Drafting Philosophy

[Drop the Sopel]

I tried to look back into 1998 and it seems like all the highly drafted D never really busted but at the same time considering how high they were drafted, never reached the star level that one would hope with a top 5 pick.

example: Bouwmeester, Bogosian, Erik Johnson, Jack Johnson, Thomas Hickey, Karl Alzner, Luke Schenn, Cam Barker, Joni Pitkanen, Brad Stuart, Bryan Allen, Vitali ishnevski, Rostislav Klesla.

I mean aside from maybe Bouwmeester, would you pick any of the above Dmen with a top 5 pick now? Only 2 legit stars came out of a top 5 pick in a 10+ year span, that is pretty damn wasteful. ( I am not counting the Hedman and 2010 + draft class, just too early).

Bingo. Dmen are just tougher to project when draft eligible - mainly due to the fact they're further from their prime at 18 than forwards are. This is likely why the success rate of top 5 picks used on forwards is significantly higher than with defensemen.

 

[Proto]

How do you define offensive juggernaut?

I don't have the article handy, but basically if a defenseman can't score .5 PPG in his draft year, he's unlikely to become a primary roster player in the next four or five years. Most exceptions to this rule are defensemen who broke out the year after their draft year, and those are players that good scouting might help you locate later in the draft; this includes players like Weber. Sometimes it's a player on a deep junior team that doesn't receive a lot of power play time.

If I was going to take a defenseman in the 1st round (or specifically the first 20-ish picks, where the likelihood of finding a player is highest), it would have to be a guy who put up .75 PPG in his draft year. Obviously you'd assume this player has other features that allows him to be an offensive force (skating, shot, etc). That's what I'd be looking for when drafting a defenseman. Primarily defensive defensemen in junior almost never become more than fringe NHLers.

Later in drafts I'd probably draft target D with translatable offensive talent and some perceived deficiency. This is what they did with Subban. If he was 6'1 200 pounds he would have been a Top 25 pick. I like that as a philosophy. Even if 7 of 8 potential Alex Edlers/Jordan Subbans don't turn out, those are the guys to try and find outside the 1st round.

Even someone like Bryan Allen scored a touch over .5 PPG in his Age 18 year of junior. Barely. Not well enough that he'd be worth a Top 5 pick (lol), but at least someone you'd think would become a serviceable long-term NHL player, as he has.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Even someone like Bryan Allen scored a touch over .5 PPG in his Age 18 year of junior. Barely. Not well enough that he'd be worth a Top 5 pick (lol), but at least someone you'd think would become a serviceable long-term NHL player, as he has.

I guess this is why Ellington didn't go in the 1st round (though it was close - 33rd overall).

 

[arttk]

Cherry picking one year in which forwards did better than defenseman doesn't do anything to prove your point. How about we look at 2008, where you have Doughty, Pietrangelo, Karlsson, Bogosian, Carlson, Gardiner, del Zotto, Myers...?



How do you define offensive juggernaut?

Top 5 picks, only Doughty, Piet and Bogosian were picked in the top 5. Are you seriously going to say that Del Zotto and Gardiner and Bogosian are stars?

 

[arsmaster*]

the difference is though that they were actually playing in the NHL, gillis' players are barely showing anything in the AHL to prove that they even deserve a shot to play in the big league

It's probably not fair to expect anything to be known about 2010 and beyond so far, so Gillis' first two drafts in which he likely only has major input on the 1st rounder for 2008 and the majority of 2009. Has brought in Hodgson, Schroeder, Connauton.

If you can get two players from a draft it's commonly thought of as an excellent draft. So he has 3 out of a possible 4.

I'm willing to give him time before making any judgements. 2010 was brutal and the list we've all seen is shocking to say the least but it seems to be improving. Probably wont have a real good idea until 2016/2017 in the 2011-2013 classes.

And since 2011 the entire scouting staff has been revamped with early positives coming from those changes.

 

[Proto]

I guess this is why Ellington didn't go in the 1st round (though it was close - 33rd overall).

Yeah, what did he have? Something like 14 points in 60 games I think.

Yann Sauve was a bad pick by Gillis as well. I think he was just under .5 PPG in the Q, which isn't great. At least that pick was defensible because he was also a big guy who looked like he had serviceable mobility early on. It's a miss, but at least I understand what the reasoning for it was.

Nonis made some picks that were honestly inexplicable, and he seemed to do it at least once a year. Sometimes twice a year. Sometimes seven times..

 

[arttk]

It's probably not fair to expect anything to be known about 2010 and beyond so far, so Gillis' first two drafts in which he likely only has major input on the 1st rounder for 2008 and the majority of 2009. Has brought in Hodgson, Schroeder, Connauton.

If you can get two players from a draft it's commonly thought of as an excellent draft. So he has 3 out of a possible 4.

I'm willing to give him time before making any judgements. 2010 was brutal and the list we've all seen is shocking to say the least but it seems to be improving. Probably wont have a real good idea until 2016/2017 in the 2011-2013 classes.

And since 2011 the entire scouting staff has been revamped with early positives coming from those changes.

2010 was brutal but then to be fair, having your first pick at the 4th round kind of leads to that.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

Then let's look at the top 5 of the previous draft too-

1. Alex Ovechkin
2. Evgeni Malkin
3. Cam Barker
4. Andrew Ladd
5. Blake Wheeler

One of these is not like the others.

There is a reason the top end of drafts are forward heavy. Why do you think that is?

Err, no the previous draft was actually 2005. The draft went Crosby-Ryan-J. Johnson-Benoit Pouliot-Price. But I guess taking Pouliot over Johnson wouldn't fit your agenda, so you moved on to 2004.

And why focus on only the top-5? Look at picks 6-10 of 2004 and you'll see both forwards drafted busted while one of the two defensemen drafted(Smid) has become a solid player.

Once again, you're cherry picking sample sizes to an obscene degree.

What's the point of talking about quality of dmen taken when the quality is unknown. If the quality is known at the time then there will be a 0% bust rate.

The quality is known in hindsight. I'm looking at the past to make this observation.

Of course they cannot be compared considering the sample size for dmen is that much smaller. Basically for such a small sample size, it takes like 1 or 2 drafts with an abnormal bust % to completely skew the stats.

It's a sample size of 249 forwards and 154 defenseman. It's not a matter of one "draft" skewing the sample size, because we are looking at individuals.

Once again you are going back to the idea that I am saying it's a bad idea to take a dmen in the first round, I haven't said that.

Do I look like him?

Then why on earth would you respond to my argument directed at him?

I am basing it on the actual players and not the number of players drafted in the top 5.

Just off the top of my head for STAR forwards drafted in the top 5
Crosby, Tavares, Towes, Kane, Ovy, Malkin, Stamkos, Thornton, Backstrom, Erik Staal, Kessel, Sedins.

vs dmen drafted in the top 5 that are actually stars
Doughty, Pietrangelo, ( Seth Jones seems like he will get there )

I tried to look back into 1998 and it seems like all the highly drafted D never really busted but at the same time considering how high they were drafted, never reached the star level that one would hope with a top 5 pick.

example: Bouwmeester, Bogosian, Erik Johnson, Jack Johnson, Thomas Hickey, Karl Alzner, Luke Schenn, Cam Barker, Joni Pitkanen, Brad Stuart, Bryan Allen, Vitali ishnevski, Rostislav Klesla.

I mean aside from maybe Bouwmeester, would you pick any of the above Dmen with a top 5 pick now? Only 2 legit stars came out of a top 5 pick in a 10+ year span, that is pretty damn wasteful. ( I am not counting the Hedman and 2010 + draft class, just too early).

Focusing on only the top-5 is what skews the sample size, since only 21 defensemen have been picked in the top-5. Even if you were going to assume that the difference isn't due to statistical noise, that would only imply it's better to take a forward in the top-5(or to be more precise, the top-3). Not the entire first round, which is what I was discussing.

 

[arsmaster*]

2010 was brutal but then to be fair, having your first pick at the 4th round kind of leads to that.

Not sure if you've seen it, but there is an image of our 2010 list that's been leaked. It's terrifying.

Maggie the Monkey with the CSS list and a wheel could have done better.

Guys we got in the 4th and 6th were in our top 30.

I think it's trending better now, but it's too early to really say.

 

[nameless1]

I don't have the article handy, but basically if a defenseman can't score .5 PPG in his draft year, he's unlikely to become a primary roster player in the next four or five years. Most exceptions to this rule are defensemen who broke out the year after their draft year, and those are players that good scouting might help you locate later in the draft; this includes players like Weber. Sometimes it's a player on a deep junior team that doesn't receive a lot of power play time.

If I was going to take a defenseman in the 1st round (or specifically the first 20-ish picks, where the likelihood of finding a player is highest), it would have to be a guy who put up .75 PPG in his draft year. Obviously you'd assume this player has other features that allows him to be an offensive force (skating, shot, etc). That's what I'd be looking for when drafting a defenseman. Primarily defensive defensemen in junior almost never become more than fringe NHLers.

Later in drafts I'd probably draft target D with translatable offensive talent and some perceived deficiency. This is what they did with Subban. If he was 6'1 200 pounds he would have been a Top 25 pick. I like that as a philosophy. Even if 7 of 8 potential Alex Edlers/Jordan Subbans don't turn out, those are the guys to try and find outside the 1st round.

Even someone like Bryan Allen scored a touch over .5 PPG in his Age 18 year of junior. Barely. Not well enough that he'd be worth a Top 5 pick (lol), but at least someone you'd think would become a serviceable long-term NHL player, as he has.

Great analysis Proto.
Very spot on.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

I don't have the article handy, but basically if a defenseman can't score .5 PPG in his draft year, he's unlikely to become a primary roster player in the next four or five years. Most exceptions to this rule are defensemen who broke out the year after their draft year, and those are players that good scouting might help you locate later in the draft; this includes players like Weber. Sometimes it's a player on a deep junior team that doesn't receive a lot of power play time.

If I was going to take a defenseman in the 1st round (or specifically the first 20-ish picks, where the likelihood of finding a player is highest), it would have to be a guy who put up .75 PPG in his draft year. Obviously you'd assume this player has other features that allows him to be an offensive force (skating, shot, etc). That's what I'd be looking for when drafting a defenseman. Primarily defensive defensemen in junior almost never become more than fringe NHLers.

Later in drafts I'd probably draft target D with translatable offensive talent and some perceived deficiency. This is what they did with Subban. If he was 6'1 200 pounds he would have been a Top 25 pick. I like that as a philosophy. Even if 7 of 8 potential Alex Edlers/Jordan Subbans don't turn out, those are the guys to try and find outside the 1st round.

Even someone like Bryan Allen scored a touch over .5 PPG in his Age 18 year of junior. Barely. Not well enough that he'd be worth a Top 5 pick (lol), but at least someone you'd think would become a serviceable long-term NHL player, as he has.

I absolutely agree that it would usually be unwise to take a defenseman scoring under .5 PPG(at least in the CHL, not counting European leagues).

But looking at last year's draft, most CHL defensemen taken were producing offensively - Jones, Nurse, Morrissey, Pulock, and Theodore would all seem to fit your criteria, I think. The ones that didn't - Mueller and Morin, I agree were bad picks. Zadorov might be somewhat debateable as to his offensive upside, but in general I'm in complete agreement - and most of the time the defensemen that are drafted are ones that display offensive acumen.

 

[Proto]

I think it would be illustrative to see a list of what people consider the most egregiously bad "misses" on draft picks from the 2003-2010. You'd probably have to limit it to Top 15 picks, because after that the likelihood of drafting a serviceable player are around 60%, and the likelihood of drafting a Top 6 forward or Top 4 D are even worse than that.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Yeah, what did he have? Something like 14 points in 60 games I think.

Yann Sauve was a bad pick by Gillis as well. I think he was just under .5 PPG in the Q, which isn't great. At least that pick was defensible because he was also a big guy who looked like he had serviceable mobility early on. It's a miss, but at least I understand what the reasoning for it was.

Nonis made some picks that were honestly inexplicable, and he seemed to do it at least once a year. Sometimes twice a year. Sometimes seven times..

There's a miss (Sauve) and there's a huge swing and a miss (Ellington). One guy might still be able to be a fringe NHLer; the other couldn't get a permanent spot in the AHL.

 

[arttk]

The quality is known in hindsight. I'm looking at the past to make this observation.

Hindsight is not available when you are drafting. You can only rely on past history, and past history says that drafting a Dmen in the top 5 is most likely a fail.

It's a sample size of 249 forwards and 154 defenseman. It's not a matter of one "draft" skewing the sample size, because we are looking at individuals.

If we are so good at looking at individuals then there won't be any bust right?

Then why on earth would you respond to my argument directed at him?

Because there are flaws in your argument.

Focusing on only the top-5 is what skews the sample size, since only 21 defensemen have been picked in the top-5. Even if you were going to assume that the difference isn't due to statistical noise, that would only imply it's better to take a forward in the top-5(or to be more precise, the top-3).

Fact is fact. You can expand the scope to look at the whole first round but then it doesn't change the fact that there are more star forwards from the top5 than dmen and that is what I am saying. I am not saying anything else about taking dmen in the first round.

Even if we look into all the STAR Dmen drafted in the first round back to 2002 (too lazy to look further), there are still not a lot.

OEL, Doughty, Pietr, Erik Karlsson, Mike Green, Suter, Phaneuf, Seabrook, Bouw. 9 stars in 10 years? We have more than 9 Star forwards just from the 2003 draft alone.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Focusing on only the top-5 is what skews the sample size, since only 21 defensemen have been picked in the top-5. Even if you were going to assume that the difference isn't due to statistical noise, that would only imply it's better to take a forward in the top-5(or to be more precise, the top-3). Not the entire first round, which is what I was discussing.

And why do you think it's infinitely better to take forwards in the top 5 than defensemen?

 

[Proto]

I absolutely agree that it would usually be unwise to take a defenseman scoring under .5 PPG(at least in the CHL, not counting European leagues).

But looking at last year's draft, most CHL defensemen taken were producing offensively - Jones, Nurse, Morrissey, Pulock, and Theodore would all seem to fit your criteria, I think. The ones that didn't - Mueller and Morin, I agree were bad picks. Zadorov might be somewhat debateable as to his offensive upside, but in general I'm in complete agreement - and most of the time the defensemen that are drafted are ones that display offensive acumen.

Yeah. Obviously I'm not a scout, so I steer clear of getting into my observations on players, as I tend not to watch them a whole lot, or certainly not enough to think my opinion is a difference maker. But I think those guys at least meet the criteria you'd be looking for.

I think with a Top 10 pick I'd still generally favour a forward though, just based on development time-tables and the fact that I think there are generally a few defensemen drafted each season that are guys that fall for clear reasons.

Honestly I was more annoyed it took the Canucks until the 4th round to select Subban, but I'm glad they did. He has 1st round talent, and gambling on a small height but solid frame is completely worth it.

It's worth mentioning that I would absolutely lambaste Gillis for the Horvat pick if his late blooming last season hadn't continued into this season. I said at the time that Gillis was laying it all on the line after trading Schneider for the pick and then going at least slightly "off the board".

 

[Zarpan]

Not sure if you've seen it, but there is an image of our 2010 list that's been leaked. It's terrifying.

Maggie the Monkey with the CSS list and a wheel could have done better.

Guys we got in the 4th and 6th were in our top 30.

I think it's trending better now, but it's too early to really say.

Yeah, here's the link to the 2010 list. It's a good thing that we traded away all our high picks, otherwise it would have been like 2007 again.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=67912827&postcount=12

 

[Vankiller Whale]

Hindsight is not available when you are drafting. You can only rely on past history, and past history says that drafting a Dmen in the top 5 is most likely a fail.

If we are so good at looking at individuals then there won't be any bust right?

Because there are flaws in your argument.

Fact is fact. You can expand the scope to look at the whole first round but then it doesn't change the fact that there are more star forwards from the top5 than dmen and that is what I am saying. I am not saying anything else about taking dmen in the first round.

Even if we look into all the STAR Dmen drafted in the first round back to 2002 (too lazy to look further), there are still not a lot.

OEL, Doughty, Pietr, Erik Karlsson, Mike Green, Suter, Phaneuf, Seabrook, Bouw. 9 stars in 10 years? We have more than 9 Star forwards just from the 2003 draft alone.

You're arguing something completely unrelated. Yes, more star forwards are drafted in the top-5 than defensemen are. But that has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say.

Also, I only count 8 star forwards from 2003(Staal, Vanek, Carter, Parise, Getzlaf, Kesler, Richards, Perry). Another 2 from 2004(OV and Malkin), another 2 in 2005(Crosby and Kopitar), 4 in 2006(Toews, Backstrom, Kessel, Giroux), 1 in 2007(Kane), and one in 2008(Stamkos).

So that's 18 star forwards to 9 star defensemen. Well what do you know...

 

[arsmaster*]

I absolutely agree that it would usually be unwise to take a defenseman scoring under .5 PPG(at least in the CHL, not counting European leagues).

But looking at last year's draft, most CHL defensemen taken were producing offensively - Jones, Nurse, Morrissey, Pulock, and Theodore would all seem to fit your criteria, I think. The ones that didn't - Mueller and Morin, I agree were bad picks. Zadorov might be somewhat debateable as to his offensive upside, but in general I'm in complete agreement - and most of the time the defensemen that are drafted are ones that display offensive acumen.

But is the value there for guys like Morrissey when you can get a slightly smaller guy with similar production almost 100 picks later (Subban).

I believe both morin and mueller exhibited the offense to be sought after defensman. Morin had a PPG run in the playoffs (people who actually scouted the player obviously saw upside....and now he's above 0.5ppg).

Mueller also exhibited offensive skills (just below the 0.5ppg threshold).

I just don't think they were good picks at those spots.

Just like I didn't think Nurse was a good pick at 7th (I liked every defensman drafted in the 1st more than him).

I think this is where in depth scouting is key. We can look at nurse's physical tools and good production, but maybe some scouts question hockey sense. Whereas a guy like Nikita Zadorov doesn't produce the numbers but his physical tools, mentality and hockey sense show you that there is more there.

I think scouting is a really big crap shoot, but I think taking forwards earlier is a better play of The percentages.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

But is the value there for guys like Morrissey when you can get a slightly smaller guy with similar production almost 100 picks later (Subban).

I believe both morin and mueller exhibited the offense to be sought after defensman. Morin had a PPG run in the playoffs (people who actually scouted the player obviously saw upside....and now he's above 0.5ppg).

Mueller also exhibited offensive skills (just below the 0.5ppg threshold).

I just don't think they were good picks at those spots.

Just like I didn't think Nurse was a good pick at 7th (I liked every defensman drafted in the 1st more than him).

I think this is where in depth scouting is key. We can look at nurse's physical tools and good production, but maybe some scouts question hockey sense. Whereas a guy like Nikita Zadorov doesn't produce the numbers but his physical tools, mentality and hockey sense show you that there is more there.

I think scouting is a really big crap shoot, but I think taking forwards earlier is a better play of The percentages.

I'm not really talking specifics, obviously in depth scouting does matter for individuals. (I also was never that high on Nurse, for instance), but in general, it makes more sense to target a defenseman who displays significant offensive ability if you are taking one in the first round - as most GMs do.

Why is drafting Subban in the later rounds any different than guys like Petan or Reway or Cammarata?

 

[arsmaster*]

I'm not really talking specifics, obviously in depth scouting does matter for individuals. (I also was never that high on Nurse, for instance), but in general, it makes more sense to target a defenseman who displays significant offensive ability if you are taking one in the first round - as most GMs do.

Why is drafting Subban in the later rounds any different than guys like Petan or Reway or Cammarata?

It really isn't but I rated Petan in the middle of the first round, so there's that.

Didn't feel comfortable ranking Reway or Cammarata.

 

[arttk]

You're arguing something completely unrelated. Yes, more star forwards are drafted in the top-5 than defensemen are. But that has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say.

Also, I only count 8 star forwards from 2003(Staal, Vanek, Carter, Parise, Getzlaf, Kesler, Richards, Perry). Another 2 from 2004(OV and Malkin), another 2 in 2005(Crosby and Kopitar), 4 in 2006(Toews, Backstrom, Kessel, Giroux), 1 in 2007(Kane), and one in 2008(Stamkos).

So that's 18 star forwards to 9 star defensemen. Well what do you know...

How bout Rick Nash (2002), Bobby Ryan (2005), Tavares, Duchene (2009), Hall, Seguin (2010).

So really about 24 to 9. You can argue that it's too early to evaluate the 2009 + draft but then thats the thing, forwards mature faster and you get them producing much faster than D and they are more safe in their development. I think Doughty is the only Dmen in the past 12 years to play right after getting drafted and still ended up as star.

 

[Vankiller Whale]

How bout Rick Nash (2002), Bobby Ryan (2005), Tavares, Duchene (2009), Hall, Seguin (2010).

So really about 24 to 9. You can argue that it's too early to evaluate the 2009 + draft but then thats the thing, forwards mature faster and you get them producing much faster than D and they are more safe in their development. I think Doughty is the only Dmen in the past 12 years to play right after getting drafted and still ended up as star.

If you're counting Bobby Ryan then I get to count Jack Johnson.

2009 and 2010 are absolutely too soon to judge. Heck, even from 2008 there's a chance someone like Bogosian or Myers turns into a star player.

Yes forwards tend to be impact players sooner, but that doesn't make their development safer, or their long term value any less.

Also a huge chunk of star forwards come from elite first overall picks that are head and shoulders over the rest. I would never pass on a Crosby, Ovechkin, Tavares, Stamkos for a defenseman, since you almost never have a defenseman ranked smilarly at the same age.

But when we're not talking about those kinds of special talents, then I see nothing wrong with taking a defenseman.

 

[nameless1]

What happened to Tyler Myers?
He was touted as the next big thing...
With the stats to prove it in the first year...
And now...
He is a mediocre player...
On a mediocre team.
That is a fast fall from grace.

Is he suffering from the Bouwmeester curse...
In that he is better as a complimentary player...
Rather than a big star the way he is paid?

 

[Proto]

If you're counting Bobby Ryan then I get to count Jack Johnson.

One is an elite play-driving forward who scores more goals than 95% of players in the league, the other is an atrociously over-used defenseman who probably shouldn't be in the Top 4 of any team in the NHL