Does where a kid is drafted determine their NHL success?

[leoleo3535]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/sports/Draft+Longshots+luck/4427851/story.html


25% of career players come from the 4th round or later.

Click to read more...

 

[Tormentor]

25% of career players come from the 4th round or later.

25% of career players came from the 4th round or later, but probably won't in the future. Some of those late round gems were older European players that with current rules would've been too old to be drafted. Also as the article points out, there are less rounds in the modern draft and more funds are used to scouting, especially in Europe. So the chances for late round steals should be slightly lower.

 

[magic school bus]

yes, if a 7th rd pick becomes the same player as a 1st rd pick.. then the 7th rdr has had more success.

 

[Sony Eriksson*]

Jamie Benn says "What is up"

 

[Noldo]

As noted, quite many of the players drafted past 4th round that has made it have been Europeans, although there are naturally notable exceptions (Luc Robitaille, to name one). As the scouting has improved, the draft position is getting better and better indication of the players future success.

However, NHL players are still drafter very raw, compared for example to football players and and development after the draft can very much affect how the player turns out.

One point to keep in mind is that teams are also most likely willing to give their higher draft choices a couple of more changes to success compared to 6th rounder. After all, the team has already invested plenty of resources (high draft pick) to the player.

 

[wej20]

If you're a high pick you're going to get more opportunities to prove yourself than a late rounder.

 

[Fiddie]

Percentage wise, yes. On a player to player basis, no.

 

[gifted88]

Percentage wise, yes. On a player to player basis, no.

Sounds like a logical answer, I'll agree

 

[Marotte Marauder]

Percentage wise, yes. On a player to player basis, no.

A high draft choice will get much more time and opportunity to earn a way into NHL. If you're drafted later those chances are severely limited.

 

[EastCoastSensFan]

Not really I think early rounder’s are players that are near ready for the jump or have so much skill that teams cant let them get past them. Whereas the latter rounds tend to be players that go to University or are in Europe who have skill but need work, therefore by going to University etc they get 4 years to develop their skills before a team need decide on them.

I do think it determines likely hood of NHL success.

Also it is really more for the fans so they can curse early rounders’ that do not live up to the hype and can brag about later rounders’ that put it all together.
Also to compare teams drafting records.

 

[Fiddie]

A high draft choice will get much more time and opportunity to earn a way into NHL. If you're drafted later those chances are severely limited.

Agree. That is why percentage why the higher you are drafted the better chance you have to become a better player (besides the obvious fact of being a better player than those drafted lower than you at the age of draft).

Player by player it is different though other wise you would have zero NHL players coming from lower draft rounds which we know not to be true. The lower you are drafted the more you have to improve and the more you have to prove yourself to become an NHL player. But being drafted in the 7th round does not automatically doom you to never play in the NHL or become an impact player.

 

[philly flyers fan]

I don't think draft position means much in determining the success of a player, but can go a long way in determining the expectations, both from an organizational and fan's perspective, of that player. To me, the draft position becomes nothing more than a nice little piece of trivia once a player starts their career. The player's do not control their draft position, so I think it's a little unfair to judge a career based on their draft position. That said, it's perfectly fair to judge a team's scouting staff when they hit on the late round picks, or miss on the early round picks.

 

[Qvist]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/sports/Draft+Longshots+luck/4427851/story.html


25% of career players come from the 4th round or later.

Where does it say that?

Anyway, I really don't see anything very surprising in there. Perhaps a little surprising that the figures for the third round were so comparatively good. But otherwise it's much as expected. The journalist works hard to squeeze something angle-worthy out of it.

 

[Qvist]

As noted, quite many of the players drafted past 4th round that has made it have been Europeans, although there are naturally notable exceptions (Luc Robitaille, to name one). As the scouting has improved, the draft position is getting better and better indication of the players future success.

One thing to bear in mind here is that there is no differentiation between anyone who has made it past 160 games. The typical lower round NHL player is a marginal role player, to a far greater degree than those who make it from the top couple of rounds.

 

[Eisen]

Chances are yes. But not exclusively. A lot more plays into success than draft position.

 

[Qvist]

Does where a kid is drafted determine their NHL success?

Of course not. This is a question of correlation, not causality. It's like wine - it doesn't make wine either better or worse if you slap a big price tag on it. But an expensive wine is much more likely to be good than a cheap one. The causality works the other way - the expensive wine is expensive because it is good. Just like players are drafted high because they are good players.

 

[kmart]

Of course not. This is a question of correlation, not causality. It's like wine - it doesn't make wine either better or worse if you slap a big price tag on it. But an expensive wine is much more likely to be good than a cheap one. The causality works the other way - the expensive wine is expensive because it is good. Just like players are drafted high because they are good players.

maybe i misreading this question but to me the op wants to know if it matter which team are drafting that talent. in this case the answer would be yes, absolutely. actually the right question would be which talent would have success regardless the team who drafted but like i said, not sure what he meant, i am lost.

 

[leoleo3535]

maybe i misreading this question but to me the op wants to know if it matter which team are drafting that talent. in this case the answer would be yes, absolutely. actually the right question would be which talent would have success regardless the team who drafted but like i said, not sure what he meant, i am lost.

I was not posing a question......just posting an article which may / may not have been interest to others.

 

[Qvist]

Percentage wise, yes. On a player to player basis, no.

Sounds like a logical answer, I'll agree

Maybe it sounds like a logical answer, but it is the opposite of that. Percentages are made up of players. If it affects the percentages (by which I presume he means the aggregate picture), then it neccessarily also affects the situation on an individual level.

 

[Sensfanman]

So 75% of players come from the first 3 rounds, or 90 picks? And 25% come from the last 4-6 rounds (~150 picks)?

Makes sense. Especially when you consider the lack of Euro scouting that allowed for late round steals.

I mean, Scott Cullen did something similar (though I am familiar with the specific work from Simon Fraser) and found similar results:

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/scott_cullen/?ID=267960

 

[Stephen]

On a related note, I wonder why it seems like prospects drafted in the teens in the 1st round seem to bust so much. The top five usually contains some gems, the 5-12 spot sees a bit of a drop off, the teens seem to have a ton of busts, and then you have teams unearthing gems again in the 20s and early 30s.