws, but I think it's generally better to at least try factor them in than to just pretend they don't exist.

I’m not saying that the attributes are independent. I’m asking why skating in particular is the attribute that matters more at the NHL level compared to every (or most) other attributes. Yes everything interacts, but why is skating so much more important than, say, hockey IQ? Or playmaking? Or even size for that matter? Why would a lower IQ player not fall behind a higher IQ player in the same way a worse skater would fall behind a better skater, in your example?

 

[g00n]

Regarding stats/analytics, there's an actual logical fallacy based on over-reliance on them:

McNamara fallacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Seems like asking why running is more important in track and field events….it’s the base skill for most things….the foundation.

 

[BallardEra]

NHL Draft Grades: Analyzing each team's haul at the 2023 event

The 2023 NHL Draft has come and gone, with teams adding future franchise-altering players, important depth pieces, and, of course, a handful of busts.Here, we grade and discuss how each team fared over the seven rounds relative to its draft slots.!function(){"use...

www.thescore.com

 

[g00n]

I’m not saying that the attributes are independent. I’m asking why skating in particular is the attribute that matters more at the NHL level compared to every (or most) other attributes. Yes everything interacts, but why is skating so much more important than, say, hockey IQ? Or playmaking? Or even size for that matter? Why would a lower IQ player not fall behind a higher IQ player in the same way a worse skater would fall behind a better skater, in your example?

I think several people have already explained why skating is so important, right?

So you're asking why skating at the NHL level would be more important than at other levels?

Maybe it's intuitive or experiential in some cases but there are logical reasons as well.

The first and most obvious is that in lower levels of competition the skill level is not as uniform and elite compared to the highest league. This holds for any sport. For that reason there are always several things that worked in lower tiers of competition but are shut down once everyone around you is plucked from the cream of all other crops. The same moves or tricks or passes or scoring methods may not work. Even your IQ might not be the same because old things work less, happen less often, or are replaced with new things. So those metrics at lower levels (even league to league or team to team) might not be worth what they seem.

The other item wrt skating at the highest level is, as others have said, the speed of the game changes. Not just the foot speed but the pace and tempo. Things happen faster, even in almost imperceptible fraction-of-a-heartbeat measurements.

Passes that clear a stick by 6 inches in a lower league are on someone else's tape and the puck is going the other way before you even realize it. Holes in a goaltender's positioning get smaller and disappear more quickly. Turns and decisions are all made faster. If you're a weaker skater you can be mentally ahead of the play and still not be in it because every one of these things compounds and adds up during a shift.


Bad IQ can have the same effect and put you well out of a play within seconds, depending on the chain of events, but bad skating is much more likely to leave you behind because the easiest thing for anyone to do is just avoid you. You can't use your IQ if you can't get into position and stay there.

I would think this would be at the front of your mind since you're someone whose default posture is basically "older players are slower and more beat up and need to be put out to pasture even if they've got good IQ because speed rules".

Some players can adapt and others can't. I'm sure that's something scouts look for--guys who they perceive to be adaptable and have the necessary character and growth mentality, such that they can adjust their game and level up. Contrast that with the guy who just blows through slower/smaller/younger/weaker players and thinks he's the shit and is going to dominate, then falls on his face and can't adjust because his mentality is fixed and his ego won't let him learn from the players with experience.

That said I agree with whoever said this was probably overblown with Cristall. Scouts/writers almost always have to search for SOME "negative" or "needs improvement" area or else they won't have jobs. "This guy is great! So is this guy! And this one!" Yeah, you're fired.

 

[Kalopsia]

I’m not saying that the attributes are independent. I’m asking why skating in particular is the attribute that matters more at the NHL level compared to every (or most) other attributes. Yes everything interacts, but why is skating so much more important than, say, hockey IQ? Or playmaking? Or even size for that matter? Why would a lower IQ player not fall behind a higher IQ player in the same way a worse skater would fall behind a better skater, in your example?

As CCR said, I think it’s because skating is such a foundational skill to hockey. Think back to your aging curves. Why do guys consistently fall off in their 30s, even if they have other potential carrying skills like hockey IQ? I doubt hockey IQ diminishes as players age. Shooting ability seems to stick around, as PP-turret Ovechkin’s been demonstrating. The more mental/muscle memory aspects of the game deteriorate much slower, and what ends guys’ careers isn’t that those skills deteriorate, but that they get so slow they can’t put them to use anymore.

I think some attributes can make skating a bit less important - namely size/physicality. Once a player’s engaged in a board battle or a fight for position in front of the net, it doesn’t matter who’s faster. But if you’re a poor skater without size/physicality and your strengths are skills that require competent skating to be useful, well… I think there’s a reason why “undersized” and “poor skater” are two weaknesses you very rarely see in combination on successful NHL players. Those are mostly the guys who’re perennial AHL All Stars. Hopefully the Caps can fix Cristall’s skating and he avoids that fate.

 

[Kalopsia]

Regarding stats/analytics, there's an actual logical fallacy based on over-reliance on them:

McNamara fallacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Wow, how had I never heard of this?

But when the McNamara discipline is applied too literally, the first step is to measure whatever can be easily measured. The second step is to disregard that which can't easily be measured or given a quantitative value. The third step is to presume that what can't be measured easily really isn't important. The fourth step is to say that what can't be easily measured really doesn't exist. This is suicide.

Yeah, that pretty much hits the nail on the head!

 

[ClevelandCapsfan]

More draft grades.

Yahoo Sports

Washington Capitals: A-​

Taking Ryan Leonard and Andrew Cristall with their first two picks will go a long way in supporting the aging offense in a few seasons. Leonard never stops moving, and Cristall has high-end scoring tools.

In Round 5, Washington grabbed Cam Allen, who was flirting with the top 10 overall at the beginning of this season. If he can show this year was a hiccup, not a true sign of his future, he could be the biggest steal in the draft.

Flo Hockey

Washington Capitals​

Letter Grade: B+

First rounders: Ryan Leonard, RW

Day 2 picks: Andrew Cristall, LW; Patrick Thomas, C; Cameron Allen, D; Brett Hyland, C; Antoine Keller, G.

Analysis: The Caps made a significant add to their prospect pool by having the good fortune of Ryan Leonard slipping to them. He fits their identity and he can score. Meanwhile, I had a first-round grade on Andrew Cristall who brings the offense and I’m a believer in Cameron Allen’s ability to bounce back from a sub-par draft season. The Caps had plenty of needs in a shallow prospect system, but getting two of the premier offensive talents in this draft later than expected is a big win for them.

Daily Faceoff

10. Washington Capitals (B+)​

Key picks: Ryan Leonard (RW), Andrew Cristall (LW), Cameron Allen (D)

Again, it’s all about the upside here. Ryan Leonard is the Capitals’ next Tom Wilson – someone who can score, create and hit. He’s a better offensive player, which is nice. Cristall is one of the most skilled wingers in the draft, but he’ll need to overcome skating concerns. Allen had an ugly year in Guelph, but he’s a minute-muncher that was once viewed as a top 10 prospect for this class. If he can clean up the decision-making and figure out who he wants to be, he could be a huge value selection.

 

[Misery74]

More draft grades.

Yahoo Sports

Washington Capitals: A-​

Taking Ryan Leonard and Andrew Cristall with their first two picks will go a long way in supporting the aging offense in a few seasons. Leonard never stops moving, and Cristall has high-end scoring tools.

In Round 5, Washington grabbed Cam Allen, who was flirting with the top 10 overall at the beginning of this season. If he can show this year was a hiccup, not a true sign of his future, he could be the biggest steal in the draft.

Flo Hockey

Washington Capitals​

Letter Grade: B+

First rounders: Ryan Leonard, RW

Day 2 picks: Andrew Cristall, LW; Patrick Thomas, C; Cameron Allen, D; Brett Hyland, C; Antoine Keller, G.

Analysis: The Caps made a significant add to their prospect pool by having the good fortune of Ryan Leonard slipping to them. He fits their identity and he can score. Meanwhile, I had a first-round grade on Andrew Cristall who brings the offense and I’m a believer in Cameron Allen’s ability to bounce back from a sub-par draft season. The Caps had plenty of needs in a shallow prospect system, but getting two of the premier offensive talents in this draft later than expected is a big win for them.

Daily Faceoff

10. Washington Capitals (B+)​

Key picks: Ryan Leonard (RW), Andrew Cristall (LW), Cameron Allen (D)

Again, it’s all about the upside here. Ryan Leonard is the Capitals’ next Tom Wilson – someone who can score, create and hit. He’s a better offensive player, which is nice. Cristall is one of the most skilled wingers in the draft, but he’ll need to overcome skating concerns. Allen had an ugly year in Guelph, but he’s a minute-muncher that was once viewed as a top 10 prospect for this class. If he can clean up the decision-making and figure out who he wants to be, he could be a huge value selection.

This was our best draft in years.

Really sounds like Allen’s brutal year in Guelph cost him. If our coaches can turn him around, could be a steal.