According to some here it's been a weak draft class for "years" so I'm guessing it was determined more along the lines of 12-14.So experts had these guys as not so good as 15 and 16 year olds?
Lol, they’re peaking in middle school nowAccording to some here it's been a weak draft class for "years" so I'm guessing it was determined more along the lines of 12-14.
12 is a bit young. Maybe you get a sense there aren't going to be Crosbys or MacDavids but that's about it. 14-15 is more like the time, that's when there are some bantam drafts and players are getting evaluated more seriously for junior leagues. By 16 players here will have already been through drafts and the prospects board will have done draft rankings, for example. So there will be a very firm opinion 2 years in advance, but still pretty strong opinions at 3-4 years in advance of the draft.According to some here it's been a weak draft class for "years" so I'm guessing it was determined more along the lines of 12-14.
That's why it's a crap shoot. We had a kid that was 5'4" his freshman year that is now over 6'1". Kids grow and mature at such rapid and different paces between 13-17. There's no kid that is close to a finished product at 16.12 is a bit young. Maybe you get a sense there aren't going to be Crosbys or MacDavids but that's about it. 14-15 is more like the time, that's when there are some bantam drafts and players are getting evaluated more seriously for junior leagues. By 16 players here will have already been through drafts and the prospects board will have done draft rankings, for example. So there will be a very firm opinion 2 years in advance, but still pretty strong opinions at 3-4 years in advance of the draft.
Yeah, that misses the point entirely. There are always outliers on a normal distribution, everybody knows that. It doesn't mean you can't still track the overall distribution. If it was a complete crap shoot, there would be no draft, no scouting, none of that.That's why it's a crap shoot. We had a kid that was 5'4" his freshman year that is now over 6'1". Kids grow and mature at such rapid and different paces between 13-17. There's no kid that is close to a finished product at 16.
That's why it's more of a crap shoot than most professional leagues. Project players that haven't even started their junior year of high school is very much a crap shoot.Yeah, that misses the point entirely. There are always outliers on a normal distribution, everybody knows that. It doesn't mean you can't still track the overall distribution. If it was a complete crap shoot, there would be no draft, no scouting, none of that.
Nobody is talking about other professional leagues here. NHL draft populations all have long broad wings and if you want to confine yourself to talking about individuals in those outlying portions of the population, then sure, you are into crapshoot territory. But why constrain yourself like that? Professionals do evaluate players in the central peak as well, and they get it right more often than not, they can definitely draw an informed conclusion about the strength of a draft looking at the population - the whole population not just the outliers - at age 16. They do it every year. Just because you and I can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done. It is done. Constantly. And it's not a crapshoot.That's why it's more of a crap shoot than most professional leagues. Project players that haven't even started their junior year of high school is very much a crap shoot.
Sure chief. Rarely do they get it right most of the time in hockey, go look at every top of the draft.Nobody is talking about other professional leagues here. NHL draft populations all have long broad wings and if you want to confine yourself to talking about individuals in those outlying portions of the population, then sure, you are into crapshoot territory. But why constrain yourself like that? Professionals do evaluate players in the central peak as well, and they get it right more often than not, they can definitely draw an informed conclusion about the strength of a draft looking at the population - the whole population not just the outliers - at age 16. They do it every year. Just because you and I can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done. It is done. Constantly. And it's not a crapshoot.
First part you are wrong at the top of the draft. Second part is a non sequitur, who cares about football when we are talking about how NHL prospects are evaluated?Sure chief. Rarely do they get it right most of the time in hockey, go look at every top of the draft.
I'd say of the professional sports hockey gets it right the least, football the most.
First off you're wrong, go look at the top of the draft. 2nd part I'm right, I'm talking about evaluating kids is a crap shoot, they're not done growing.First part you are wrong at the top of the draft. Second part is a non sequitur, who cares about football when we are talking about how NHL prospects are evaluated?
Ok, lol, I can see there's no helping you. Wallow away!First off you're wrong, go look at the top of the draft. 2nd part I'm right, I'm talking about evaluating kids is a crap shoot, they're not done growing.
I see you're still the Self Righteous one....Ok, lol, I can see there's no helping you. Wallow away!
Pot meets kettle, two obnoxious assholes collide, yet again.I see you're still the Self Righteous one....
Well, especially now, there is not really any monolithic "structure". Players come from all over the world and all kinds of different systems.I think the tidbit I would add to this back and forth is that hockey has a horrible amateur structure and draft system. The fact these decisions are made about players that are so young has always baffled me.
Well, you are talking about the US system mostly, then? But yes, it is expensive everywhere, and if it is just a matter of hockey being cost prohibitive for many young athletes, then yes, that is certainly true. But aside from the cost, then here there are so many options now with the way the junior leagues have grown that I think players are not as automatically derailed if their local option turns them away.You can say all that but it's really not true. I'm personally not just talking about the NHL draft, it's the whole system. If a kid isn't playing AAA hockey at minimum by the time he's 14 he isn't getting a snif at a D1 program much less the NHL.
When you look at other sports 14 y/o kids are still playing Jr High/middle school and aren't being scouted for college (unless they are an outlier) at that point. Maybe scouted to go to some fancy private pipeline type high school but not college. And how many of the kids that make it to D1 or D2 programs are taken for the performance on their high school teams not because their parents can afford $20,000 or more a year to play AAA from 12-14 y/o until they are 17-18?
It is a severely flawed system that buries players that aren't playing at a high enough level early enough in life and the only real option to dig out of that hole is to have a very serious bank account.
The Athletic put out a full mock draft. Here's the Preds selections
Nashville Predators
Daniil Chayka, LHD, Guelph-OHL (19)
Mackie Samoskevich, RW, Chicago-USHL (40)
Stanislav Svozil, LHD, Brno-Czech Extraliga (51)
Matvei Petrov, RW, Krylja Sovetov-MHL (83)
Vernier Miettinen, C, Espoo-Finland Jr. (115)
Hunter Strand, C, Tri-City-USHL (124)
James Malatesta, LW, Quebec-QMJHL (147)
Charles-Alexis Legault, RHD, Lincoln-USHL (179)
Chayka is always bad in NHL 21, not sure that is wise.
The Athletic put out a full mock draft. Here's the Preds selections
Nashville Predators
Daniil Chayka, LHD, Guelph-OHL (19)
Mackie Samoskevich, RW, Chicago-USHL (40)
Stanislav Svozil, LHD, Brno-Czech Extraliga (51)
Matvei Petrov, RW, Krylja Sovetov-MHL (83)
Vernier Miettinen, C, Espoo-Finland Jr. (115)
Hunter Strand, C, Tri-City-USHL (124)
James Malatesta, LW, Quebec-QMJHL (147)
Charles-Alexis Legault, RHD, Lincoln-USHL (179)