Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Brady Tkachuk: Episode 4 - A new hope

Status
Not open for further replies.
RAFI BOMB

RAFI BOMB

Registered User
May 11, 2016
7,389
7,646
The argument against drafting Tkachuk is a pretty weak one. The NHL draft has a draft lottery for the top three picks, so even if a team finishes in the bottom 3 there is no guarantee they will draft there. For argument sake let us suppose that the Senators draft in the top ten. In this scenario they finish in the bottom 7 and they can fall back as far as 10 based on the draft lottery. Using historical statistical analysis of the performance of draft picks using the data set from 1990 to 2013 TSN arrived at the following conclusions:

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

This is the classification system for player upside:
Generally, the ratings are as follows:
10 - Generational
9 - Elite Player
8 - First Line, Top Pair D
7 - Top Six Forward, Top Four D
6 - Top Nine Forward, Top Six D
5 - NHL Regular, 350+ NHL games
4 - Fringe NHLer, 200+ NHL games
3 - Very Good Minor Leaguer, 50-200 NHL games
2 - Minor Leaguer, under 50 NHL games
1 - 10 or fewer NHL games

This is the actual performance of top 10 picks from 1990 to 2013:

Pick 1
Average Rating: 7.75
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 79.2%
4th Line or Worse: 8.3%

Pick 2
Average Rating: 7.79
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 87.5%
4th Line or Worse: 0%

Pick 3
Average Rating: 7.06
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 79.2%
4th Line or Worse: 8.3%

Pick 4
Average Rating: 6.21
% who play 100+ games: 83.3%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 54.2%
4th Line or Worse: 25%

Pick 5
Average Rating: 6.75
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 62.5%
4th Line or Worse: 8.3%

Pick 6
Average Rating: 5.63
% who play 100+ games: 83.3%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 58.3%
4th Line or Worse: 41.7%

Pick 7
Average Rating: 5.77
% who play 100+ games: 91.7%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 41.7%
4th Line or Worse: 33.3%

Pick 8
Average Rating: 4.88
% who play 100+ games: 70.8%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 29.2%
4th Line or Worse: 45.8%

Pick 9
Average Rating: 5.40
% who play 100+ games: 87.5%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 33.3%
4th Line or Worse: 50%

Pick 10
Average Rating: 4.52
% who play 100+ games: 78.3%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 13%
4th Line or Worse: 65.2%

Looking that over, in the best case scenario where we end up with the first overall pick based on average performance we should expect a player that is in between a top line forward/top pairing d man and a top 6 forward/top 4 d with an 80% probability of being a top six forward/top 4 d. As it stands currently, Tkachuk fits that definition very well. Therefore by average performance of the number 1 overall pick from 1990 to 2013 we have exactly that in Tkachuk.

If we fall as low as 10 we would then be looking at a fringe NHL player by average historical performance.

Someone can argue that the 2019 draft is stronger and that the odds should be adjusted but then the question becomes by how much and how can we know with certainty that these players will perform significantly better than the historical average. Hughes certainly seems like a great talent so a good argument could be made that he is the better pick than Tkachuk. But with the NHL drat lottery and the fact that the Senators could somehow perform better than expected or that other NHL teams could have some major injuries that lead to the Senators ending up higher in the rankings that changes the assessment. Once you start comparing Tkachuk's upside to players ranked in the top 10 in the draft as you move further away from the 1st overall pick it is harder to justify passing on it.

The only people who would argue that Tkachuk is a worse pick than the players available outside of the top few picks in 2019 are the people that are completely biased against Tkachuk and completely undervalue his actual upside.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HF Reader
Micklebot

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,773
30,971
RAFI BOMB said:
The argument against drafting Tkachuk is a pretty weak one. The NHL draft has a draft lottery for the top three picks, so even if a team finishes in the bottom 3 there is no guarantee they will draft there. For argument sake let us suppose that the Senators draft in the top ten. In this scenario they finish in the bottom 7 and they can fall back as far as 10 based on the draft lottery. Using historical statistical analysis of the performance of draft picks using the data set from 1990 to 2013 TSN arrived at the following conclusions:

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

This is the classification system for player upside:
Generally, the ratings are as follows:
10 - Generational
9 - Elite Player
8 - First Line, Top Pair D
7 - Top Six Forward, Top Four D
6 - Top Nine Forward, Top Six D
5 - NHL Regular, 350+ NHL games
4 - Fringe NHLer, 200+ NHL games
3 - Very Good Minor Leaguer, 50-200 NHL games
2 - Minor Leaguer, under 50 NHL games
1 - 10 or fewer NHL games

This is the actual performance of top 10 picks from 1990 to 2013:

Pick 1
Average Rating: 7.75
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 79.2%
4th Line or Worse: 8.3%

Pick 2
Average Rating: 7.79
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 87.5%
4th Line or Worse: 0%

Pick 3
Average Rating: 7.06
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 79.2%
4th Line or Worse: 8.3%

Pick 4
Average Rating: 6.21
% who play 100+ games: 83.3%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 54.2%
4th Line or Worse: 25%

Pick 5
Average Rating: 6.75
% who play 100+ games: 100%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 62.5%
4th Line or Worse: 8.3%

Pick 6
Average Rating: 5.63
% who play 100+ games: 83.3%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 58.3%
4th Line or Worse: 41.7%

Pick 7
Average Rating: 5.77
% who play 100+ games: 91.7%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 41.7%
4th Line or Worse: 33.3%

Pick 8
Average Rating: 4.88
% who play 100+ games: 70.8%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 29.2%
4th Line or Worse: 45.8%

Pick 9
Average Rating: 5.40
% who play 100+ games: 87.5%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 33.3%
4th Line or Worse: 50%

Pick 10
Average Rating: 4.52
% who play 100+ games: 78.3%
Top 6 F/Top 4 D: 13%
4th Line or Worse: 65.2%

Looking that over, in the best case scenario where we end up with the first overall pick based on average performance we should expect a player that is in between a top line forward/top pairing d man and a top 6 forward/top 4 d with an 80% probability of being a top six forward/top 4 d. As it stands currently, Tkachuk fits that definition very well. Therefore by average performance of the number 1 overall pick from 1990 to 2013 we have exactly that in Tkachuk.

If we fall as low as 10 we would then be looking at a fringe NHL player by average historical performance.

Someone can argue that the 2019 draft is stronger and that the odds should be adjusted but then the question becomes by how much and how can we know with certainty that these players will performs significantly better than the historical average. Hughes certainly seems like a great talent so a good argument could be made that he is the better pick than Tkachuk. But with the NHL drat lottery and the fact that the Senators could somehow perform better than expected or that other NHL teams could have some major injuries that lead to the Senators ending up higher in the rankings that changes the assessment. Once you start comparing Tkachuk's upside to players ranked in the top 10 in the draft as you move further away from the st overall pick it is harder to justify passing on it.

The only people who would argue that Tkachuk is a worse pick than the players available outside of the top few picks in 2019 are the people that are completely biased against Tkachuk and completely undervalue his actual upside.
Click to expand...

I think most people advocating for passing on Tkachuk and keeping our 2019 pick are doing so because:
1. They feel the 2019 draft is deeper, which most if not all the analysts right now that I've read or heard from would agree,
2. They didn't see Tkachuk as the 4th best prospect available, and had some combination of Hughes Bouchard, Zadina ahead,
3. They expect the team to finish bottom three, particularly given we traded Karlsson and Hoffman in the offseason, and unloaded Brassard, and Phaenuf at the deadline.

Lets say you value Tkachuk at 6th OA in terms of you're personal draft ranking for this past draft, that means in an average draft based on the numbers above, you're on pretty much even terms or close to it drafting in the top 7 since historically, 6 and 7 are very similar in quality. Now, add in that next years draft is stronger, and this years team is weaker on paper, and it becomes an easy choice.

On the flip side, if you feel Tkachuk was picked where he should have been, the above chart suggests you can't afford to drop lower than 5th, even given the stronger draft year it would be risky. I think that's right around where we can be reasonably expected to finish. This suggests there is risk, finishing 5th worst in the league would give you about a 70% chance of drafting in a position where you'd get a player expected to be about equal or better (picks 1-6) and a 3o% chance of a worse expected player (pick 7 or 8).

Now, here's the thing; the impact of lucking out and getting one of those star players, a Eichel, McDavid, Matthews, Laine level player is a big step up from the next tier of guys, more so than the potential downgrade from a 4th OA expected value player to 9th OA expected value (based on the stats you quoted). So, the risk of downgrading a bit might be worth the potential of upgrading a lot, particularly when the league for the most part is won by the stars, not the support, and unless your SJ apparently, you can't trade for franchise players whenever you want.



Edit: Also worth pointing out saying Tkachuk fits the definition of the best we can expect of a 1st OA pick? Really? Nobody in their right mind wouldn't give Tkachuk for next years 1st OA regardless of the historical figures.

Edit 2: I also think it's worth pointing out most in the keep next year's pick camp likely see us trading Stone and Duchene at the deadline because we can't get them signed. So the odds of us doing significantly better than last year declines even further. Then there's the fact that by throwing in the towel before the season even starts (keeping next years pick) the message sent likely demotivates the players, meaning we place a bit worse, and the coach is likely told to focus 100% on development and not winning (probably a tough sell, but maybe we do what Toronto did and fire the coach only to put an even worse one in his place to finish the season).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bileur, Nac Mac Feegle, HF Reader and 2 others
stempniaksen

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,036
4,316
Brady Tkachuk: Haters Gonna Hate Edition

Seems fairly spot on, but also may be a little divisive given the current climate around here :laugh:
 
aragorn

aragorn

Do The Right Thing
Aug 8, 2004
28,573
9,085
Brady Tkachuk the new face of the Franchise, we're going to see & hear a lot about him over the yr & maybe for yrs to come. The media seem to love him.
 
RAFI BOMB

RAFI BOMB

Registered User
May 11, 2016
7,389
7,646
Micklebot said:
I think most people advocating for passing on Tkachuk and keeping our 2019 pick are doing so because:
1. They feel the 2019 draft is deeper, which most if not all the analysts right now that I've read or heard from would agree,
2. They didn't see Tkachuk as the 4th best prospect available, and had some combination of Hughes Bouchard, Zadina ahead,
3. They expect the team to finish bottom three, particularly given we traded Karlsson and Hoffman in the offseason, and unloaded Brassard, and Phaenuf at the deadline.

Lets say you value Tkachuk at 6th OA in terms of you're personal draft ranking for this past draft, that means in an average draft based on the numbers above, you're on pretty much even terms or close to it drafting in the top 7 since historically, 6 and 7 are very similar in quality. Now, add in that next years draft is stronger, and this years team is weaker on paper, and it becomes an easy choice.

On the flip side, if you feel Tkachuk was picked where he should have been, the above chart suggests you can't afford to drop lower than 5th, even given the stronger draft year it would be risky. I think that's right around where we can be reasonably expected to finish. This suggests there is risk, finishing 5th worst in the league would give you about a 70% chance of drafting in a position where you'd get a player expected to be about equal or better (picks 1-6) and a 3o% chance of a worse expected player (pick 7 or 8).

Now, here's the thing; the impact of lucking out and getting one of those star players, a Eichel, McDavid, Matthews, Laine level player is a big step up from the next tier of guys, more so than the potential downgrade from a 4th OA expected value player to 9th OA expected value (based on the stats you quoted). So, the risk of downgrading a bit might be worth the potential of upgrading a lot, particularly when the league for the most part is won by the stars, not the support, and unless your SJ apparently, you can't trade for franchise players whenever you want.



Edit: Also worth pointing out saying Tkachuk fits the definition of the best we can expect of a 1st OA pick? Really? Nobody in their right mind wouldn't give Tkachuk for next years 1st OA regardless of the historical figures.

Edit 2: I also think it's worth pointing out most in the keep next year's pick camp likely see us trading Stone and Duchene at the deadline because we can't get them signed. So the odds of us doing significantly better than last year declines even further. Then there's the fact that by throwing in the towel before the season even starts (keeping next years pick) the message sent likely demotivates the players, meaning we place a bit worse, and the coach is likely told to focus 100% on development and not winning (probably a tough sell, but maybe we do what Toronto did and fire the coach only to put an even worse one in his place to finish the season).
Click to expand...

Great analysis and I agree on almost all points. I think you may have misinterpreted my statement in regards to your first edit though. I wasn't arguing Tkachuk is better than Hughes. What I was saying is that if you look at what the historical assessment of first overall picks are, Tkachuk's upside fits the average. The average number 1 pick has a 79.2% chance of being a top 6 f/top 4 d and has an average rating of 7.75. A rating of 8 is a top line forward/ top pairing d and a rating of 7 is a top six forward/top 4 d. Most people would likely agree that Tkachuk has something close to an 80% chance of being a top six forward and that his upside is likely somewhere between a first and 2nd liner. Therefore Tkachuk is as good as the average result of the number 1 overall pick. Given that Tkachuk is arguably as good as the average result of a number 1 overall pick it is hard to pass on him. Sure Hughes has more upside but once you get past Hughes the up;side and the confidence level drops off. So the question becomes if you have a chance at a player that has the upside equivalent to the average number 1 pick do you pass on them an expose yourself to the rick of a player who either doesn't have that upside or probability of attaining it for the chance to get a player with arguably higher upside?

A comparable would be to look at a team who has the 1st overall pick in the draft and ask whether they would trade that pick for the first round pick of another team in the upcoming season because the draft pool is deeper. in 2014 Florida could have traded the number 1 overall pick to Edmonton or Buffalo for their 1st round pick in 2015 in hopes of getting McDavid. In that scenario it might have worked out well for them because they could have ended up with McDavid or Eichel but normally speaking it isn't clear who the worst teams will be. Every year we could trade away our firs round pick in the draft if we know the following years draft will be deeper and hope we can predict who the worst team will be. It is risky but it compares to the Tkachuk situation where you give up something certain for something uncertain.
 
Micklebot

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,773
30,971
BonkTastic said:
I've got the next 3 Tkachuk thread titles ready to go:

1) Brady Tkachuk: A New Hope
2) Brady Tkachuk: The Dorion Strikes Back
3) Brady Tkachuk: Return of the Ginger.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a winner to me, because imo it sticks it to that millennial that said the empire strikes back sucked, but do I retroactively rename the first thread and skip straight to Episode 5: The Dorion strikes back? Episode 5 was always the best episode.

edit: quick correction to my episode numbering
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom