Draft best player available or positional need

hirawl

Used Register
Dec 27, 2010
3,313
1,334
BPA every time. And that answering the question 'who's going to have the best career?'.
 

Push Dr Tracksuit

Gerstmann 3:16
Jun 9, 2012
13,238
3,316
Break the draft into tiers then take the best positional player left in the tier in this order: C/D first, winger second, goalies third. You never know what you’re going to need but you do know that centers and D will be worth more on the trade market to get what you actually need when you eventually need it.
 

Bjornar Moxnes

Stem Rødt og Felix Unger Sörum
Oct 16, 2016
11,507
3,976
Troms og Finnmark
Could be.

I don't think Hellebuyck will be a flash in the pan just because of his style. He is like the antithesis of flopping around. He just optimizes his huge body to be in perfect position with as little movement as possible. It looks extremely sustainable.

Except before this season Hellebuyck kinda was a out of position, poor puck handling, poor rebound control goalie. Crawford still struggles with all 3 (Although much improved from when he first entered the league) and he's still posting elite numbers.
 

canucks4ever

Registered User
Mar 4, 2008
3,997
67
Eh not really. After the ~25 spot, the value of draft picks is relatively similar. The only big drop off is after 1 and after the top 7. It may seem like there is a big drop off because teams often pick there high risk guys with the 2nd round pick and low upside positional needs with the 3rd round pick, so that is what sticks out to fans

As for the question, the NHL draft is a lot similar than GMs act. You pick BPA 95% of the time. And you should always look to trade down after the late 1st and acquire more lottery tickets.

Hell, Id personally make a wager I could end up with a better results at a draft with zero scouting staff and zero spent on any scouting activities by trading down when the price is right, acquiring more picks and picking BPA from the aggregate of the different freely available scouting agencies. GMs try way, way to hard to put their own stamp on the draft and try to outsmart the other GMs.

chart4.jpg
I said 2nd or 3rd pick, not 2nd or 3rd round. In most drafts, the first two players are usually far and away better than the remaining players in the top 10. 2004, 2009, 2010, 2015 and even 2016 are proving this to be the case. Sure there are some drafts where the best player will get picked later on.

I think this draft is the perfect example. After Dahlin and Svechnikov, there will be another massive drop-off.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,973
8,453
BPA. But the thing is, I believe many fans understanding of BPA is not he same as teams and scouts.

I've read interviews which mentions that teams actually rank players in tiers and not in a numerical list. This is why lists for certain teams are different than others as their ranking methods are a hybrid of BPA and positional need. Players in a tier are considered interchangeable as BPA, and a tier can have as few as a single player to having a dozen players.

If a team determines that they are drafting in a tier that has multiple players in a tier and most of them will fit a need, they will consider trading down to acquire additional assets, fill a positional need and still draft BPA. This is why there are teams that are willing to trade down.

However, if a team is sitting in a higher tier with 1 player left in their eyes, they will draft BPA rather than take a positional need in a lower tier. Otherwise, you're wasting significant value in a pick.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad