How to draft well

Circulartheory

Registered User
Apr 22, 2006
6,714
685
Hong Kong
Los Angeles picking Hickey that high is a example of playing your wild card too soon. Even if they thougt he was the fourth best prospect, trade down and pick him. Even if there was a rumour the Bruins (at 8) also had Hickey in there top 5.

This doresn't make sense to me...you have to either pick one

Trade down and lose Hickey to the Bruins (or potentially some1 in 5-7)
Or pick Hickey #4.
 

Kadri43*

Registered User
Oct 1, 2010
2,933
0
noneofyourbusiness
Yup, it's hard, but some teams are better than others at it. Look at Chicago or Boston or LA or Ottawa or Detroit. It's not "a total crapshoot" like a roll of the dice or something, it's just very hard to do it well, but some teams manage to do it right over and over. What are they doing that is making their drafting successful?

Detroit is not even that good at drafting and developing anymore. Not any better than any other teams at least. I would argue that even Anaheim has drafted better lately.
 

feffan

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,949
146
Malmö
This doresn't make sense to me...you have to either pick one

Trade down and lose Hickey to the Bruins (or potentially some1 in 5-7)
Or pick Hickey #4.

It could be seen as a bold good move in the making, in the molds of say Philly taking Forsberg. But:
For starters there´s still three teams that surely would want to move up before Boston is about to draft. Every little step that early could be worth at least a third round pick. And with Voracek and Gagner still available I find it hard to believe none would want to move up.
And this is assuming that Boston really were that high on Hickey as the rumour said - I don´t know if that ever been confirmed. Hickey was predicted to go at earliest at number 15 I think, most having him 20-30. And even if other rankings aint and shouldt be something teams look at too much when drafting - it was a stretch pick. LA played their cards bad. Most people thougt it at the time, most people think it now. If they really wanted Hickey they should have been able to get him + .
 

Razz

Registered User
Jan 23, 2011
4,457
719
Mississauga
From what I've seen over the years, teams that draft well tend to draft skill. They figure they can teach other areas of the game, as long as the player is skilled.

Then, it depends on that player whether they want to work hard enough to become better at areas they lack.(or if they really can)

I actually think drafting for skill and swinging for the fences is one of the bigger mistakes a lot of teams make. Skill alone may get you a good career in the AHL but it doesn't always translate in the NHL except for the top picks whom usually have the whole package.

NHL players later in the draft need to be more well rounded and it comes down to work ethic and drive.

I think the more safe NHL assets you end up with, the better the team is overall. Sure you might hit a homerun with a skill pick but there's a lot of positions to fill in a lineup, many of which rely on other attributes.

I think it's of sound strategy to draft as many potential NHL players as possible (even marginal ones) and deal them to fill a need down the road. Depth is an asset.
 

Anthony Mauro

DraftBuzz Hockey
Oct 3, 2004
6,859
5
www.draftbuzzhockey.com
It could be seen as a bold good move in the making, in the molds of say Philly taking Forsberg. But:
For starters there´s still three teams that surely would want to move up before Boston is about to draft. Every little step that early could be worth at least a third round pick. And with Voracek and Gagner still available I find it hard to believe none would want to move up.
And this is assuming that Boston really were that high on Hickey as the rumour said - I don´t know if that ever been confirmed. Hickey was predicted to go at earliest at number 15 I think, most having him 20-30. And even if other rankings aint and shouldt be something teams look at too much when drafting - it was a stretch pick. LA played their cards bad. Most people thougt it at the time, most people think it now. If they really wanted Hickey they should have been able to get him + .

You can't draft based on any other source than your own team and it's rankings. However, there has to be an objective assessment tool out there that states Gagner/Voracek are better value than Hickey at that pick.

Granted, they aren't that far off of thinking that Hickey was the best defenseman at the time due to production and skillset in '07. The problem is pitting him against forwards that obviously had more clout, more staying power, whatever you want to call it. And that's why you don't go Hickey at 4.
 

The Camera Eye

Registered User
Nov 4, 2006
702
123
Sainte-Catherine
I want to know how a guy like Andrew Shaw gets passed over in his draft year yet is a 5th round pick in 2011 and now is 5th among all players drafted that year in GP. Is it easier for him to crack an NHL lineup because he's a bottom 6 player as opposed to a potential top 6 (that take more time to develop/teams are careful with high picks)? Is he one of those players who is better at the NHL level than he was at the OHL level? I'd imagine if there was a 2011 re-draft he'd be a 1st rounder now. But it's interesting to me that a 5th round pick has had such an impact at the NHL level so soon after his draft year.
 

Mc5RingsAndABeer

5-14-6-1
May 25, 2011
20,184
1,385
For a lot of players the talent is obvious, but they have one major flaw. Some players can overcome that flaw to become stars, while others are busts because of it.
 

tigervixxxen

Optimism=Delusional
Jul 7, 2013
53,056
6,154
Denver
burgundy-review.com
Though not perfect, the Avs have generally drafted well since Pracey became head scout. Their philosophy is draft for skill, compete, character. Almost everyone they draft has been a captain or at least wore an A at some point.
 

golgoXIII

Registered User
Apr 2, 2007
1,092
426
For me ther's always 4 things that a watch on a prospect: Skating-Hockey IQ- 2 way game- work ethic. If a player got those 4 skills pretty sure he'll make it to the NHL for a try out
 

Brodeur

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,864
15,274
San Diego
Los Angeles picking Hickey that high is a example of playing your wild card too soon. Even if they thougt he was the fourth best prospect, trade down and pick him. Even if there was a rumour the Bruins (at 8) also had Hickey in there top 5.

Lombardi said he tried to trade down, but nothing materialized. There was video of St. Louis, who were trying to trade up for Voracek, offering #9 and #24 to Edmonton for #6. It might be a reasonable assumption that they offered something similar to the Kings for #4. This is why the rumor of Boston wanting Hickey at #8 seems plausible as the reason why the Kings didn't trade down.

During a fan Q&A session, Lombardi explained the rationale behind the pick. For me, it ended up being the wrong pick but for the right reasons.

Lombardi described his experience as a first year GM for the Sharks in 1996. San Jose had the #2 pick and virtually everybody had Andrei Zyuzin as the 2nd best prospect available. Deep down, Lombardi wasn't high on Zyuzin but didn't have the confidence to go against the consensus ranking.

He then mentioned how he did like this other defenseman named Derek Morris even better than Zyuzin. But Morris was projected to go much later. Calgary surprised everybody and took him #13. If the Internet was what it is today back then, the Flames would have been skewered for going off the board.

But five years later, Morris was one of the few '96 first rounders who was an above average NHL player. Meanwhile, Lombardi managed to trade Zyuzin on Draft Day '99 while he still had some of his proverbial new car smell remaining as a top prospect.

Lombardi's experience from 1996 was at least a partial reason why the Kings went off the board for Hickey in 2007.
 

DatsyukToZetterberg

Alligator!
Apr 3, 2011
5,549
738
Island of Tortuga
I want to know how a guy like Andrew Shaw gets passed over in his draft year yet is a 5th round pick in 2011 and now is 5th among all players drafted that year in GP. Is it easier for him to crack an NHL lineup because he's a bottom 6 player as opposed to a potential top 6 (that take more time to develop/teams are careful with high picks)? Is he one of those players who is better at the NHL level than he was at the OHL level? I'd imagine if there was a 2011 re-draft he'd be a 1st rounder now. But it's interesting to me that a 5th round pick has had such an impact at the NHL level so soon after his draft year.

It was his 3rd time going into the draft in 2011 so it's not like he was some unknown prospect to NHL teams, he's since proven he was a late bloomer. I'd assume that most teams felt that his increase in production was due to him being 19 years old & not that he had improved that much. That & come draft day they had somebody higher left in their board or they felt that the value wasn't there to pick him.

The Hawks obviously felt that he was worth the gamble & picked him in the 5th round.

Shaw may go in the 1st round if a re-draft was held today but most teams prospects that were picked ahead of him have a higher upside & they are only now starting their pro careers.
 

feffan

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,949
146
Malmö
Lombardi said he tried to trade down, but nothing materialized. There was video of St. Louis, who were trying to trade up for Voracek, offering #9 and #24 to Edmonton for #6. It might be a reasonable assumption that they offered something similar to the Kings for #4. This is why the rumor of Boston wanting Hickey at #8 seems plausible as the reason why the Kings didn't trade down.

During a fan Q&A session, Lombardi explained the rationale behind the pick. For me, it ended up being the wrong pick but for the right reasons.

Lombardi described his experience as a first year GM for the Sharks in 1996. San Jose had the #2 pick and virtually everybody had Andrei Zyuzin as the 2nd best prospect available. Deep down, Lombardi wasn't high on Zyuzin but didn't have the confidence to go against the consensus ranking.

He then mentioned how he did like this other defenseman named Derek Morris even better than Zyuzin. But Morris was projected to go much later. Calgary surprised everybody and took him #13. If the Internet was what it is today back then, the Flames would have been skewered for going off the board.

But five years later, Morris was one of the few '96 first rounders who was an above average NHL player. Meanwhile, Lombardi managed to trade Zyuzin on Draft Day '99 while he still had some of his proverbial new car smell remaining as a top prospect.

Lombardi's experience from 1996 was at least a partial reason why the Kings went off the board for Hickey in 2007.

Never heard the full story before. Thanks! It does make a lot more sense if none of the next three would be interested in a trade. Would think one of them would be interested in a jump, but if he says so I have no reason to not believe it. Would believe many teams had especially Voracek high, as he by many was ranked second before that year (if I remember corecctley...). But the Bruins rumour probably got the best out of him.

Even so: I still believe it´s bad asset management. Adding the Zyuzin story explains why Lombardi did it. But I think he learned the wrong lesson. The right way (easy en retro, I know :D ) even in 1996 would have been to then trade the second pick and pick Morris a couple of places later. Much like he should with Hickey (also easy in retro, even if more people said it right when it happened).

But too add and see the other side: Who knows where Hickey would be if he hadn´t been injuried or had just been beaten out of the last D-spot in his third (?) season after the draft. He didn´t have an ideal situation infront of him for sure.
 

kingsfan

President of the Todd McLellan fan club by default
Mar 18, 2002
13,384
1,032
Manitoba, Canada
Yup, it's hard, but some teams are better than others at it. Look at Chicago or Boston or LA or Ottawa or Detroit. It's not "a total crapshoot" like a roll of the dice or something, it's just very hard to do it well, but some teams manage to do it right over and over. What are they doing that is making their drafting successful?

I just skimmed through the the posts in this thread after this one, so maybe this has been answered, but I'll comment on just LA, since you brought him up.

And I'll only comment on the players drafted in 2007 and later, since that was the first draft by the current Kings director of amatuer scouting, Mike Futa.

In general, there's been one prinicipal I've seen from the Kings over that time. Draft for character and don't reach but also be ready to go after a guy most wouldn't. Hickey was the lone example of a reach, and I think the Kings learned from that pick not to reach.

But even Hickey was a character guy. Captain with the Seattle Thunderbirds. Character has been a key focus of the Kings. So has been picking safe players, so the Kings don't really take a flyer on anyone until the very latest rounds. Hence why in the 2007 draft they came away with Hickey, Simmonds, Martinez and Dwight King, all regular NHLers last season. They also got Oscar Mollar, who played almost 90 games in the NHl before heading back to Europe.

In 2008, it could be argued they had their worst draft. Yes, they got Doughty, but they could have taken any of the big three D-men (Doughty, Pietrangelo and Bogosian) and still done well. They wasted a pick (two actually since they gave up two firsts to trade up to get Colton Teubert), but then made up for it by getting Voynov in round two and later on added Loktionov. So that's three players that are NHL regulars. Again, character. Doughty will one day be the Kings captain if Brown ever hangs them up, and both Voynov and Lokitionov made it well known to DL and crew they were willing to ride it out in the minors in an effort to make their NHL dreams come true (and did they ever).

2009, already they have produced Brayden Schenn, Kyle Clifford and Jordan Nolan. Again, real character guys, grinding, physical players. They also have some good prospects from the draft coming up in the system, like linden Vey who many are expecting to be a contender to take over for Jarrett Stoll maybe as soon as next year. Brandon Kozun and Nicolas Deslauriers are also still coming up from that draft as well, so they might make it too (though in Kozun's case, it'll likely have to be elsewhere as we just don't have room). The hallmark of all three is their dedication. Kozun sort of changed who he is to make it work, getting away from being a almost purely offensive guy and working for three years in manchester on being a two-way guy who can forecheck really well. I didn't even think he'd have a chance at the NHL, but he's really changed his game in the right ways.

In 2010, we only had five picks, but I expect all five to make the NHL, which is a huge steal if it happens. Toffoli would likely be up on most teams, and guys like Forbort and Gravel are just a few years away from regular NHL duty. Forbort has looked, based solely on what I have read this year, surprisingly good in manchester, much better than I expected. And Kitsyn, well if ever there was a poster boy for a european willing to sacrifice to get to the NHL, he's it. He was basically buried in Russia, yet he's now over here, gutting it out in the minors.

The Kings don't take flyers on guys, they seek out character first and go for the guy with dedication. That's why I'm really excited about Valantin Zykov. For the Kings to trade up, and give up the picks they did give up, to get him in 2013, they must really like him and feel he's a steal. He dropped, likely due to the Russian factor, and DL and crew have shown they do their homework on those guys. they've drafted four Russians before, and all have played pro in the Kings system (Prokhorkin had to go back to Russia, but was in manchester prior to that).

Sometimes if you swing for the fences it works out (ala Philly and Forsberg) but most often it doesn't. Such as Hickey. now I think Hickey will still have a long and solid NHL career, but not that of one who was drafted 4th overall. Since then, the Kings have been very methodical in their drafting, not going off the board very much until the 2nd round, when they reached for guys like Simmonds and Clifford, only to see gold appear.

One other thing is that lately, the Kings seem more willing to draft guys who have been passed over in previous drafts than other teams. They have draft 18 players who have been passed over in at least one draft since 2007, an average of about 2.5 per draft. I haven't compared that to any other team, but it seems extremely high. I guess it gives the Kings a chance to really assess the players potential a bit better, since they are more mature and further along in their development. If they like the guy, they don't let the stigma of being passed over a draft disuade them in drafting the guy. They even took Tanner Pearson in the first round despite this fact.

the Kings are lacking a bit in elite talent in their prospect ranks, mostly because of the desire to draft character over pure skill, but it also gives them a steady pipeline of 2nd-4th line players and #3-6 type defensemen, so they will likely never run out of depth if they continue to hit as well and often as they do on their draft picks. It also gives them a lot of chips to use in a trade to fill the talent void if they need to.
 

Sticks and Pucks

Registered User
Jan 2, 2008
2,282
152
In 2008, it could be argued they had their worst draft. Yes, they got Doughty, but they could have taken any of the big three D-men (Doughty, Pietrangelo and Bogosian) and still done well. They wasted a pick (two actually since they gave up two firsts to trade up to get Colton Teubert), but then made up for it by getting Voynov in round two and later on added Loktionov. So that's three players that are NHL regulars. Again, character. Doughty will one day be the Kings captain if Brown ever hangs them up, and both Voynov and Lokitionov made it well known to DL and crew they were willing to ride it out in the minors in an effort to make their NHL dreams come true (and did they ever).

I know they messed up on Teubert but anytime you come away with Doughty and Voynov - you know, arguably your top pair for the next decade - you can't exactly say you had a bad draft.
 

Finlandia WOAT

js7.4x8fnmcf5070124
May 23, 2010
24,135
23,681
Yup, it's hard, but some teams are better than others at it. Look at Chicago or Boston or LA or Ottawa or Detroit. It's not "a total crapshoot" like a roll of the dice or something, it's just very hard to do it well, but some teams manage to do it right over and over. What are they doing that is making their drafting successful?

It's a total crapshoot. Chicago's 2010 winning team developed players out of late picks in Brouwer, Keith, Hjalmmerson, Byfuglien, Bolland and Bickel, but had dozens of late round busts- and a few in the first round. Kyle Beach? Jack Skille? The Bruins Cup winning team had Krejci, Lucic, Bergeron, and Marchand drafted outside of the 1st round. That's a great drafting record, but it's offset by the fact that only Tyler Seguin represented the recent Boston Bruins' first round draft choices in the 2011 playoffs. Jordan Caron? Joe Colborne? Zach Hamill?

Detroit's drafting reputation is built on the fact that they were paying people to scout Europe and the Soviet Union when no one else would. I think their European scout (don't feel like butchering his name) said that he was either the only scout or one of two that saw Datsyuk play before the draft (I think it's one; he was on a plane with a Blues scout that got snowed out).

Every team has drafted hundreds of players in the later rounds that bust. Every team has drafted some gems that scouts miss. Once you get out of the top-5 in a normal draft year, your odds of success become less and less until....
 

kingsfan

President of the Todd McLellan fan club by default
Mar 18, 2002
13,384
1,032
Manitoba, Canada
I know they messed up on Teubert but anytime you come away with Doughty and Voynov - you know, arguably your top pair for the next decade - you can't exactly say you had a bad draft.

Never said it was a bad draft, I said it was their worst draft. It still was a good draft, even a great one, just not as good as the others imo. Which speaks to how well LA is drafting.

I was also looking beyond the Doughty pick, since they were virtually guraanteed a damn good player no matter which defenseman they picked at that pick.
 

Sticks and Pucks

Registered User
Jan 2, 2008
2,282
152
Never said it was a bad draft, I said it was their worst draft. It still was a good draft, even a great one, just not as good as the others imo. Which speaks to how well LA is drafting.

I was also looking beyond the Doughty pick, since they were virtually guraanteed a damn good player no matter which defenseman they picked at that pick.

I'd disagree with that. I still say Bogosian has been a disappointment for a top 3 pick. Neither him nor Voynov has cemented themselves as a number 1 d-man yet so if the Kings took Bogosian then they would still have a hole on D.
 

SimplySensational

Heard of Hough
Mar 27, 2011
18,839
6
VA
The amazing thing is when players are getting hyped when their 13-14 years old like no other players are, and they turn into Ovechkin and Crosby.

The Red Wings drafted 39 Swedish players from 94(Holmstrom) to present, while they picked up some gems, they also picked plenty of nobodies. The thing you can deduce is they probably got a pretty damn good scout in Sweden.

McPhee has been on the recent Swedish kick, but he's been drafting a lot of US NTDP players too, which ended up getting the Capitals Riley Barber in the 6th round, and he's tearing up the NCAA and was a major part of the US winning the gold at the WJC last year.

It's all about scouts seeing the tools or skill set that can turn a player into a good NHLer.
 

scoutman1

Twitter - scoutman33
Feb 19, 2005
3,220
543
www.facebook.com
The amazing thing is when players are getting hyped when their 13-14 years old like no other players are, and they turn into Ovechkin and Crosby.

The Red Wings drafted 39 Swedish players from 94(Holmstrom) to present, while they picked up some gems, they also picked plenty of nobodies. The thing you can deduce is they probably got a pretty damn good scout in Sweden.

McPhee has been on the recent Swedish kick, but he's been drafting a lot of US NTDP players too, which ended up getting the Capitals Riley Barber in the 6th round, and he's tearing up the NCAA and was a major part of the US winning the gold at the WJC last year.

It's all about scouts seeing the tools or skill set that can turn a player into a good NHLer.

well this is only half of it, after that is up to the player if he wants to train hard enough to make it and also how the team handles him. Like Steve Bernier, all the skill and size in the world but motivation is nill to improve off ice training.
 

kingsfan

President of the Todd McLellan fan club by default
Mar 18, 2002
13,384
1,032
Manitoba, Canada
I'd disagree with that. I still say Bogosian has been a disappointment for a top 3 pick. Neither him nor Voynov has cemented themselves as a number 1 d-man yet so if the Kings took Bogosian then they would still have a hole on D.

Not comparing Doughty to Bogosian, nor saying Bogosian is better or even equal to Doughty. I totally think Doughty is better than him and it's not even close. That said, when the worst pick you could have made at #2 (assuming you pick one of the big three defensemen available) is to pick a physical top three defenseman that logs 23 minutes a game and likely will pot 30 points a season, that's hardly a bad place to be. Not the best, but not bad by any stretch.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->