Post-Game Talk: NHL Draft - Day 2 - Part II

[bbfan419]

What if on top of preferring the NCAA development path, they also have analytics that suggest that once you get to a certain point in the draft, guys from the CHL tend to be overvalued, while guys from Europe and the US are undervalued?

Could be, but I watch lots of CHL games, so maybe I am biased in that direction, but look at 2015 in round 2 they take JFK who does not look like a regular NHL player and they could have had Cirelli, so to me focusing on one area only or completely eliminating one group of players is very myopic.

 

[BlackFrancis]

I would be interested too but how do we define value- games played? What about the quality of play in those games and over what time frame? 99 games played in 2 seasons is much different than over four seasons. It would have to account for injuries derailing a player who might have otherwise been a solid pick. Other personal issues that could affect a career but have nothing to do with hockey ability would need to be considered also. It gets damn complex.

The idea is to use WAR to determine value, then derive expected WAR for each round/pick. The problem is WAR's ties to wins makes it about as byzantine as basketball's PER.

Hockey is a nightmare to determine wins away from simple goals scored and goals scored against. How much does a player like Matthew Barzal contribute to wins when his primary contribution is assists? Or defenders and goalies? Or coaches? They attempt to do this with WAR, but you'll have a hell of a time tying the results back to Pythag.

So, you can try to assign value to picks with WAR, and it'll likely give you something better than games played but it won't be nearly as concrete, and may very well not be as predictive as simple goals scored.

 

[Blowfish]

Several people around here called Lindgren a minor piece in the Nash fleecing that Gorton perpetrated on the Bruins. Meanwhile, all Lindgren does is play playoff hockey every shift. Sweeney just isn't the man for the job.

True that...horrible trade.

 

[Dr Hook]

Not painting a bright future for the Bs.

Not at all, but that is the cost of being successful year in and year out which Kirk points out and which I think people here don't want to know. To really get into those areas of the draft where you get the star players for the most part the team is going to have go into the toilet. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If the Bruins want to stay as a cup competitor they are probably not going to do it in the draft (unless they can deal for high first rounders) but need to improve their pro scouting and bring in players that can do the job.

 

[UncleRico]

Bruins draft Four long-term prospects

Kirk sheds some light.

Agree with Kirk at the very end. The window is closing and the Bruins need to stop trading away picks and acquiring assets.

Do you give this team one more run? Start now and sell off Krejci and Rask. Dare I say anyone who you don’t expect to be around for the next run (Bergy and Marchand)?

Would be very interested to see the return those four players could get if they just went full rebuild.

On top of that I’d be very intrigued to see if they went full rebuild and retain money on guys like Krejci or Rask in a trade, how big of a return that would haul.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Vaak went where he was projected and 80% of the fan base would have cried about picking a midget if they picked debrincat

huh? lots of people here (maybe a majority) wanted Debrincat and were annoyed when the Bruins made the typical boring Bruins pick with Frederic who they then immediately characterized as a 3rd liner.

I actually think taking Frederic over Debrincat is almost as bad as passing on Barzal, etc and doesn't get talked about enough.

 

[Dr Hook]

The idea is to use WAR to determine value, then derive expected WAR for each round/pick. The problem is WAR's ties to wins makes it about as byzantine as basketball's PER.

Hockey is a nightmare to determine wins away from simple goals scored and goals scored against. How much does a player like Matthew Barzal contribute to wins when his primary contribution is assists? Or defenders and goalies? Or coaches? They attempt to do this with WAR, but you'll have a hell of a time tying the results back to Pythag.

So, you can try to assign value to picks with WAR, and it'll likely give you something better than games played but it won't be nearly as concrete, and may very well not be as predictive as simple goals scored.

Yes, this is my major problem with it as far as I understand it and get into it: what is the value of a stay at home defender who prevents a couple of goals in a night but his forwards miss empty nets and the team loses. What about a goalie that stands on his head for 58 saves but his d man blows coverage and he gives up a goal and loses? And then we haven't even touched on player chemistry. Is player X good for a +WAR because he works really well with his particular linemates but stick him with two different players and what happens?

 

[Gator Mike]

Could be, but I watch lots of CHL games, so maybe I am biased in that direction, but look at 2015 in round 2 they take JFK who does not look like a regular NHL player and they could have had Cirelli, so to me focusing on one area only or completely eliminating one group of players is very myopic.

Considering the Bruins took four CHL kids before they took JFK, I'm not sure you're going to convince me that JFK was selected as part of an anti-CHL bias.

 

[BlackFrancis]

Brad Marchand 80th overall among NA skaters
Matt Grzelcyk 177th / NA skaters
Jack Studnicka 120th / NA skaters

I do agree that Sweeney should have traded down, for his picks, in many instances, a lot actually. But I don’t agree that the scouting list(s) are the, “be-all-end-all” for the draft. Go take a look at all the re-drafts threads on the prospects page.

They certainly aren't the be-all/end-all, but there's certainly value there or teams wouldn't be paying.

The scouting services/subscriptions argument happens in the NFL and NBA every year. Several teams in those leagues routinely draft off the lists and don't employ amateur scouting, leading fans of teams that do going nuts that teams without scouts aren't reaching compared with their team.

Hockey's great, though - especially in the age of the internet. You've got scouting services, real scouting departments run like mini-baseball scouting depts, and access to video or live game for almost every league out there. That right there is enough to drive even the most mild mannered fan insane come draft day.

 

[JAD]

Unless they were told from on high to select players that will not impact the cap/contract totals for several years due to Covid and possibly no gate/ concession revenue, their selection of player and more so the round of selection boarders on negligence.
The players selected may one day if everything falls into place earn a roster spot, but the whole process of selection seems grossly inappropriate.
It almost feels as though they wrote this draft off as inconsequential.

 

[LouJersey]

huh? lots of people here (maybe a majority) wanted Debrincat and were annoyed when the Bruins made the typical boring Bruins pick with Frederic who they then immediately characterized as a 3rd liner.

I actually think taking Frederic over Debrincat is almost as bad as passing on Barzal, etc and doesn't get talked about enough.

Many people wanted Thomas or Vesalainen over Vaak as well. Some even clamored for yamamoto if I am not mistaken.

 

[CDJ]

Many people wanted Thomas or Vesalainen over Vaak as well. Some even clamored for yamamoto if I am not mistaken.

I remember Vesalainen being popular


They did go V-Finn When it was all said and done!

 

[LouJersey]

I remember Vesalainen being popular

He was my pick, and he could miss for sure.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Many people wanted Thomas or Vesalainen over Vaak as well. Some even clamored for yamamoto if I am not mistaken.

in fairness I think Vaak was a really good pick and he was going to be a potential long-term partner for Mac if he hadn't suffered that one concussion (I think it was from a Borowiecki elbow?). Seems like that really derailed his development.

 

[KrejciMVP]

any Zetterbergs in the 7th round?

 

[CDJ]

He was my pick, and he could miss for sure.

I very much liked the Idea of 6’4 220 lb winger too

They went Vaakanainen and I get it though. Wasn’t my number 1 but I don’t pretend to know anything about most of these guys outside of online profiles so I couldn’t really bitch much lol

 

[Mick Riddleton]

I would not say their is a bias agenda but I am seeing a trend that is limiting them. If there was a Marchand or Bergy available the last few years I assume they would be ignored? Limiting the opportunities will hurt them. Was there no Euro players that warranted consideration this year, I seen a few that went undrafted. I do not care where they get them from but put away the macro lens and see the big picture. Take a few reaches or one here and there but not as a plan.

 

[ON3M4N]

Now that I've had a night to digest the draft....

I've been defending Sweeney w/ drafts since day 1, but its really getting hard to do that. While I understand their obsession of floor vs ceiling, you need to have a balance. You can't always take the guy who at worst should be a depth NHL player and MAYBE if the stars align they turn into something special. While I love 200ft players, not every single guy needs to be a 200ft player (Pastrnak wasn't and while he's gotten better still isn't great in his own end). If you look at our drafts since 2015, who are the top 5 most skilled guys we've drafted? Not necessarily the best, but going into the draft just raw skill.

To make things worse, we go off the board and then never give those picks a serious look. Senyshyn is D+5 and not only does he not have a serious NHL look, but he still gets bottom 6 minutes in the AHL. Either give these kids looks or move on from them, plain and simple. Zboril, same thing, Vaak same thing. We go out and make deals to bring guys in while we've burned first round picks on similar positions but won't give those picks a serious look.

 

[Dr Hook]

Now that I've had a night to digest the draft....

I've been defending Sweeney w/ drafts since day 1, but its really getting hard to do that. While I understand their obsession of floor vs ceiling, you need to have a balance. You can't always take the guy who at worst should be a depth NHL player and MAYBE if the stars align they turn into something special. While I love 200ft players, not every single guy needs to be a 200ft player (Pastrnak wasn't and while he's gotten better still isn't great in his own end). If you look at our drafts since 2015, who are the top 5 most skilled guys we've drafted? Not necessarily the best, but going into the draft just raw skill.

To make things worse, we go off the board and then never give those picks a serious look. Senyshyn is D+5 and not only does he not have a serious NHL look, but he still gets bottom 6 minutes in the AHL. Either give these kids looks or move on from them, plain and simple. Zboril, same thing, Vaak same thing. We go out and make deals to bring guys in while we've burned first round picks on similar positions but won't give those picks a serious look.

There is no question he has made some flops like everyone. But this draft- how can we really criticize it objectively? Picking late second round, you are fortunate to get a guy with a floor that is a regular NHL player and extraordinarily fortunate to get someone special. I just can't be that upset about this one where they are trying to get something of value out of it instead of the kid with great hands and a killer shot who turns up every other game, or doesn't play defense, or avoids contact.

There is a lot to critique about Sweeney's tenure including, as you point out, how they've handled prospects, but this draft, who knows. Time will tell- there is no such thing as a "can't miss" or blue chip prospect late in a second round.

 

[UncleRico]

There is no question he has made some flops like everyone. But this draft- how can we really criticize it objectively? Picking late second round, you are fortunate to get a guy with a floor that is a regular NHL player and extraordinarily fortunate to get someone special. I just can't be that upset about this one where they are trying to get something of value out of it instead of the kid with great hands and a killer shot who turns up every other game, or doesn't play defense, or avoids contact.

There is a lot to critique about Sweeney's tenure including, as you point out, how they've handled prospects, but this draft, who knows. Time will tell- there is no such thing as a "can't miss" or blue chip prospect late in a second round.

It’s just alarming when you draft someone in the 2nd round and all the panelists in the room have no idea who the guy is so they continued talking about the previous pick jack Finley. On top of it the scouts who are working behind the scenes for the draft network didn’t tell the production crew to pull and game tape on the guy. Yet there with 4th and 5th rounders who they had plenty of tape on when they got drafted.

maybe it was a giant oversight by the panelists, everyone on the network, the scouts, all the scouting websites who didn’t have him ranked, NHL central scouting who had him ranked as the #132 North American skater.

Or maybe it was just an awful pick by the bruins.

 

[Dr Hook]

It’s just alarming when you draft someone in the 2nd round and all the panelists in the room have no idea who the guy is so they continued talking about the previous pick jack Finley. On top of it the scouts who are working behind the scenes for the draft network didn’t tell the production crew to pull and game tape on the guy. Yet there with 4th and 5th rounders who they had plenty of tape on when they got drafted.

maybe it was a giant oversight by the panelists, everyone on the network, the scouts, all the scouting websites who didn’t have him ranked, NHL central scouting who had him ranked as the #132 North American skater.

Or maybe it was just an awful pick by the bruins.

Well, Kirk said he wasnt on his radar- and should have been. Worth a read at the Scouting Post if you haven't looked at it already. As for it being an awful pick, we'll see.

 

[member 96824]

According to your own graph that your source posted you’re looking at a % in the 20’s for pick 58 and for pick 100 a percentage at 20 in terms of 100 games played by a player. The graph also shows that reaching in the first round is way different than reaching at 58. Don’t get mad at me for using your own research, I’m not going to waste time doing my own. I don’t have all day to argue this nonsense


“Insulting other people’s intelligence” get real. If you want me to insult people’s intelligence I can ACTUALLY do that. That was me in the Tuukka thread. I’ve explained my position a thousand times. It’s a fact that you’re unlikely to get an NHL regular at either 58 or 100. And yes the difference in that player hitting is only a handful of percentage points. Per your own graph. The fact that it goes up to 100% is relevant because it shows you the entire draft and shows that bitching about a perceived reach at 58 is pointless when compared to a year like 2015, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE PLAYER.

Easy partner, take the caps lock off...what does Tuukka or 2015 have anything to do with the discussion at hand?

Yes, we agree that you’re unlikely to get an impact player at 58 or 100. As mentioned, 100 isn’t relevant anyway cause Lohrei was ranked 132 among NA skaters but if you want to believe there is a forgettable difference between the 58 and 100th pick that’s your prerogative. I disagree highly, the historical stats disagree highly(you’re not even reading the graph you picked from one of the links I sent over...definitely not citing the real data in that study), real GMs disagree highly (as you pointed out...not a ton of 2nd for 4th straight up trades). You just want to be mad because strangers on the internet are critical of Donny FIGJAM and the B’s, that’s also your prerogative.

Like I mentioned earlier, think you glossed over it, even beyond the argument you’re trying to make that there’s no difference between a 2nd and 4th round pick, it’s about managing the draft and opportunity costs. If you think the difference between 58 and 100 are equal or close to it, were you pounding the table for the B’s to trade back? The market was set right in front of them. Pick 57 returned a 2nd and 4th. Before that Pick 45 returned 51 and 97. Clearly doable

And come to think of it, those are pretty smart organizations...why would Tampa and LA do such deals if there is truly no difference?

It’s not about the specific player, it’s about the use of the asset to grab that player. Just like in my TV example, it’s not about the TV, it’s about the cost that you paid for that TV and what you could have gotten for the same money if you just allocated your funds properly.

 

[ON3M4N]

There is no question he has made some flops like everyone. But this draft- how can we really criticize it objectively? Picking late second round, you are fortunate to get a guy with a floor that is a regular NHL player and extraordinarily fortunate to get someone special. I just can't be that upset about this one where they are trying to get something of value out of it instead of the kid with great hands and a killer shot who turns up every other game, or doesn't play defense, or avoids contact.

I'm not really talking about this draft because the jury is still out. My only issue with this draft is maximizing value. When you take a kid in the 2nd round that no one has any info on, you could have easily traded back and taken him at a later stage while gaining another asset. From the 1 scouting report I've seen on our 2nd rounder, he sounds like he could be a solid player....but as of today did Sweeney get the best value out of that pick? I don't think so because again he could have moved back and still gotten the guy he wanted.

There is a lot to critique about Sweeney's tenure including, as you point out, how they've handled prospects, but this draft, who knows. Time will tell- there is no such thing as a "can't miss" or blue chip prospect late in a second round.

I mean I don't think there is a such thing as a "can't miss" prospect at all. Hell we've seen #1OA bust. From the years 2000 to 2009 only 35% of 2nd round pick played 100+ games in the NHL. If odds are low to begin with, why not take a gamble on a higher skill guy and if he hits the payoff is probably more significant. Drafting high floor guess isn't going to increase the probability that they make the NHL.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

any Zetterbergs in the 7th round?

Yes, in 2021.

Great trade by Sweeney.

 

[ON3M4N]

Well, Kirk said he wasnt on his radar- and should have been. Worth a read at the Scouting Post if you haven't looked at it already. As for it being an awful pick, we'll see.

He wasn't on their radar because he was a 2nd year draft eligible player and wasn't a serious prospects last year. Kind of curious to see what 2nd year drat eligible player has gone the highest in the draft.

He also went on to say:

"How many other teams were seriously on Lohrei there, and with some highly-regarded first-year draft players still on the board like Will Cuylle, Daemon Hunt, Ty Smilanic, Jean-Luc Foudy, Jeremie Poirier and even local prep star D Ian Moore, the decision to spend the first pick on Lohrei was a curious one"