Gostisbehere is the biggest miss that has lingered constantly in my mind for the past year. Some may say counter that he was a third-round pick, or that I did have him toward the tail end of my top NHL prospect rankings before his breakout season, so it wasn't that big a miss. But anytime a player becomes a star -- as he has -- and you didn't have him close to that range, it's a significant miss. In this case, it's about a bigger issue.
There has been a steady progression of the way I evaluate players. I started at a point where I wanted guys who scored a bunch and play a high-skill game, everything else be damned. I realized I was missing attributes such as two-way hockey IQ and not accounting for performance not captured by numbers, and shifted toward another end, which was taking the best players in an age group. This seemed like a good idea; I wasn't so worried about "projecting" players, because I felt that was an excuse for taking big guys and hoping they figure it out skill-wise. In fact, I've come to the conclusion the opposite is true. In general, taking the best players in an age group is the best plan, but projecting is important, though not from "athletic" types who you hope develop hockey skills, and not from hockey players who you hope develop the other athletic skills.
Applying this to Gostisbehere, he was a pretty good player in his age group though he wasn't dominant for a long period of time. He wasn't an elite college player until he was 20, and played in a weak conference. He looked good but not amazing at the IIHF World Junior Championship.
But, he has the hockey skills. He's a fantastic skater, and a great and imaginative puck mover. He wasn't great defensively to begin in college, or to begin in his pro career, but he kept learning how to win battles and make the most of his hockey skills.
This type of development isn't a guarantee. There are plenty of high-skill guys who have floundered away in the AHL, as they didn't develop off-puck skills. I also still believe you can't just go after skill, as other attributes can combine to make a top player, and you should consider who the best players in an age group are. But when checking the biggest gaps in terms of draft-pick value compared to NHL value, the players with the biggest ones are highly skilled at an initial point, who then develop the other parts of their game later. This is what is truly meant by the term upside, and upside means a lot in projecting prospects.
Gostisbehere was an upside prospect. I've gotten too far away from valuing this kind of player, and it's an adjustment I will make going forward.
