Finding Gems: Overrated or not?

[Marshal Rochambeau]

"Andersson was in Moscow to scout Dmitri Kalinin, but the one who caught his eye was Datsyuk, "this little guy on the other team." Andersson made another trip to see Datsyuk and would have gone a third time; however his flight was cancelled because of a storm.[3] A scout from the St. Louis Blues was on the plane as well, and as a result of that storm Andersson believes he is the only NHL scout to have seen Datsyuk play prior to the 1998 NHL Entry Draft, when the Red Wings drafted him 171st overall"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Datsyuk

So, it was his destiny to play for the Wings?

 

[Duke749]

Does anyone know why Enstrom was taken so late? Was there question of him coming over or did it have a lot to do with his size?

 

[PresidentCamacho*]

Here's some fairly relevant material for this topic:

http://techtv.mit.edu/videos/11869-...e-quality-of-draft-decisions---peter-tingling

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1942757


There's some fascinating insights in the video.

 

[SabresSharks]

Yes, it is overrated.

All prospects are very well known to all teams these days. Luck - in terms of which of two evenly rated players will become the better NHLer - plays a way bigger role than scouting staffs and GMs would care to admit. It's exceedingly difficult, excepting generational players, to project how an 18 year-old will develop.

A mock draft by a well informed HFB poster will approximate the actual results fairly accurately. What does that tell you about any special insight a team might have used in "uncovering" a late-round gem?

 

[sg58]

Does anyone know why Enstrom was taken so late? Was there question of him coming over or did it have a lot to do with his size?

Yes, mostly. He had limited playing time in his draft year, too, being with Modo's senior roster but not in an important role.

 

[chopkins]

It's not just luck. It could also be excellent scouting and great development. For example, Alex Edler (beaten to it). The Wings had him on their radar and were planning on picking him but the Canucks found out and stole him from them. That wasn't blind luck at all. I'm sure there are many other examples.

But yes, luck can play a part.

 

[Xander Crews]

There is tons of luck in it... you think a team like Detroit knew Dats was that good and still didnt bother even using a 5th rounder on him? If they they wait that late in the draft a team could easily take them before that.

If the team really thought they were so good then there is no way they wouldnt have picked them earlier.

 

[Claypool]

Scouts look for potential. Their job is to find players that can become NHL regulars. It's up to the teams to try and make that happen.

Datsyuk had the benefit of maturing before playing for the Wings. When he did come over, his rookie season was with one of the best hockey teams ever assembled. I believe Hull, Larionov and Fedorov had a huge impact with how Datsyuk developed as a player, too.

What I'm saying it Datsyuk probably wouldn't be the same player if he was drafted by a team like Florida or something.

 

[Ola]

Alot of the key factos has been mentioned above, but I miss maybe the biggest reason for, atleast, Detroits late round success.

Its certainly valid to mention that Detroit themselves passed on these kids, and natrually were higher on other players who turned out to be busts.

But, you gotta keep in mind the types of players Detroit has drafted round after round year in and year out.

At a time were teams wanted size and character guys Detroit took the most skilled/best hockey players available, basically.

-They have never been intanglibles horny. Like you so often hear stuff like "This kid is 6'4, he can skate well for a big man bla bla bla bla" with Detroit, instead they take that kid who just had a very good season at whatever level he played, they take that player who is able to get it done.

-They have looked at the right places at the right time. Which is very very very important. Developing hockey players takes know how. A country like Canada will sometimes develop some good players or at times a big majority of all good players, depending the state of their programs. But countrys like Sweden, Finland, the Czech Rep, even Russia, is alot more streaky when it comes to developing kids. If Sweden's program is behind Canada and the US' programs, we won't develop more than the odd decent player like every other year. We have seen that for long stretches. Look at like players born 81' to like 84' from Sweden in the NHL, you have like Kronwall in the NHL, Alex Steen, and a few others, but certainly not many or that good. While at other times, Sweden can develop like a 4-5 very good players per year. The diffrence can litterary be counted in several hundred per cents.

-And of course how they are developed. Kids are drafted for roles in the NHL, and there is never any doubt what is expected from them or what roles they will get.