leeroggy
Registered User
- Jan 3, 2010
- 9,454
- 5,760
We rightfully crow about how well the 2008 entry draft did for our roster and prospect pool. As I was playing my fantasy team over the weekend I was intrigued by how well Eric Gelinas has come out of the blocks for the Devils this year and since I picked him up about 10 days ago it struck me that he was a late 2nd round pick for the Devils in 2009 (54th overall). A 6'4", 210 lbs PMD and PP quarterback gets my attention pretty quickly (i.e.-Hamilton).
So I looked up the 2009 draft on HockeyDB and noted that this draft has rapidly become a pretty strong one. We all know how strong the top of the draft was that year but I don't remember at the time how deep the draft was considered:
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2009e.html
87 of the 211 players drafted (41%!) have already played an NHL game with the average age about 22. That's a hell of a success ratio for so young a group I would think. The 2008 draft has a rate of 45% and the 2010 has a rate of 24%. Seems like the 2009 draft was pretty darn good league-wide. Although I really like what I've seen so far from DeHaan, in retrospect it might have been a lot better to not have made that trade to move up for him. The actual trade was:
26 (actual pick Kyle Palmieri)
37 (actual pick Matt Clark)
62 (actual pick Anders Nilsson - how did we get that one back?)
92 (actual pick Casey Cizikas)
for
12 (DeHaan)
77 (actual pick Matt Hackett)
I know I am leaving out a number of interim trades that mixed this analysis up, but if we had not made that trade we would have likely had quite a different draft, although many still believe DeHaan could have been there at 26. BTW, Minnesota took Nick Leddy at 16, which would have been a nice pick too for us.
What strikes me about the 2009 draft is how strong that second round looks in retrospect and we really did whiff on that round. I also noted that TWELVE 4th rounders from that draft have already played in the NHL. That's a heck of a good number for so recent a draft year.
Looking back at that draft, given how many picks we started with, it could be argued that round 2 (as well as what we could have done in round one) was the one part of recent drafts that the Isles wish they could have back. Even with JT, Casey and Lee and DeHaan this draft might well have been as good or EVEN BETTER than the great 2008 haul.
Man, just Gelinas alone would have made this one epic if he keeps this up . . .
And one last swipe at our 2009 draft - what a terrible year for goalies that draft has been so far and we draft two of them with the 31st and 62nd picks. The only even partially impactful goalie in 2009 so far is Robin Lehner at 46th overall. And BTW the 2008 and 2007 goalie drafts completely suck so far too! 2006 and 2005 were jackpot years for goalies. Not sure what to make of that but maybe bunching goalie picks in drafts is not necessarily the best strategy?
So I looked up the 2009 draft on HockeyDB and noted that this draft has rapidly become a pretty strong one. We all know how strong the top of the draft was that year but I don't remember at the time how deep the draft was considered:
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2009e.html
87 of the 211 players drafted (41%!) have already played an NHL game with the average age about 22. That's a hell of a success ratio for so young a group I would think. The 2008 draft has a rate of 45% and the 2010 has a rate of 24%. Seems like the 2009 draft was pretty darn good league-wide. Although I really like what I've seen so far from DeHaan, in retrospect it might have been a lot better to not have made that trade to move up for him. The actual trade was:
26 (actual pick Kyle Palmieri)
37 (actual pick Matt Clark)
62 (actual pick Anders Nilsson - how did we get that one back?)
92 (actual pick Casey Cizikas)
for
12 (DeHaan)
77 (actual pick Matt Hackett)
I know I am leaving out a number of interim trades that mixed this analysis up, but if we had not made that trade we would have likely had quite a different draft, although many still believe DeHaan could have been there at 26. BTW, Minnesota took Nick Leddy at 16, which would have been a nice pick too for us.
What strikes me about the 2009 draft is how strong that second round looks in retrospect and we really did whiff on that round. I also noted that TWELVE 4th rounders from that draft have already played in the NHL. That's a heck of a good number for so recent a draft year.
Looking back at that draft, given how many picks we started with, it could be argued that round 2 (as well as what we could have done in round one) was the one part of recent drafts that the Isles wish they could have back. Even with JT, Casey and Lee and DeHaan this draft might well have been as good or EVEN BETTER than the great 2008 haul.
Man, just Gelinas alone would have made this one epic if he keeps this up . . .
And one last swipe at our 2009 draft - what a terrible year for goalies that draft has been so far and we draft two of them with the 31st and 62nd picks. The only even partially impactful goalie in 2009 so far is Robin Lehner at 46th overall. And BTW the 2008 and 2007 goalie drafts completely suck so far too! 2006 and 2005 were jackpot years for goalies. Not sure what to make of that but maybe bunching goalie picks in drafts is not necessarily the best strategy?
