vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 28,911
- 16,452
Some surface level statistical comparison for fun:
DRAFT -1
Daigle:
66-35-75-110 (involved in 46% of his team's goals)
Turgeon:
69-47-67-114 (34%)
Modano:
70-32-30-62 (18%)
DRAFT
Daigle:
53-45-92-137 (involved in 38% of his team's goals)
Turgeon:
58-69-85-154 (37%)
Modano:
65-47-80-127 (34%)
DRAFT +1
Daigle (NHL):
84-20-31-51 (involved in 25% of his team's goals)
Turgeon (NHL):
76-14-28-42 (15%)
Modano (Junior):
41-39-66-105 (35%)
DRAFT +2
Daigle (NHL):
47-16-21-37 (involved in 32% of his team's goals)
80-28-36-64 (Hockey-Reference Adjusted)
Turgeon (NHL):
80-34-54-88 (30%)
80-28-44-72 (Hockey-Reference Adjusted)
Modano (NHL):
80-29-46-75 (26%)
80-24-38-62 (Hockey-Reference Adjusted)
Things obviously diverge quite a bit from there. I decided to calculate what percentage of goals each player was involved as a way to represent team depth and very roughly adjust for scoring across the junior leagues.
ooh thanks for the legwork
that was some rookie year in the Q by daigle
i guess my hunch is what made daigle an exceptional junior player was his tools. he skated better than everyone else and had a really good shot. at the next level, those advantages were still advantages but they weren't like a cheat code anymore.
that's kind of why i brought up kariya upthread. they were about the same age—kariya was four months older. but you could see that what made kariya dominate at the WJC, which daigle did not, was instincts and vision. even in his draft -1, when kariya made the team as a very early birthday for his cohort but still by far the youngest guy on the team, you could see in spurts kariya had "it."
i think in the same way, turgeon, who in my understanding was regarded as the best north american prospect between mario and lindros, scored at a similar rate to daigle in their draft years. but again, his advantage over everyone else was upstairs, not tools.
modano i think was more of a cross between the two. incredible tools but obviously he also thought the game at a high level, albeit not at a near-genius level like kariya or turgeon.
it kind of makes me think: someone on this board (i think @MS ?) insists that jeff friesen was considered the presumptive number one prospect for the 1994 draft in their draft -1 year. i have no memory of this but that's another out of this world skater with goal scorer's hands at the lower level. and he followed up his very impressive CHL rookie of the year (the year after daigle won the award) with an excellent draft age year but fell to #11 with no future superstars and only one can't-miss prospect (bonk) passing him. i wonder of part of friesen's fall was watching daigle's rookie year: the killer start and then him looking less and less impressive with every passing month.
After his illustrious entertainment mogul career.. he needed the money.
it's an interesting question: if daigle came around a decade later, would he have thrived in the post-lockout NHL? or would he have killed it as vince on HBO's entourage?