What have you learned over the years?

[CHooligan]

I have been following the draft closely since 1992. I have made some observations over the time.

I would like you to share your own observations from the draft.

Here is one of mine:


Don't pick a big defenseman with limited offensive potential in the first round

Between 1993 and 2007, I have registered 28 defenseman picked in the first round coming from the CHL that have had a below 30 point season in their draft year.

On those 28 players, only 6 (Witt, McKee, Allan, Regehr, Fischer, Staal) have had or are having, IMO, a decent to good career. Notice none have been close to be nominated to the Norris trophy. On those players, only Regehr and Staal could be considered as top pair defenseman...and to me, Regher is second pair Dman.

The 28 players are : Witt, Belak, McKee, Ware, Brown, Aitken, Ward, Focht, Larocque, Descoteaux, Brown, Wallin, Ferrence, Grimes, Allen, Regeher, Fischer, Mezei, Belle, Valabik, Fistric, Rogers, Staal, Parent, Kindl, Lashoff, Pelech, Ellerby.

The "succes" rate for this type of players is 6/28=21.4%. So, 1 out of 5 players of that type is going to have an NHL career. This rate is way below the average rate for a first rounder.

I would add that none of this player overachieved. The only one overachiever would be Tyler Myers picked in 2008. Chara is also overachieving but he was not a first round pick.

To sum up, the risk of picking this type of player is very high and the reward is low. Only 1 or 2 out 28 became a top 2 defenseman.

Scouts seem to forget that defensive players in the NHL like Barret Jackman, Kyle McLaren,Rostislav Klesla and Denis Gauthier, as exemple, were getting some points in the CHL.

If a team is really looking for a big defensemen with limited skill, they can get one for a 3rd round pick. O'byrne has been traded for Bournival this year. So for a third round pick, you can get a defensive NHL player. If a was a GM, I would prefer to give a 3rd pick for a NHL ready player than having 21% of chance of having this same kind of player by using my first round pick.

So, why are teams still drafting players like Tinordi or Oleksiak in the first round???

Click to read more...

 

[Mc5RingsAndABeer]

I have learned that no matter how much of a consensus the #1 pick is, HF posters from the other 29 teams that don't own the #1 pick will try to convince us that someone else should go #1.

 

[Ryan English]

oleksiak's potential is myers.

this is partially why i think siemens will fall to ~20th, i know he had over 30 pts, but his offensive potential isnt that much

 

[Draftman]

I've been following the draft since 1972. The same can be said for forwards with limited offensive ability. I've seen over the years many scouts who think some of these players who they feel have "potential" and would improve. They don't. I believe if you can't score against junior goalies, you won't score against the best goaltenders in the world in the NHL.

 

[AmazingNuck]

That fans ***** and moan incorrectly over the team not picking the "BPA" according to TSN/international rankings when the teams are actually picking the "BPA" according to their own PAID PROFESSIONAL scouts.

 

[dem]

Safe picks are not safe at all

Every year there are guys with limited offense that get labelled 'safe picks'. Guys like Kyle chipchura or ryan omarra come to mind.

Don't fall for it

 

[YoSoyLalo]

That fans ***** and moan incorrectly over the team not picking the "BPA" according to TSN/international rankings when the teams are actually picking the "BPA" according to their own PAID PROFESSIONAL scouts.

THANK YOU.

I hate this "BPA" crap. Each team has their own, paid, professional scouts to name the supposed "BPA".

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

The op's comment is good advice their are far too many teams trying to luck their way into the next Chara. He's a very rare commodity and there might not be another like him for a long time, many 1st round picks have been wasted in big men with limited skill who "project well".

What I`ve learned is people who fall in the draft usually fall for good reason and this is justified in the results about 85% of the time (yes I pulled that number straight out of my butt). The other 15% that actually do turn out quite well and demonstrate that the teams who passed on them were foolish in doing so, are constantly trumpeted when someone drops below their ``perceived`` value and the fans bemoan their team for letting him slip by even though in the majority of cases it proves to be the right call.

I`ve also learned that players who have ``overstated`` character issues, usually do have character issues that have in fact been overstated just as suggested, but that`s not to say that they still don`t have character issues and should be picked significantly lower as a result. Even minor character issues can be the difference between a very talented player making it or not making it and oppositely players with good character can overcome many perceived weaknesses with a combination of hard work and dedication.

Lastly players picked well above their perceived draft position typically don`t turn out particularly great, this margin does vary based on position in the draft (the later in the draft you get the less it matters), but if for example your picking top 5 and you grab someone who is well out of the top 30 it usually doesn`t turn out well for you. That player is rarely a bad player because there was obviously some very attractive attributes in there, but often is outshone by those players selected in there general vicinity.

 

[Big McLargehuge]

Bad team = tanking

And thus any top pick is undeserved and an affront to hockey.

 

[SidGenoMario]

Bad team = tanking

And thus any top pick is undeserved and an affront to hockey.

This.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

THANK YOU.

I hate this "BPA" crap. Each team has their own, paid, professional scouts to name the supposed "BPA".

So you hate BPA but want teams to draft according to it still?

Anyone who purports to know the BPA unequivocally is an idiot but not nearly as dumb as the person who makes a pick favoring a position or any other quality, such as a future draft class's positional makeup, over a scout's opinions (or deferring from BPA)

 

[Epsilon]

Beware of the siren song of players who were ranked highly a year or even two years before the draft. Fans love these types because they are familiar with their names (from seeing them near the top of way-too-early draft lists) but more often than not there's a reason these players are dropping in the rankings: they are not improving relative to the other players in the same draft class. Guys like Wes O'Neill, Evan McGrath, Steve Anthony, and others come to mind here.

 

[SeanVT395]

Draft position means nothing when comparing prospects, yet people do it so much.

 

[zorz]

I've learned that all "no way player XY goes that high/low!" or "no way team ABC passes on this guy!" are totally meaningless before the draft, because everytime picks like that happen. And I didn't need many years to learn that.

 

[the tribute]

oleksiak's potential is myers.

this is partially why i think siemens will fall to ~20th, i know he had over 30 pts, but his offensive potential isnt that much

really? what has myers proven other then a good rookie season and a bit of a sophomore slump?

 

[Ryan English]

really? what has myers proven other then a good rookie season and a bit of a sophomore slump?

i agree that myers hasn't proven himself, but they sound like a very similar prospect and i dont think oleksiaks potential is better then myers right now. I think if oleksiak develops perfectly, hell be what myers is (or is approaching) now. Which is a big, mobile #1 D with offensive production and steady D.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

I agree with that theory.

I've also learned that drafting a small, but skilled defenceman in the late rounds can be a great value, in particular if they are character guys. Josh Gorges, Ian White and many other are examples of late round picks who were top d-men in their draft years, but were overlooked because of their size and not having outstanding speed. It just takes them a bit longer to land in the NHL. But the bottom line is they were dominant in their age group with top notch character. They simply worked their butts off to become excellent NHL d-men. There are tons of other examples, that is just two. And you can guys like that in the mid to late rounds, no problem.

I'd also say drafting based on production is more successful than drafting based on tools without a tool kit. Elite hockey players come in all shapes and sizes, but the best ones tended to be the best when they were drafted, but overlooked because they didn't fit the prototypical mold. It's not like you can ignore attirubtes altogether if a high producing forward is small, slow and soft (Corey Locke), but it doesn't mean it will hold them back (Wellwood, Savard etc.) Similar to Moneyball theory, really.

 

[SC2008]

I leanrned the best draft year/round for goalies was 1994/9th Round.

Which produced Thomas, Nabakov, Voukon, Hedberg, and a serviceable back-up in Grahame.

 

[rycky182]

So, why are teams still drafting players like Tinordi or Oleksiak in the first round???

Tinordi is the biggest riser of 2009 AND 2010 included according to Craig Button. It has to mean something, no?

 

[Levitate]

Tinordi is the biggest riser of 2009 AND 2010 included according to Craig Button. It has to mean something, no?

It's Craig Button, so no.

edit: as for drafting defensemen, I think it depends where you're drafting and what other players are available. If you get a top four defenseman who fills a roll in one way or another, even if it's not scoring a bunch of points, you probably did pretty well even for the first round. There aren't that many legit star players drafted every first round, and most of them are in the top 5 or so

Using McIlrath is an iffy thing, since there were guys like Fowler or Tarasenko available who are much more attractive prospects, but the Rangers didn't draft McIlrath to become the next Chara or even really the next Weber...they drafted him to be a tough as nails top four defenseman who makes life miserable for other teams and still has the skill to effectively move the puck out of his own end and maybe contribute a little here and there offensively. You usually don't find those guys in the 3rd round or whatever.

 

[SufferingCatFan]

I have learned that certain organizations consistently do a great job developing the players they draft and helping them reach/exceed expectations (i.e. Detroit) and certain organizations do the opposite (i.e. Florida).