How much of scouting/development is skill vs luck?

[The Zetterberg Era]

eliminate the aspect of guessing wether a small guy shall grow enough by not drafting small guys

Your strategy basically eliminates the chance of our last cup core because goodbye Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Kronwall...

 

[deca guard]

Your strategy basically eliminates the chance of our last cup core because goodbye Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Kronwall...

i might have to do some cypherin concerning this strategy

 

[Frk It]

The logic was watching a player only a handful of times is you can grow affection to a player which can cloud your judgement.

Over focus on a handful of things that you like/dislike about the player.

I forgot what scout did the interview, may have been Hakan but I can't recall.

Here’s the quote, it’s from Hakan in an old HF article:

Andersson needs more than just one game to paint a good picture of a prospect and project his future. But he doesn’t want to see the player too often either.
“It depends,” he explained. “Usually it takes about two to three games. One game is not much to go on since the player could have the best or worst game of his career. But you don’t want to see a guy more than 10 times either. If you do, then there is a big risk that you’ll start picking on the player’s minor weaknesses.”

I think that’s just a personal philosophy that works for Hakan. Because I can guarantee our OHL scouts will see Byfield, Perfetti, Drysdale, Rossi etc more than 10 times this year. Especially Perfetti who plays on Saginaw with Osgood and Jimmy D on the ownership team.

www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/7606/hkan_andersson_scout_extraordinaire/

 

[Dingle]

A GM had better be a rink rat... He must love the smell of propane from the Zamboni. He must be willing to work 12 hour days. Unearth every last thing about a prospect.

As guys grow older, that becomes harder, so they delegate. I was floored once. Doug McLean (CB old president/GM) had no problem saying on air, how he drafted some kid in like rounds 2 or 3, that he had never seen!

Yea, at the end, there is a luck component..But you better bust your hump.

Looking at measurables like: size, skating, shot is one thing. Examining a kid's history, his background, his character are just as key. I once heard the greatest line. "Sydney Crosby was a 15 year old Navy Seal..." Then you have to have experience in watching the game. Seeing if he has good vision, instincts, does he drive the play or does he tag along? there are another half dozen variables.

You guys once had this magic in spades..Now less so.

 

[Shaman464]

You think teams knew AA would score 30 goals but overlooked him because of character flaws?
When those things happen, players slide to the end of round 1 or round 2, not Round 4.

Yes, because he was considered a top pick until his whole temper tantrum and demanding a trade and then it came out he was an ass and his extreme lack of caring.

https://thehockeywriters.com/andrea...-nhl-draft-prospect-profile-beware-the-greek/

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #50: Andreas Athanasiou - Last Word on Sports

 

[Run the Jewels]

I think this could be an interesting conversation given the state of this franchise and the task at hand.

I think of drafting Datsyuk out of Russia. I think Hakan said he was 5'9" and 150 something lbs when he first saw him. Saw the raw talent and desire to have the puck and get the puck back.

What if he maxed out at 5"10 and 170 lbs and wasn't strong enough to play center in the NHL... Just became a solid 3rd line winger... Based on what we knew at the time he was drafted, that seemed like a pretty possible outcome.

But instead he gets to almost 200 lbs and becomes an elite 2 way force in the NHL and Hakan becomes a world famous scout. (This is in no way meant to discredit Hakan or start a Datsyuk pissing contest)

Projecting these kids that are still developing and unfinished products has to be one of the hardest things to do. The more I have tracked prospects and talked to people, the more I feel like there is just a ton of luck involved. These kids all dominate their peers at 17/18. They all have things they do extremely well and some things they need to improve to continue progressing forward. How do we know who can gain 20 lbs of muscle, or gain a step or two in their skating and who won't? Then you have injuries and other uncontrollables that get thrown into the mix.

My gut says that luck plays a role in this more than we would like to think, what does everyone else think? I'd like to think that for all the $ and time that gets invested into scouting, that everything is calculated and every team gets different results because of different processes/resources. But it just doesn't seem like anyone has been able to separate themselves except for maybe us in the 90's with European players... doesn't there have to be a reason for that?

I do believe certain guys have an eye for talent. Hakan is the clearest example. He was never given top picks in Detroit yet he routinely found NHL talent outside of the top 50 picks in any draft.

Hronek: 53rd overall
Jarnkrok: 51st overall
Mrazek: 141st overall
Tatar: 60th overall
Nyquist: 121st overall
Franzen: 97th overall
Hudler: 58th overall
Fleischmann: 63rd overall
Filppula; 95th overall
Kronwall: One of only 2 top 50 picks
Kopecky: his other top 50 pick, played in nearly 600 games
Zetterberg: 210th overall
Datsyuk: 171st overall

He has the ability to identify guys who despite not being clearly ticketed for the NHL as 18 year olds are eventually solid NHLers. Obviously not all of them hit, but it's strange that he hasn't been consulted on earlier picks given his impressive track record.

 

[Mlotek]

Yes, because he was considered a top pick until his whole temper tantrum and demanding a trade and then it came out he was an ass and his extreme lack of caring.

https://thehockeywriters.com/andrea...-nhl-draft-prospect-profile-beware-the-greek/

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #50: Andreas Athanasiou - Last Word on Sports

That scout report is so accurate.

Could easily be written in 2020.

 

[MBH]

Your strategy basically eliminates the chance of our last cup core because goodbye Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Kronwall...

It also eliminates Yzerman's greatest strength - drafting little guys in rounds 2-4 who turn into top 5 type talents.

 

[Shaman464]

That scout report is so accurate.

Could easily be written in 2020.

I felt the same way, in a lot of ways he's still the 17 year old that people wrote these scouting reports on. Its scarily accurate, and he's just not changed.

 

[MBH]

Yes, because he was considered a top pick until his whole temper tantrum and demanding a trade and then it came out he was an ass and his extreme lack of caring.

https://thehockeywriters.com/andrea...-nhl-draft-prospect-profile-beware-the-greek/

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #50: Andreas Athanasiou - Last Word on Sports

AA left London because he wasn't playing.
He went to Barrie and played.
And quickly found himself on track for an NHL career.

That's not a "temper tantrum."
That's taking care of your career.

He'll do the same in the NHL, I'm guessing. Find a place/coach that wants to play him, and play.

 

[ricky0034]

Here’s the quote, it’s from Hakan in an old HF article:



I think that’s just a personal philosophy that works for Hakan. Because I can guarantee our OHL scouts will see Byfield, Perfetti, Drysdale, Rossi etc more than 10 times this year. Especially Perfetti who plays on Saginaw with Osgood and Jimmy D on the ownership team.

www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/7606/hkan_andersson_scout_extraordinaire/

I do think there's a bit of a difference between guys like those and the range of players Hakan has historically mostly been scouting too

if you're looking at guys that are gonna go in the 2nd or 3rd round or even later and there's potentially dozens of guys you're realistically picking between? yeah you probably don't wanna watch any of them too much,these guys aren't really gonna be a total package you want to be identifying strengths not nitpicking over their weaknesses

if you're picking between a handful of guys for a top 5 pick? very different situation,you probably do want to be trying to really break it down and analyze everything you can

 

[Mlotek]

The reason that the wings had an edge in Europe is because of the scouting system they put in place. Other teams were not as serious about Eropeans and remember the 90s was still the infancy of data being available globablly. You couldn't go on the internet in 1991 and download stats on every single hockey leauge in the entire world. Scouting was boots on the ground and Detroit sent people to Europe and Russia.

Remember in the 90's you heard first European this First Russain that. Because no one systemically drafted Europeans and Russians until the 90's. If the Russian 5 did not defect the wings would have wasted all those picks.

The European boat that docked in Detroit was not system of statistical evaluative methodology it was just boots on the ground when no one else was doing it and risking picks when you didn't know players would come over.

That advantage died when other teams caught on, and then even more so when the internet made any 15 year old in the world with talent global knowledge.

For the Soviets that was more because they couldn't come over.

Also don't recall Detroit selecting anyone from Soviet Union until the 89 draft which is when the floodgates were opening for Soviet players to leave. Which coincidentally included 7 players from CSKA Moskwa. 89-90 was like the first season that Soviet players started playing in numbers.


Fyodorov and Konstantinov were among the 2 players from CSKA Moskwa selected that season. At that time there really weren't any bad players on that powerhouse. If you were drafting from Dynamo Moskwa, meh, bad luck I guess.

Keep in mind Fetisov and Larionov played most of their Soviet careers for CSKA. Althought they weren't drafted by Detroit. Also, technically they didn't defect, their leave to North America was granted by the Soviet state.

Speaking of Fetisov, New Jersey actually took 3 Soviets in 1983 draft, one of which was Fetisov. 6 years before Detroit drafted their first.
Quebec also took a few Soviets as well, which included Gusarov and Kamensky. IIRC, both won cups after franchise moved to Colorado. Again, taken before Detroit drafted a single Soviet.

Kozlov also ended in CSKA after he was drafted by Detroit.

Keep in mind guys like Fyodorov, Bure, and Mogilny were already stars from the U20 touraments.

Soviet national teams and others also showed off their talents in exhibitions at times. A handful of games can be found on youtube from the 80s.


As for rest of Europe.
There were about 40 Swedes taken in the draft before Detroit took their first.
They went pretty heavy in 1984 taking 4 and striking out 4 times.
In 1985 they took 3 more and struck out.
In 1986 they finally hit gold with Garpenlov and whatever you want to consider Djoos.
1 bust in 87
Got platinum in 89 with Lidstrom than nothing until the mid 90s.

Just a note, St. Louis had already taken 6 Swedes by the time Detroit drafted their first. That is ignoring the 3 they drafted in same draft class as Detroit. Again, all taken before Detroit's pick.

80s/90s Wings weren't big on the Fins. There were no Fins taken between 87-97.
Edmonton did find Kurri and Tikkanen.
Winnipeg found Selanne and Numminen in the 80s.

About 8 Czech/Slovaks from 80-99 with Klima and Fischer being only ones of note.



Conclusion: I really don't think that statement of Detroit being the first to exploit "hidden" European/Soviet talent to hold much validity.

Even with respect to the Soviets, they were behind the curve. They only started drafting Soviets when it was obvious that they would be allowed to come over and play.

Afterthought: I do wonder how much NHL salaries came into play with recruiting foreign players in the 80s. I mean by 89 there were maybe only a dozen players making 7 figures. I heard even in the 80s many players didn't break 100k per year.

 

[Pavels Dog]

A GM had better be a rink rat... He must love the smell of propane from the Zamboni. He must be willing to work 12 hour days. Unearth every last thing about a prospect.

As guys grow older, that becomes harder, so they delegate. I was floored once. Doug McLean (CB old president/GM) had no problem saying on air, how he drafted some kid in like rounds 2 or 3, that he had never seen!

Yea, at the end, there is a luck component..But you better bust your hump.

A GM doesn't need to be a scout.

And imo it's probably a badly run organization if the GM doesn't have trust in the work his scouts and scouting director is doing. Should the GM watch prospects? Sure, as much as he can. If you're drafting top 10, the GM should probably be pretty involved in that scouting process. But later in the draft I see nothing wrong with essentially "giving" the picks to the scouts and scouting director.

 

[Mlotek]

A GM doesn't need to be a scout.

And imo it's probably a badly run organization if the GM doesn't have trust in the work his scouts and scouting director is doing. Should the GM watch prospects? Sure, as much as he can. If you're drafting top 10, the GM should probably be pretty involved in that scouting process. But later in the draft I see nothing wrong with essentially "giving" the picks to the scouts and scouting director.

Back when Jim Nill used to be with Detroit.

Holland generally had input on the first few picks before handing the reigns off to Nill. IIRC, Nill was the director of scouting prospects.

Given Nill tendency to go with Europeans, I am sure he relied heavily on Hakan.

Somewhat of a confirmation of your position.

 

[waltdetroit]

Here is a pretty good podcast on scouting biases (Rachel Doerrie & Ian Tulloch). They describe the many types of bias folks have when looking at players. If you want to self-improve your research, give it a listen

The Staff & Graph Podcast

 

[Dingle]

A GM doesn't need to be a scout.

And imo it's probably a badly run organization if the GM doesn't have trust in the work his scouts and scouting director is doing. Should the GM watch prospects? Sure, as much as he can. If you're drafting top 10, the GM should probably be pretty involved in that scouting process. But later in the draft I see nothing wrong with essentially "giving" the picks to the scouts and scouting director.

Back when Jim Nill used to be with Detroit.

Holland generally had input on the first few picks before handing the reigns off to Nill. IIRC, Nill was the director of scouting prospects.

Given Nill tendency to go with Europeans, I am sure he relied heavily on Hakan.

Somewhat of a confirmation of your position.

I am not arguing, but engaging you guys in debate. What then is the definition of a GM? More often then not, he is a hockey man..so the marketing, salary cap, player contracts, etc, which he has input into, you associate with the business side of hockey Ops. And are not as closely attended to by him..he is not about to spend hours putting the legalese into the document.

Does that not leave his primary roles as: drafting (and all components associated with it), Pro player moves (and all components of that), hiring of coaches and all hockey ops.

if a GM does not give drafting a disproportionate time, I do not believe he will succeed. Doug Mclean did get fired and never worked again. Lou Lamarello, who I believe does an above average job of drafting/player development just keeps on going. I have always believed Lou is way more comfortable at the rink, than the office. And his success, Toronto aside, was/is in small markets, where he has no financial advantage.

I believe that a GM who stands at that podium in June, not having done his due diligence. Not having seen players with his own eyes, investigated them himself, is heading for trouble.

Similarly for a GM who trades, less all the above. See the guys in Ottawa debating the Mike Hoffman trade..The consensus is: Dorion got fleeced, because he may have believed his pro scouts and their evaluation of Boedker. Makes you wonder if he had done the work himself.

 

[HisNoodliness]

To people arguing luck as the overriding driver, I wonder how you account for teams that have a long track record of drafting a developing at certain positions? Tampa at Forward, Nashville at goalie and D, St Louis at D, etc?

There's two things at play here IMO. The first is that there of course is some skill in drafting. Sometimes a team identifies a particular trait or set of traits that they should target and because those happen to be good choices their draft picks tend to have success. Tampa prioritizing skating and hockey IQ over size in their forwards seems to pay dividends. Furthermore they have a particularly good development track. All of these factors together give them a slight bump to their probability of a pick working out. I think it's quite small though, say 5%

The second effect is that whenever you distribute something (in this case talent) randomly or semi-randomly, you're likely to get clustering. Humans do a terrible job of producing random sequences of numbers because we're unwilling to put in enough repeats- we make the distribution far too uniform. That's to say that our intuition would predict a much more even distribution of talent around the league than you get from a mostly random system. If I take a huge pile of confetti and throw it into the air over a group of people. One person will have a lot more on them than another, it doesn't mean they're better at attracting falling confetti.

 

[Mlotek]

I am not arguing, but engaging you guys in debate. What then is the definition of a GM? More often then not, he is a hockey man..so the marketing, salary cap, player contracts, etc, which he has input into, you associate with the business side of hockey Ops. And are not as closely attended to by him..he is not about to spend hours putting the legalese into the document.

Does that not leave his primary roles as: drafting (and all components associated with it), Pro player moves (and all components of that), hiring of coaches and all hockey ops.

if a GM does not give drafting a disproportionate time, I do not believe he will succeed. Doug Mclean did get fired and never worked again. Lou Lamarello, who I believe does an above average job of drafting/player development just keeps on going. I have always believed Lou is way more comfortable at the rink, than the office. And his success, Toronto aside, was/is in small markets, where he has no financial advantage.

I believe that a GM who stands at that podium in June, not having done his due diligence. Not having seen players with his own eyes, investigated them himself, is heading for trouble.

Similarly for a GM who trades, less all the above. See the guys in Ottawa debating the Mike Hoffman trade..The consensus is: Dorion got fleeced, because he may have believed his pro scouts and their evaluation of Boedker. Makes you wonder if he had done the work himself.

I think the Boedker move was more panic to trade away Hoffman before attempting to re-up Karlsson. He also didn't want to trade him to an Eastern conference team, thereby eliminating half the league as potential trade partners. San Jose did really well there.

Keep in mind there are 1000 players in the NHL any given year. 1000+ draft eligible players every year.

With running day to day of a club, I dunno how much time they'd realistically have to see all these guys play. One of the keys to success in management is delegating tasks to competent subordinates. Seeing someone play, and ability to judge potential and ability are also very different things.

It also depends how much success at the draft table David Conte deserves. He was with the Devils for about 30 years mostly as director of scouting, he left around time when Lou left. Last season he rejoined Lou in New York.

I dunno the New Jersey organization enough to comment more on that matter. I'am sure someone on this forum is more knowledgeable on this matter.

Elite Prospects - David Conte Team Staff Profile

 

[Dingle]

I think the Boedker move was more panic to trade away Hoffman before attempting to re-up Karlsson. He also didn't want to trade him to an Eastern conference team, thereby eliminating half the league as potential trade partners. San Jose did really well there.

Keep in mind there are 1000 players in the NHL any given year. 1000+ draft eligible players every year.

With running day to day of a club, I dunno how much time they'd realistically have to see all these guys play. One of the keys to success in management is delegating tasks to competent subordinates. Seeing someone play, and ability to judge potential and ability are also very different things.

It also depends how much success at the draft table David Conte deserves. He was with the Devils for about 30 years mostly as director of scouting, he left around time when Lou left. Last season he rejoined Lou in New York.

I dunno the New Jersey organization enough to comment more on that matter. I'am sure someone on this forum is more knowledgeable on this matter.

Elite Prospects - David Conte Team Staff Profile

Again, question not arguments.

Do you really need to see 1000 prospects? You get your scouts to do all the work for the 2 years in advance. By February of that year, you should have your list of the 5-6 players in each round that you realistically target. And the players your scout should be high on, in case you move up. The NHL is not the NFL..it is unwise to move down. So, the reality is, you should be down to 20 players to scout. Between film, between phone calls, between seeing them in person.. and I am giving credit to picks 5,6,7.

And similarly with NHL players. Who cares about the bottom ~ 60% of all players. Trading a 4th liner, for a 4th.. But Hoffman was a 1st/2nd liner..There are 200 of them.. you are not getting Crosby, Ovi, etc. That means about 100.. should you not keep an eye. Should you not, as trades come up, now kick into high detective mode?

I don't want to aggrandize Pierre McGuire. But he does a local Radio hit. The guy is like an encyclopedia...Even if he rehearsed his hit before hand and knew the players you want to discuss, it is still impressive.

I don't know if this is folk lore or real, but Jerry Tarkanian, the old Running Rebels Basketball coach. It was once claimed he was in an airport in 1980 the US hostages had just been freed from Iran.. and he commented, what hostages? Again folk lore or real?? But imagine that kind of immersion.

My apologies for repeating myself, I believe the correlation between the draft and success is straight forward. The Red Wings 1980-2002 drafting was unreal. Then POOF..nothing after that and we see the results. It took a while for you to feel it, but the 98-02 still had 15 years ahead of them. Holland was much younger and hungrier, Jimmy D. was much younger and hungrier. I hope Stevie Y. is that again.

 

[Frk It]

Again, question not arguments.

Do you really need to see 1000 prospects? You get your scouts to do all the work for the 2 years in advance. By February of that year, you should have your list of the 5-6 players in each round that you realistically target. And the players your scout should be high on, in case you move up. The NHL is not the NFL..it is unwise to move down. So, the reality is, you should be down to 20 players to scout. Between film, between phone calls, between seeing them in person.. and I am giving credit to picks 5,6,7.

And similarly with NHL players. Who cares about the bottom ~ 60% of all players. Trading a 4th liner, for a 4th.. But Hoffman was a 1st/2nd liner..There are 200 of them.. you are not getting Crosby, Ovi, etc. That means about 100.. should you not keep an eye. Should you not, as trades come up, now kick into high detective mode?

I don't want to aggrandize Pierre McGuire. But he does a local Radio hit. The guy is like an encyclopedia...Even if he rehearsed his hit before hand and knew the players you want to discuss, it is still impressive.

I don't know if this is folk lore or real, but Jerry Tarkanian, the old Running Rebels Basketball coach. It was once claimed he was in an airport in 1980 the US hostages had just been freed from Iran.. and he commented, what hostages? Again folk lore or real?? But imagine that kind of immersion.

My apologies for repeating myself, I believe the correlation between the draft and success is straight forward. The Red Wings 1980-2002 drafting was unreal. Then POOF..nothing after that and we see the results. It took a while for you to feel it, but the 98-02 still had 15 years ahead of them. Holland was much younger and hungrier, Jimmy D. was much younger and hungrier. I hope Stevie Y. is that again.

I think that advantage came down mostly to covering more ground in Sweden and Russia than the rest of the league. I know that with Datsyuk, Hakan Andersson said we were probably the only NHL team that saw him play prior to his draft year. That kind of stuff just wouldn't happen now. Zetterberg, Kronwall, Franzen, Lidstrom... we also cleaned up in Sweden.

It literally got to the point where Vancouver picked Edler because they knew Detroit scouted him and liked him. But when you can totally rebuild a franchise without high picks, other teams are going to take notice. So yeah, that advantage in Sweden/Russia does not exist anymore. I know not all teams have the same # of scouts, but it seems like all areas are pretty well represented now. The Wings still try to target areas they feel are not being hit as heavily, but that is not nearly the same thing as what they were doing before.

 

[Dingle]

I think that advantage came down mostly to covering more ground in Sweden and Russia than the rest of the league. I know that with Datsyuk, Hakan Andersson said we were probably the only NHL team that saw him play prior to his draft year. That kind of stuff just wouldn't happen now. Zetterberg, Kronwall, Franzen, Lidstrom... we also cleaned up in Sweden.

It literally got to the point where Vancouver picked Edler because they knew Detroit scouted him and liked him. But when you can totally rebuild a franchise without high picks, other teams are going to take notice. So yeah, that advantage in Sweden/Russia does not exist anymore. I know not all teams have the same # of scouts, but it seems like all areas are pretty well represented now. The Wings still try to target areas they feel are not being hit as heavily, but that is not nearly the same thing as what they were doing before.

You do know that the next 25 years, could be the Montreal Canadians since 1993 !! way more misses than hits. It could also mean Stevie Y. is no more the answer than any other GM.

We got our own problems...The Tank Nation Thread in Ottawa is upset that you guys are diving faster than us.

 

[Mlotek]

I think that advantage came down mostly to covering more ground in Sweden and Russia than the rest of the league. I know that with Datsyuk, Hakan Andersson said we were probably the only NHL team that saw him play prior to his draft year. That kind of stuff just wouldn't happen now. Zetterberg, Kronwall, Franzen, Lidstrom... we also cleaned up in Sweden.

It literally got to the point where Vancouver picked Edler because they knew Detroit scouted him and liked him. But when you can totally rebuild a franchise without high picks, other teams are going to take notice. So yeah, that advantage in Sweden/Russia does not exist anymore. I know not all teams have the same # of scouts, but it seems like all areas are pretty well represented now. The Wings still try to target areas they feel are not being hit as heavily, but that is not nearly the same thing as what they were doing before.

Wings were big on Swedes because Hakan has a Swedish bias, with being from Sweden, is a big DUH!


I really don't buy the premise that Detroit started the trend of getting teams to scout or take chances on Swedes.

Luckily, eliteprospects has draft breakdowns by nationality.

Elite Prospects - Players from Sweden in the NHL Entry Draft

Elite Prospects - Players from Russia in the NHL Entry Draft

 

[Frk It]

Wings were big on Swedes because Hakan has a Swedish bias, with being from Sweden, is a big DUH!


I really don't buy the premise that Detroit started the trend of getting teams to scout or take chances on Swedes.

Luckily, eliteprospects has draft breakdowns by nationality.

Elite Prospects - Players from Sweden in the NHL Entry Draft

Elite Prospects - Players from Russia in the NHL Entry Draft

I have no clue how you got any of this from what I said. You totally missed the point.

 

[Mlotek]

I have no clue how you get any of this from what I said. You totally missed the point.

So yeah, that advantage in Sweden/Russia does not exist anymore.

Kinda from this line and generally line of conversation.

 

[Frk It]

Kinda from this line and generally line of conversation.

I said we covered more ground in Russia and Sweden than anyone else. That was our competitive advantage. Not that we took Swedes because Hakan is Swedish. If that was your takeaway, I don't know what to tell you.