SSM Greyhounds 2018-19 Season Thread

[Houndzfan20]

One of the reasons we have been doing so well with no 2nd rounders is because we've been using them to bring in studs. We need to recoup them from time to time. Sure we draft great and develop tons but having second rounders is money in the bank. Use them in potential draft picks or as currency to bring in game changers.

IMO I think we still sell. But that's just me. Be nice to add a couple young high end players to go with our current crop of players, grab a ton of draft picks and be back on top in 2 years. I fear if we dont, there will be some lean years ahead.

Like I said, just my opinion. I will still be supporting them regardless.

 

[shot caller]

Anyone have a take on Mufarreh?

 

[OHLfan200]

One of the reasons we have been doing so well with no 2nd rounders is because we've been using them to bring in studs. We need to recoup them from time to time. Sure we draft great and develop tons but having second rounders is money in the bank. Use them in potential draft picks or as currency to bring in game changers.

IMO I think we still sell. But that's just me. Be nice to add a couple young high end players to go with our current crop of players, grab a ton of draft picks and be back on top in 2 years. I fear if we dont, there will be some lean years ahead.

Like I said, just my opinion. I will still be supporting them regardless.

I agree. And this team is doing really well with Frost/Hollowell playing probably on average 30 minutes a game. Not to mention Villalta is stellar in net. Take those guys away and it changes the whole make-up of the team, that's why its risky going for it moving forward because that's a huge loss if one of them gets injured. Lack of depth and lack of draft picks to deal are reasons to sell. I will support either way too. I'm on board with whatever Raftis does.

 

[Marj44]

As for the value of 2nd round picks, can we all just agree that we would rather have them than not have them? From the 1999-2002 classes we only have 2 players picked in the top 2 rounds - Barrett Hayton and Ryan O'Rourke. Isn't it better to have more players like these? Why is this even up for debate?

We can all certainly agree that having 2nd round picks is better than not having any, I don’t think that’s up for debate. In this post your claiming 2nd round picks are important and then list two 1st round picks to support that argument? You’re argument should include some actual second round picks from those year; Serron Noel, Owen Gilhula, Arthur Kaliyev, Duncan Penman, Antonio Stranges, Will Portokalis...
We could hypothetically have Noel, Kaliyev and Stranges right now but wouldn’t have been able to compete for the championship recently...





Since 2010 there’s been a 10-40% chance you get an impact player in the 2nd round depending on how deep the draft is. That means 60-90% of those picks won’t give you a return equivalent to what you’re selling.

If I presented you with 5 boxes;
1 contains a 16 year old Morgan Frost
4 contain 16 year old Liam Stevens (Bulldogs)

Play along and say they turn out exactly as they have; would you give up Hayton to play the game once? You may end up with Frost but probably not. What if I let you play 4 times (you keep all 4 prizes)? Keep on mind each time you play there’s 5 new boxes (you’re not picking 4 of the 5).


Point is it’s easier to take the for sure thing and add then to sell and hope for the best. What if the Hounds sell and get back 5 busts? What if they buy a guy like Nick Suzuki and Owen Sound picks 5 busts with the picks sold?

The only debate going on is do the hounds take the for sure thing they have; a top team in the OHL (currently) or do they sell, risk it all and take a chance in drafting young impact players?

 

[Marj44]

I agree. And this team is doing really well with Frost/Hollowell playing probably on average 30 minutes a game. Not to mention Villalta is stellar in net. Take those guys away and it changes the whole make-up of the team, that's why its risky going for it moving forward because that's a huge loss if one of them gets injured. Lack of depth and lack of draft picks to deal are reasons to sell. I will support either way too. I'm on board with whatever Raftis does.

That’s exactly it. Is the team too shallow to compete for a title? Or have the young kids proven themselves and can carry some of the weight? We’ll find out shortly with Hayton, Frost, Villalta all gone for a bit.

 

[Marj44]

Anyone have a take on Mufarreh?

Points per game he’s outplaying Jacklin, Kartye and Pucek of the forwards. He also only slightly behind Johnston, Kerins and McLean.

Would love to see him play more. He hasn’t taken a face off yet and has only played 7 games. Looks like he could be a good player if he develops correctly. Unfortunately for him he’s one of the smallest and lightest guys on the team, perhaps he’s needing a bit more time to adjust to playing older and bigger opponents?

 

[Fischhaber]

We can all certainly agree that having 2nd round picks is better than not having any, I don’t think that’s up for debate. In this post your claiming 2nd round picks are important and then list two 1st round picks to support that argument? You’re argument should include some actual second round picks from those year; Serron Noel, Owen Gilhula, Arthur Kaliyev, Duncan Penman, Antonio Stranges, Will Portokalis...
We could hypothetically have Noel, Kaliyev and Stranges right now but wouldn’t have been able to compete for the championship recently...





Since 2010 there’s been a 10-40% chance you get an impact player in the 2nd round depending on how deep the draft is. That means 60-90% of those picks won’t give you a return equivalent to what you’re selling.

If I presented you with 5 boxes;
1 contains a 16 year old Morgan Frost
4 contain 16 year old Liam Stevens (Bulldogs)

Play along and say they turn out exactly as they have; would you give up Hayton to play the game once? You may end up with Frost but probably not. What if I let you play 4 times (you keep all 4 prizes)? Keep on mind each time you play there’s 5 new boxes (you’re not picking 4 of the 5).


Point is it’s easier to take the for sure thing and add then to sell and hope for the best. What if the Hounds sell and get back 5 busts? What if they buy a guy like Nick Suzuki and Owen Sound picks 5 busts with the picks sold?

The only debate going on is do the hounds take the for sure thing they have; a top team in the OHL (currently) or do they sell, risk it all and take a chance in drafting young impact players?

I'll repeat part of a post that I made a couple of days ago because obviously you didn't see it. I think it's worth repeating, however.

"With 9 picks between the second and fourth round we got:

Colton White
Zach Senyshyn
Hayden Verbeek
Boris Katchouk
Joseph Raaymakers
Tim Gettinger
Conor Timmins
Anthony Demeo
Morgan Frost

I'm not eliminating the busts or anything. That's all of them."

These league wide percentages don't mean anything to the Greyhounds. They are going to get some good talent with high picks, period.

 

[HockeyPops]

We can all certainly agree that having 2nd round picks is better than not having any

Then why would we want to continue status quo? To me, we are behind the 8 ball with those missing picks, and until we shake up the formula, we will continue to be behind the 8 ball. All this talk about getting/missing an impact player with your pick, all this talk about us drafting better so we don't need the picks, is just that - talk. With the picks we are better. Period. Full Stop. Let's get the picks back. Let's be better.

or do they sell, risk it all and take a chance in drafting young impact players?

I can follow your reasoning right up until this point. Maybe we have a different set of base assumptions though. For me, selling doesn't risk it all, rather not selling risks it all. Selling risks only this year's playoff success, while not selling risks multiple seasons including missing the playoffs, finishing last, poor attendance, etc. etc. etc.

And if we are only talking about risking this year's playoff success, what are we really risking? A ~1% chance of winning the OHL this season?

 

[Marj44]

I'll repeat part of a post that I made a couple of days ago because obviously you didn't see it. I think it's worth repeating, however.

"With 9 picks between the second and fourth round we got:

Colton White
Zach Senyshyn
Hayden Verbeek
Boris Katchouk
Joseph Raaymakers
Tim Gettinger
Conor Timmins
Anthony Demeo
Morgan Frost

I'm not eliminating the busts or anything. That's all of them."

These league wide percentages don't mean anything to the Greyhounds. They are going to get some good talent with high picks, period.

You’ve listed 3 drafts. The 2013-2014-2015 with 2014 being one of the deepest drafts in the past 8 seasons.

Following your same picks ^ 2nd through 4th round; how about in 2012 when we picked: Spinozzi, Pastorious, Mallette, Jenkins and Cody Milan?

What about 2016 where we picked Grits and Wale? (Neither are studs).

You’re correct in saying the Hounds pick great talent. I’ve run the numbers from the 2010 draft until (and including) the 2015 draft. In those 5 years the Greyhounds have the best drafting, picking an impact player with 22% of their picks not to mention a guy like Hayden Verbeek who I didn’t count as an impact player. Next best team is London at 18%. The average for the league is 10% by the way, teams average 1 Barrett Hayton every 10 picks total, we do it every 5 picks total.

It’s not that I didn’t see your post, I chose not to challenge your argument when you’re post encompasses 3 drafts.

Edit: 6 Drafts* 2010-2015

 

[Marj44]

Then why would we want to continue status quo? To me, we are behind the 8 ball with those missing picks, and until we shake up the formula, we will continue to be behind the 8 ball. All this talk about getting/missing an impact player with your pick, all this talk about us drafting better so we don't need the picks, is just that - talk. With the picks we are better. Period. Full Stop. Let's get the picks back. Let's be better.

I can follow your reasoning right up until this point. Maybe we have a different set of base assumptions though. For me, selling doesn't risk it all, rather not selling risks it all. Selling risks only this year's playoff success, while not selling risks multiple seasons including missing the playoffs, finishing last, poor attendance, etc. etc. etc.

And if we are only talking about risking this year's playoff success, what are we really risking? A ~1% chance of winning the OHL this season?

By risk it all I meant risking it all this season. I should have clarified. I think you’re a little off saying the hounds would have a 1% chance to win the OHL if they bought.

 

[Fischhaber]

You’ve listed 3 drafts. The 2013-2014-2015 with 2014 being one of the deepest drafts in the past 8 seasons.

Following your same picks ^ 2nd through 4th round; how about in 2012 when we picked: Spinozzi, Pastorious, Mallette, Jenkins and Cody Milan?

What about 2016 where we picked Grits and Wale? (Neither are studs).

You’re correct in saying the Hounds pick great talent. I’ve run the numbers from the 2010 draft until (and including) the 2015 draft. In those 5 years the Greyhounds have the best drafting, picking an impact player with 22% of their picks not to mention a guy like Hayden Verbeek who I didn’t count as an impact player. Next best team is London at 18%. The average for the league is 10% by the way, teams average 1 Barrett Hayton every 10 picks total, we do it every 5 picks total.

It’s not that I didn’t see your post, I chose not to challenge your argument when you’re post encompasses 3 drafts.

I simply used the data that you provided. I didn't intend for it to focus on only good drafts. I think Alex Gritz would have been great had he stayed with the Greyhounds, but that's neither here nor there.

I think the key point that we agree on is that the Hounds have the best scouting staff in the league and a far higher chance of selecting impact players.

If we want to see a 'super team' like we had the last few years then it's going to come via high draft picks. We can stay afloat for several more years with our collection of 6th rounders, but it will never translate into an obvious championship contender.

 

[HockeyPops]

I think you’re a little off saying the hounds would have a 1% chance to win the OHL if they bought.

I would hope that I am off as I pulled a number out of my ass. Care to postulate with your own number? Also interested what you would be willing to give up in the scenario where we are buyers this year?

 

[Marj44]

I simply used the data that you provided. I didn't intend for it to focus on only good drafts. I think Alex Gritz would have been great had he stayed with the Greyhounds, but that's neither here nor there.

I think the key point that we agree on is that the Hounds have the best scouting staff in the league and a far higher chance of selecting impact players.

If we want to see a 'super team' like we had the last few years then it's going to come via high draft picks. We can stay afloat for several more years with our collection of 6th rounders, but it will never translate into an obvious championship contender.

I wish I could share the google docs amongst everyone and have it peer reviewed to include everyone’s opinion, therefore creating a valid reference point. Unfortunately every time I try to share a google docs it doesn’t work
I’ve done the 6 drafts (and plan to continue as the years go) and the entire OHL travel for this season.

The Hounds lost some of their scouts so it’ll be interesting to see if they can continue their success. The 2014 greyhound draft class is the best draft class in 2010-2015.

 

[Marj44]

I would hope that I am off as I pulled a number out of my ass. Care to postulate with your own number? Also interested what you would be willing to give up in the scenario where we are buyers this year?

I mean if Oshawa, Niagara, Sudbury, Ottawa, London, Guelph and us go for it then the number would be about 1/7. Factor in a “weaker” roster for us and maybe it goes down a few percentages? Maybe about 10% without boosting the roster?

If they bought you’d be looking at picks and younger players leaving, obviously.

 

[Marj44]

I’ll remind you guys that as I provided these numbers I’m not saying the Hounds should 100% buy and go for it.
In fact Since August 29th I’ve been saying that without Sandin it’s most likely better to sell. I also stated that if Sandin didn’t come this week that I would give up on it. Which I’m ready to do personally.

I’m just indicating that it’s not a clear vision. There’s a bunch of moving parts and thus Raftis hasn’t pulled the trigger on anything. There’s pros and cons to buying and selling. The Greyhounds could go either way due to a number of factors.

I mean, we could argue pros and cons all day but it’s not gonna change Raftis’ decision. So let’s wait and see how the team approached this season

 

[HockeyPops]

I mean if Oshawa, Niagara, Sudbury, Ottawa, London, Guelph and us go for it then the number would be about 1/7. Factor in a “weaker” roster for us and maybe it goes down a few percentages? Maybe about 10% without boosting the roster?

Wow, we win 10% of the time with our current roster? I have Ottawa as favorites. I give Ottawa 80/20 against the current Hounds if we make the league final, and I give London 75/25 to beat the current Hounds in the Conference Final. I think we make the conference final 50/50 with our current team.

Based on those numbers, we win .5 x .25 x .2 = 0.025 or 2.5% of the time. I honestly have no idea how you get as high as 10%.

 

[HockeyPops]

If they bought you’d be looking at picks and younger players leaving, obviously.

I still don't see this as an option, but let's follow this train of thought. If you wanted to add like last year you would give up everything remaining. Last season we gave 5 seconds, 2 thirds, 2 sixths, and our first round prospect. This year we have 3 seconds and 5 thirds that the league will let us trade. Throw in O'Rourke plus a couple higher picks and you will be close in value to what we gave last year.

After the playoffs are done and our players graduate, next season we are left with:
1999
DeMeo
Peccia

2000
Wale
LeGuerrier
Jacklin
Trott
Pucek
Roth

2001
Calisti
Carroll
MacKay
Johnston
Kartye
Taylor
McLean

2002
Kerins
Mufarreh

In this scenario we traded away our best player, we have no seconds or thirds for 6 years, and all of our Impact Players walk at the end of this season for nothing. We are left with a shell of a team, with no obvious way of recouping missing picks. This team will not be competitive for 5+ years. Could you do this? Yes. Should you do this? No No No No No. But maybe I am missing something.

 

[Marj44]

I still don't see this as an option, but let's follow this train of thought. If you wanted to add like last year you would give up everything remaining. Last season we gave 5 seconds, 2 thirds, 2 sixths, and our first round prospect. This year we have 3 seconds and 5 thirds that the league will let us trade. Throw in O'Rourke plus a couple higher picks and you will be close in value to what we gave last year.

After the playoffs are done and our players graduate, next season we are left with:
1999
DeMeo
Peccia

2000
Wale
LeGuerrier
Jacklin
Trott
Pucek
Roth

2001
Calisti
Carroll
MacKay
Johnston
Kartye
Taylor
McLean

2002
Kerins
Mufarreh

In this scenario we traded away our best player, we have no seconds or thirds for 6 years, and all of our Impact Players walk at the end of this season for nothing. We are left with a shell of a team, with no obvious way of recouping missing picks. This team will not be competitive for 5+ years. Could you do this? Yes. Should you do this? No No No No No. But maybe I am missing something.

I’m not going down hypothetical roads. I’ve seen some posted already but I’m not really into that.

What you’re missing as you’ve stated ^ is the exact thing I’ve repeated multiple times. Which is that IF the hounds were to be buyers it would have to be IF they could buy cheap. Something that may occur if not many teams go for it.
I’m not going to keep repeating myself over and over. If you don’t read my posts then so be it, if you think my opinion is to sell the farm and go for it this year then you’re mistaken, but it’s ok.

I haven’t had a concrete opinion on what the hounds should do because there’s too much going on still to make an educated guess.

 

[Marj44]

Wow, we win 10% of the time with our current roster? I have Ottawa as favorites. I give Ottawa 80/20 against the current Hounds if we make the league final, and I give London 75/25 to beat the current Hounds in the Conference Final. I think we make the conference final 50/50 with our current team.

Based on those numbers, we win .5 x .25 x .2 = 0.025 or 2.5% of the time. I honestly have no idea how you get as high as 10%.

Fair enough. I’d say we have a 75% chance to make the conference finals, 50% chance to beat London and 30% chance to beat Ottawa. That makes 11.25%, plus knock off a bit of percentage for those who consider us to have a “weak” roster and I’d say things look about 10%.
Neither of us are right or wrong, just two opinions that’s all.

 

[HockeyPops]

Fair enough. I’d say we have a 75% chance to make the conference finals, 50% chance to beat London and 30% chance to beat Ottawa. That makes 11.25%, plus knock off a bit of percentage for those who consider us to have a “weak” roster and I’d say things look about 10%.
Neither of us are right or wrong, just two opinions that’s all.

75% to make the conference finals seems impossibly high odds. We should probably win the first round most of the time. Maybe not 9 out of 10 times but let's say it is just for arguments sake. The second round gets tougher, probably against a loaded up Guelph, but maybe you think we can beat them 2 out of 3 times or 67%. That's still only .9 x .67 = 60% to make the Conference Finals.

I’m not going down hypothetical roads. I’ve seen some posted already but I’m not really into that.

Fair enough. Adding cheap could mean a lot of different things so I am still struggling to understand what kind of trades you would envision. I like to try to quantify my position with tangibles to help others understand my position better, but if you aren't willing to get into that I can respect it.

Let's say we have 5 options:
1 - Buy a lot
2 - Buy a bit
3 - Stand Pat
4 - Sell a bit
5 - Sell a lot

My position through the season has been slowly migrating from Option 5 being the recommended course, to now Option 4 being perhaps the best course of action. I don't think we will want to be selling again for the next 2-3 seasons at least, so getting some of those picks back now while we can seems like the best option to me. Even using your (optimistic - I feel) numbers for a 1/7 chance of winning the OHL with buying cheap, I feel will put us into too much of a hole in the coming seasons.

As you say though, it really doesn't matter what I think. We will see what Raftis thinks soon enough.

 

[Marj44]

Let's say we have 5 options:
1 - Buy a lot
2 - Buy a bit
3 - Stand Pat
4 - Sell a bit
5 - Sell a lot

My position through the season has been slowly migrating from Option 5 being the recommended course, to now Option 4 being perhaps the best course of action. I don't think we will want to be selling again for the next 2-3 seasons at least, so getting some of those picks back now while we can seems like the best option to me. Even using your (optimistic - I feel) numbers for a 1/7 chance of winning the OHL with buying cheap, I feel will put us into too much of a hole in the coming seasons.

As you say though, it really doesn't matter what I think. We will see what Raftis thinks soon enough.

I understand your opinion. I’m not even saying I disagree with where you currently sit on the issue, for me it’s too early.
I thought a few teams would have indicated their approach by now but for some reason this season teams aren’t showing cards.

Without question we are ALL here because we admire the Hounds and want to see continued success throughout the years. Whether one believes they should sell or buy doesn’t stray from the fact that we’re very fortunate to even be in this position to debate what we should do this season. There are a few teams that could only dream of trading places with the Hounds right now.


As for me diving into potential trades to back up my point and all that stuff, it’s not really why I entered this board. I came here to see people’s opinions, share information, learn new things & understand more about what’s going on with both the Greyhounds and the OHL (though I personally don’t really care for the league ). The OHL draft pick database is a great tool and I never would have found it if not for these boards. I’ve made 2 myself and the more information we can all share with each other the better we can use the tools to have intelligent conversations.

 

[HockeyPops]

Great post.

I thought a few teams would have indicated their approach by now but for some reason this season teams aren’t showing cards.

It has been an odd season in the west. The teams predicted to be really good (Guelph, Owen Sound, Saginaw) haven't been (with the exception of London). The teams predicted to be really bad (Sarnia, Erie) haven't been (with the exception of Flint).

 

[Yooper]

I believe whether we sell or buy, the next 2 years, maybe 3, are going to be a struggle. Obviously we dont have a Frost, Hayton, or Katchouk, among the young guys...yet. I've been a season ticket holder for many years, and I've sat through some bad seasons. But the chance to go deep in the playoffs trumps all for me. So it's hard for me to say do a major sell. How would you feel as a kid on a 1st place team to have management say you aren't good enough, so we're gonna blow this thing up?! The other problem I see is a lack of "for sure" buyers. There's several teams that seem to be in the same boat as us. And the Dipietro deal showed us that not all of the big buyers are parting ways with their young future stars. If we cant get any of those in a deal, then the rebuild gets pushed back farther. Personally, I dont think Hayton will make the nhl next year. I've loved his game from day 1, but look at how many 19 year olds get sent back every year. Plus with the expansion draft coming up they may want to keep him down another year. So if we are weighing percentages, let's say there's a 75% to 80% chance he'll be back to restock the cupboards. And there's a slim chance Villalta could get sent back. Goalies take time. So I say go after a Yantsis from kitchener. Never been a prolific scorer but a lot better this year. He's big (6-3 210) and plays the right wing. Then if Sandin for sure isnt coming back, or there's no unannounced plans for the other Czech we drafted to report after world juniors, I say go after Lufegnivus (forgive the spelling) from Sarnia. Another big (6-3 224) left wing that's scoring at a good rate this year. Both teams are most likely selling so maybe they come a little cheaper?? Yantsis because he's never been a big scorer, and Lufegnivus because he's an import and most teams dont have a spot. Size and scoring down the wings to go along with Hayton and Frost down the middle. Imagine a line of Frost, Lufegnivus, and Howdeshell?!! I just have a hard time selling a 1st place team especially when the whole league is down overall. If we do sell, I'd say Frost, and either one of or Sambrook or Hollowell, will be the ones to go. But who knows, they could sell off everyone lol! Wont be surprised either way!

 

[HockeyPops]

Yooper, great post!

Obviously we dont have a Frost, Hayton, or Katchouk, among the young guys...yet.

My feeling is we might be able to get one if we sell. But you are right, we could really use one. I think this might be our window to get one.

 

[GameTime]

All of these numbers are craziness! The OHL is first and foremost a business, and I remind everyone the NHL does not support the OHL as a direct farm team. Only two key ingredients exist, developing players towards an NHL career (the sole reason every player signs in the OHL) and maintaining positive cash flow. The Greyhounds cannot afford to miss the trade deadline without recouping a significant number of draft picks. Simply, it's the old blessing and curse concept in sports management of continuously competitive teams. A blessing because fans are spoiled with continuously competitive teams, but a curse because fans are spoiled with continuously competitive teams. My humble opinion, the Raddysh/Sambrook trade of last year was a very big gamble. It was Cup or problems for possibly 3+ seasons. Now its time to address the issue of limited draft picks and trading a few players easily fixes the problem. Without question trade Frost, Hayton and Villalta. Consider others if the environment looks promising.