Reaching for a player, but hitting... (Shane Pinto)

[Akrapovince]

I think the general consensus amongst Senators fans when Dorion drafted Pinto was negative, especially with names like;

Kaliyev, Brink, Lavoie, Rees, Afanasyev, Leason still on the board.

Pinto had an amazing d+1 year, and obviously we don’t know where he landed on other GMs draft board, but I have a couple questions:

If Pinto turns into a 30-45 point shutdown centre and we “hit” on this draft pick, should the GM be off the hook for “reaching” (again- maybe we don’t know other GMs draft board) for him that early in a seemingly stacked second?

And would you have preferred one of the bigger names in the second round + soogard and risk trying to get Pinto in the third, or just following the draft as it played out?

Either way, I’ve learned to trust our scouting staff. It’s just crazy how I remembered being upset about the draft selection, still early but seems like a strong pick.

Click to read more...

 

[Brannstorm]

I also think every year it is a bust and then, as far as I am concerned, now we are stacked with young talent. Definitely good to see the draft and develop actually work.

It is fun to watch the draft because it seems like every year Dorion likes to move up. For me it is the most exciting moment of the year.

 

[Boud]

To be honest even though we've been reaching for some players I'm always giving the benefit of the doubt to our scouting staff as they've been able to get us some legitimate talent in later rounds. It's not always paying off but we're still one of the best drafting teams in the league right now. I know a lot of people weren't happy about Pinto being selected, but generally speaking I see people here giving the team a pass on amateur scouting because it's been our strongest asset.

 

[Micklebot]

I think the general consensus amongst Senators fans when Dorion drafted Pinto was negative, especially with names like;

Kaliyev, Brink, Lavoie, Rees, Afanasyev, Leason still on the board.

Pinto had an amazing d+1 year, and obviously we don’t know where he landed on other GMs draft board, but I have a couple questions:

If Pinto turns into a 30-45 point shutdown centre and we “hit” on this draft pick, should the GM be off the hook for “reaching” (again- maybe we don’t know other GMs draft board) for him that early in a seemingly stacked second?

And would you have preferred one of the bigger names in the second round + soogard and risk trying to get Pinto in the third, or just following the draft as it played out?

Either way, I’ve learned to trust our scouting staff. It’s just crazy how I remembered being upset about the draft selection, still early but seems like a strong pick.

So, if we used a early 2nd round pick to get a 30-45 pts shut down center, its a hit but I'd still prefer we had swung for one of the potential top 6 options.

Picking that high i am looking for guys with top line potential, like Kucherov, Bergeron, Marchand, Aho, ect. Pinto was intriguing because of how raw he was/is and the potential for exponential growth, so maybe they saw/see the kind of potential i am looking for when they picked him, but if they saw 30-45 pts shut down center as the result if he hit, then i would prefer another pick.

 

[slamigo]

I think the draft is where we really see Dorion shine. Have to give him his due.
Other areas of his portfolio are more heavily influenced by EM. Even then, I like the EK65 trade now, so for me, he's shut my complaining mouth. I'm going to be giving him the benefit of the doubt for a while now.

 

[dumbdick]

So, if we used a early 2nd round pick to get a 30-45 pts shut down center, its a hit but I'd still prefer we had swung for one of the potential top 6 options.

Picking that high i am looking for guys with top line potential, like Kucherov, Bergeron, Marchand, Aho, ect. Pinto was intriguing because of how raw he was/is and the potential for exponential growth, so maybe they saw/see the kind of potential i am looking for when they picked him, but if they saw 30-45 pts shut down center as the result if he hit, then i would prefer another pick.

I think it depends. I'm a big believer in the concept of "star/elite bottom 6" players. Guys who are just extremely effective but aren't going to break the bank or challenge for a spot in your top 6. Guys like Neil, Ruutu, "early" Foligno, Dean-O-Mac, Chris Kelly, Z. Smith, Winnie and maybe even future Colin White or Parker Kelly come to mind.

These are the low-cost guys that I can picture standing out in game 7 when the cup is on the line. If we don't draft them, I'm not against trading for them, since a 2nd rounder would often get the job done.

Compare that to the fallers like Kaliyev, Kabanov, or Ho-Sang. If these guys hit, they're the type of guys I can picture eating up a big part of your budget while completely disappearing every year in the playoffs. Point-per-game players that post three points and a minus-1 in a 6-4 loss.

I'm all for guys like Kucherov, Bergeron, Marchand and Aho. Would they have met your definition of swinging for the fences on their draft days? Kucherov put up 2 points in 8 games in the KHL in his draft year. Shane Prince put up 88 points in 59 GP in the OHL and was still on the board when Kucherov was taken.

In their draft years, I think Ho Sang, Kaliyev, Tolvanen, Puempel, Kabanov, Rattie, Saad, etc., would meet your definition of swinging for the fences (without the benefit of hindsight). They're some of the high-skill fallers in the late 1st/2nd rounds that I remember at least.

I honestly think if you swing for the fences every time in the middle of the 2nd round, you're going to wait 20 years before you get one that turns into a true star.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

The idea of a reach is mostly entirely artificial and is created by observers who usually do not have a ton of information about what kind of a person the prospect is, what his parents are like, what are his eating habits etc.... That is a big part of the picture and observers/talking heads mostly focus on the on-ice part.

Scheifele was deemed a reach at the time, it worked out great for the Jets. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Yakupov was the consensus first pick in 2012 and he busted hard.

If a team that has a good track record as far as amateur drafting goes takes a player pundits had going later, that team has earned the benefit of the doubt AFAIC.

Players take a while to develop. The idea that we should judge immediately if it was the correct pick or a reach is silly.

 

[NyQuil]

So, if we used a early 2nd round pick to get a 30-45 pts shut down center, its a hit but I'd still prefer we had swung for one of the potential top 6 options.

Picking that high i am looking for guys with top line potential, like Kucherov, Bergeron, Marchand, Aho, ect. Pinto was intriguing because of how raw he was/is and the potential for exponential growth, so maybe they saw/see the kind of potential i am looking for when they picked him, but if they saw 30-45 pts shut down center as the result if he hit, then i would prefer another pick.

I think there's a distinction between a hit and a home run.

There are teams out there that literally cannot draft and/or develop a consistent NHL caliber player with their top picks.

Typically I agree with your perspective - you gamble on talent early as opposed to going for the "sure thing". Go for ceiling as opposed to floor in the first two rounds.

But when they do get someone like Pinto in the 2nd round, I'm not going to regret that selection.

 

[Micklebot]

I think there's a distinction between a hit and a home run.

There are teams out there that literally cannot draft and/or develop a consistent NHL caliber player with their top picks.

Typically I agree with your perspective - you gamble on talent early as opposed to going for the "sure thing". Go for ceiling as opposed to floor in the first two rounds.

But when they do get someone like Pinto in the 2nd round, I'm not going to regret that selection.

I'm not saying he is a bad choice, i just prefer the higher risk higher reward option at that stage in the draft, particularly as a team that lacked high end talent.

I also think as a team with as many picks and prospects as we have, we are better positioned to take risks on bust or boom guys than the average team. There are obly so many roster spots to go around and you typically have a much harder time converting excess good players inton elite players than you do converting excess elite players into a quantity of good players.

What is stategically right at the draft table for Tbay or Washington might not be right for us.

 

[NyQuil]

I'm not saying he is a bad choice, i just prefer the higher risk higher reward option at that stage in the draft, particularly as a team that lacked high end talent.

I also think as a team with as many picks and prospects as we have, we are better positioned to take risks on bust or boom guys than the average team. There are only so many roster spots to go around and you typically have a much harder time converting excess good players into elite players than you do converting excess elite players into a quantity of good players.

What is stategically right at the draft table for Tbay or Washington might not be right for us.

I can recall the Zibanejad draft year, when we were all pretty supportive of casting the net wide and grabbing Puempel and Noesen along with Mika in the 1st round.

Obviously neither additional guy panned out, but the Senators staff didn't take a lot of heat for it as I think we were all on board.

But I think it is still possible for "safe" players to boom or bust during the next phase of development.

 

[slamigo]

The idea of a reach is mostly entirely artificial and is created by observers who usually do not have a ton of information about what kind of a person the prospect is, what his parents are like, what are his eating habits etc.... That is a big part of the picture and observers/talking heads mostly focus on the on-ice part.

Exactly, the casual fan can only assume a player was a reach, but we do not have access to the actual draft rankings that teams are using. Just because central scouting has a player at #25 doesn't mean that there aren't at least a dozen teams that have that same player at #10. A lot of information is kept internal and we'll never know.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Pinto is an animal.

He plays an imposing(presence) yet cool and collective game like Brock Nelson or Monahan/K.Hayes

He is powerful out there and a workhorse with excellent release.

 

[BondraTime]

I can recall the Zibanejad draft year, when we were all pretty supportive of casting the net wide and grabbing Puempel and Noesen along with Mika in the 1st round.

Obviously neither additional guy panned out, but the Senators staff didn't take a lot of heat for it as I think we were all on board.

But I think it is still possible for "safe" players to boom or bust during the next phase of development.

Puempel pick was highly praised, Noesen pick wasn’t. Noesen went 20+ spots higher than his ranking (40th on CSS and 46 on Bobs) most thought we should have either waited, or took someone else. Rakell was a guy many wanted on the same team as Noesen (I’m not one, unfortunately) and he went 30th.

They must have known he’d get taken I’d imagine.

 

[jhutter]

I think the general consensus amongst Senators fans when Dorion drafted Pinto was negative, especially with names like;

Kaliyev, Brink, Lavoie, Rees, Afanasyev, Leason still on the board.

Pinto had an amazing d+1 year, and obviously we don’t know where he landed on other GMs draft board, but I have a couple questions:

If Pinto turns into a 30-45 point shutdown centre and we “hit” on this draft pick, should the GM be off the hook for “reaching” (again- maybe we don’t know other GMs draft board) for him that early in a seemingly stacked second?

And would you have preferred one of the bigger names in the second round + soogard and risk trying to get Pinto in the third, or just following the draft as it played out?

Either way, I’ve learned to trust our scouting staff. It’s just crazy how I remembered being upset about the draft selection, still early but seems like a strong pick.

We have enough 35-40 point players. We need to "hit" on some higher level talent.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Pinto’s potential is most definitely not 35-40 points

that’s his conservative/realistic potential

he has 30 goal 60-65 point all around animal potential.

I’m more hyped about Pinto than Norris tbh

 

[BondraTime]

Pinto’s potential is most definitely not 35-40 points

that’s his conservative/realistic potential

he has 30 goal 60-65 point all around animal potential.

I’m more hyped about Pinto than Norris tbh

I think that’s setting the bar quite a bit high.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

I think that’s setting the bar quite a bit high.

I really like Pinto’s game. Not saying he gonna hit that potential but it’s definitely there for me.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

Pinto hasn't hit yet, but it is quite silly to grade drafts on Day 1 and claim players are reaches based on arbitrary rankings.

 

[BondraTime]

Pinto hasn't hit yet, but it is quite silly to grade drafts on Day 1 and claim players are reaches based on arbitrary rankings.

No it’s not, reaches are literally by definition grabbing someone higher than they are ranked, by non arbitrary services and scouts.

We can’t call the pick a win or a loss yet, as you can’t with any pick, but you absolutely can call picks reaches, because that’s what they are. We know Pinto was rated higher by the Sens than he was by most others, that doesn’t discount the fact they reached for a guy ranked late 2nd/3rd in the early 2nd. Sens don’t consider it a reach, hence them picking him, but it’s absolutely considered a reach. Same as Janakowski, Flames has him rated 1st overall, and got him at 21, which was still considered a reach.

Doesn’t make it a bad pick, but absolutely makes it a reach.

 

[dumbdick]

Can we please start calling him "Beans" instead of Pinto?

 

[JD1]

There's only two things we know for certain about the draft

1. Teams do not have access to other team's lists
2. The team trading up to grab a player generally doesn't consider that player in that draft slot a reach

On 2, teams need to assess their own rankings against who is still available on the board and assess whether one of your players will be available when it is your turn.

You might have a guy rated 25th that is available at 35 but you hold pick 42. Trading up to get him isn't a reach relative to your own list.

There might also be a bunch of guys that are available and on central lists that your team might have on a do not draft list.

I suspect it's all pretty fluid.

 

[slamigo]

Can we please start calling him "Beans" instead of Pinto?

 

[ijif]

I think it depends. I'm a big believer in the concept of "star/elite bottom 6" players. Guys who are just extremely effective but aren't going to break the bank or challenge for a spot in your top 6. Guys like Neil, Ruutu, "early" Foligno, Dean-O-Mac, Chris Kelly, Z. Smith, Winnie and maybe even future Colin White or Parker Kelly come to mind.

These are the low-cost guys that I can picture standing out in game 7 when the cup is on the line. If we don't draft them, I'm not against trading for them, since a 2nd rounder would often get the job done.

Compare that to the fallers like Kaliyev, Kabanov, or Ho-Sang. If these guys hit, they're the type of guys I can picture eating up a big part of your budget while completely disappearing every year in the playoffs. Point-per-game players that post three points and a minus-1 in a 6-4 loss.

I'm all for guys like Kucherov, Bergeron, Marchand and Aho. Would they have met your definition of swinging for the fences on their draft days? Kucherov put up 2 points in 8 games in the KHL in his draft year. Shane Prince put up 88 points in 59 GP in the OHL and was still on the board when Kucherov was taken.

In their draft years, I think Ho Sang, Kaliyev, Tolvanen, Puempel, Kabanov, Rattie, Saad, etc., would meet your definition of swinging for the fences (without the benefit of hindsight). They're some of the high-skill fallers in the late 1st/2nd rounds that I remember at least.

I honestly think if you swing for the fences every time in the middle of the 2nd round, you're going to wait 20 years before you get one that turns into a true star.

I don't agree with your statement about swinging in the second round causing long stretches of misses. Let's just say we have one pick in the second from 2010-2014. The pick is #45 every time. Let's also say I must select the player with the highest probability of being a star based on Byron Bader's model. The only other rule is I won't select any overage player, and I won't select any player that was playing high school hockey. If players are tied, I will go with the player that had the highest NHLe. The 2012 and 2013 draft would not yield anyone too important, but the other drafts would have been good. In the 2010 draft, the player with the highest probability of being a star player would be A. Panarin. In the 2011 draft, it would N. Kucherov. In the 2014 draft, it would be B. Point. That is three star players in five drafts.

 

[NyQuil]

I'll admit, I've only seen his performance at the WJCs where he impressively racked up a bunch of points but mainly by standing in front of the net and swatting in passes and rebounds IIRC.

I found it amusing that USA Hockey fans were constantly trying to downplay his contribution in favour of the more flashy players like Zegras, Kaliyev, Turcotte and Caufield.

Still, I didn't see a lot of game-breaking play from him - mainly being in the right spots at the right times which is useful to be sure.

I will be surprised if he ends up as a consistent top six forward but I've been very wrong before (like with Brady Tkachuk).

 

[Stylizer1]