There are two things that bog down a conversation about any entry draft.
- An unwillingness to give credit to the people doing the drafting for the 30 NHL teams.
- Hindsight comments that "cherry pick" ratings, rankings or scouting reports to frame the issue in the most damning way possible.
I'd like to suggest a few things that may benefit the conversation moving forward. If you really believe NHL teams are poor at drafting, divide any past entry draft into two parts: 1-100 and the rest. The overwhelming majority of quality players are long gone by pick #100 (in fact they're long gone for the most part by #50) and the outliers almost always have a story (draft eligibility question, major after-draft spike in size/strength, Laura Stamm) that tells you why the scouts passed on them. We can argue about specific organizations being horrible (Fraser's Oilers after the Stanley's started rolling in) but overall the NHL's talent scouts are very good at their jobs.
Now, the ratings. Allow me to give you two completely different scenario's based on draft day ratings. We'll use 2003 since it is such a famous draft for Oilers fans.
Hockey News 2003 Draft Rankings (for Oiler picks)
- #14: Marc-Antoine Pouliot
- #95: Jean-Francois Jacques
Nothing in the top 100 in regard to any of the other Oiler picks in the first three rounds.
Redline Report 2003 Draft Rankings (for Oiler picks)
- #40: Marc-Antoine Pouliot
- #57: Colin McDonald
- #62: Mikael Joukov
Redline did rank Jacques (#118), Stortini (#194) and Brodziak (#185) but well outside the top 100. Which ranking is better? The Hockey News and their contacts or Redline report and their "31st NHL team" scouts? I think Redline trumps HN. Now we'll try 2007 and use two other ranking services.
International Scouting Services 2007 Draft Rankings (for Oilers picks)
- #7: Sam Gagner
- #28: Alex Plante
- #37: Riley Nash
- #63: Milan Kytnar
ISS had the three first rounders pegged pretty well, and have done a fine job over the years although there are some questions about recent quality.
Bob McKenzie 2007 Draft Rankings (for Oilers picks)
- #7: Sam Gagner
- #32: Alex Plante
- #33: Riley Nash
McKenzie has quickly become the gold standard for draft rankings, which makes sense based on his contact list that goes back decades. McKenzie's final list this season should be the one draft primer you pay attention to before the draft.
Redline liked the Oilers 2007 draft more than the others (Gagner at 5, Plante at 19, Nash at 24) but I don't think it is a major difference from the two lists above. What does skew the argument is stating "Central Scouting ranked Riley Nash at #64NA" because it is not an industry recognized authority in terms of final rankings. And I'd suggest the Hockey News is less and less credible, an erosion that began when McKenzie left the paper.
Here is
Redline's April article and their current top 10. And here is
ISS's Top 30 on their front page. My
Desjardins-aided top 30 is here and Bob McKenzie's mid-season 30 is
here.
I don't think there's an arguement about the Minnesota's scouting department being extremly bad.
ReplyDeleteSince 2004, only Benoit Pouliot emerged as a player with impact.
That being only this year with th Habs.
I checked out all theyr picks and they seem to have 6''00 as a standard for every player. I think it's a pretty stupid thing to limit your scouting with a minimum in size. It's very rare a big guy will come out of the later rounds and be a go to guy, cause so much teams watch for size and skill.
Their first 4 drafts (Gaborik, Koivu, PM Bouchard, Burns) were very good.
ReplyDeleteSince then, they missed badly with Thelen, Pouliot struggled (but they got paid for him) and they rushed Sheppard.
So they've stumbled some, but one imagines they'll fire whoever they have and bring in someone else.
In spite of Plante's injuries and Nash's school choice, when you look at the whole 2007 draft class, neither Plante or Nash is noticeably trailing the pack (yet).
ReplyDeleteIts still too early to tell as there are still too few graduates to say they are lagging behind.
LT: I agree that most scouts are good at what theyr doing, and love the head scout in Montreal (Trevor Timmins). But i think that sometimes they will make gross errors for ''Seen good'', and just go down as a regular everyday normal guy.
ReplyDeleteColton Gillies and Kyle ChipChura for exemple.
I'm still astonished they'l step over Jordan Weal, just for the sake of his size. I mean, John Mcfarlanad? Really? How do these guys expect a kid who can't score a PPG to make it in the NHL? I mean Weal just shifts Mcfarland by X2 of his points. There's a big difference between those guys that can't be equalized by context.
Deano: I think Plante and Nash are fine; the questions about Nash are almost completely with regard to the organization's attitude toward him.
ReplyDeletefpb - you're right to a point (the size issue makes me crazy) but we (and I do mean we because some of the conversation about Seguin/Hall is already beyond ridiculous) have to remember that the idea is to pick the guy who is going to be the best player down the road, not right now.
ReplyDeleteSo a guy may tear up junior, absolutely tear it up, but it may mean absolutely nothing. I've never seen McFarland play and the kid might be a total bust but the scouts probably like his skating, his size, his hockey sense, his compete (again I'm just throwing things out there, I wouldn't know the kid if he walked into my kitchen).
Here are some names for you - Todd Simon, Max Middendorf, Jamie Matthews, Bobby Russell, Rod Schutt, Hector Marini - these guys were all junior stars. Except for Marini they were all big stars back in the day.
I think Schutt got a cup of coffee. Marini too before he lost an eye. And Russell played for the Oilers in the WHA and did OK.
If you went back to their respective eras you would find a whole bunch of guys who had NHL careers who couldn't hold these guys' jocks in junior.
This is the tough thing about scouting. Hall is the better player right now, absolutely, but who will be the better one ten years from now? When was Joe Sakic drafted? Was it in the teens?
Its a tough gig.
gawd....2003!! and i thought the '95 draft here was bad when the whole crowd was chanting "Doan Doan Doan", and they chose Steve Kelly! but they managed to top that by trading DOWN to take Pouliot, when Zach Parise was the next player in line for us to choose. then we trade down FIVE spots, therefore missing out on Kesler, Getzlaf, Burns, Mark Stuart, Mike Richards! even Corey Perry, though i doubt we would have selected him anyway because he went at #28.
ReplyDeletei hope the Oilers always have a sheet of paper on the draft table reminding them of what NOT to do at the draft in the 1st round!
BDHS: I think Sakic and Trottier are good comps for Seguin in one very important way: they both went BACK to junior after being drafted.
ReplyDeleteTrottier was a second round pick but that is completely misleading (a long story, but back then teams were allowed to draft one underage player in the first two rounds. So the Islanders took Clark Gillies in the first round and a better player in the second round. But he was underage and that was the reason he was taken in the second round).
Anyway, does everyone think Oilers fans have the patience for that? I hope the Oilers don't care and take the BPA.
As Al Davis (one of the more insane people in sports history) once said: "just win, baby!"
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. The concept gets considerable derision here, but 'culture' is mgmt's responsibility and these guys seem to be the worst kind of dogmatic, unthinking, old-school, Peter-principle dolts.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that Nash's exclusion from the last World Junior team was a foregone conclusion before he ever showed up. If the 'fix' wasn't in and he made it, the tune around here would be different. I'd also like to point out that the team that was selected in this manner did not win.
MacT's exclusion of Penner on the WHC team in favor of Cumiskey and Downie (how does he keep getting asked?) is the same kind of polluted decision making.
Basing hockey decisions on non-hockey criteria makes it extremely difficult to succeed (and makes you a laughing-stock organization that nobody wants to play for).
Black Dog: Yeah, that's a thing that happens often. But in that specific case, i think it proves (Oh so partially) that sometimes kids will be greatly overated by the eye.
ReplyDeleteSeeing Weal progressed from 70 to 102 points, and Mcfarland regressed from 52 to 50 while playing more games.
If the scouts like his skillset, the numbers should ring a bell that there's a big thing missing to his game. (Whatever it is) Those things are usually less noticeable on the spot (Awareness, positioning, Opportunism)
fpb: With regard to Weal, it isn't a matter of the scouts not liking his skill. It's the trail of body parts left behind by other small forwards over the years. For every Cliff Ronning there's 50 guys who played the perimeter or lacked foot speed or didn't have a deathwish.
ReplyDeleteWeal is extremely skilled. So was Bruce Boudreau.
I really believe the success they had by going "off the board" with Hemsky in 2001, led them directly to taking Niinimaki in 2002.
ReplyDeleteDoing well with the Hemsky pick reinforced their belief that they were smarter than everyone else.
You see it all the time in poker where a player makes the wrong play but gets a positive result, so it reinforces that the wrong move was correct. The ol' confirmation bias.
They seem to have stopped doing that, which is good.
I agree that when you are outside the top 50 or so, that is when you really earn your $$$ as a scout.
The real part of the fun is in stuff like Patric Hornqvist being the last player taken (230th overall, 7th round 2007 draft) leading Nashville in scoring this year.
Another example is Joe Pavelski, smallish US college forward (5'11" 190lbs) taken 205th overall (7th round in the vaunted 2003 draft), leading the Sharks in scoring this playoff, and arguably their MVP of the first round.
Everyone screams about scouts missing on guys, but guys like Pavelski and Hornqvist show how much voodoo and luck is really involved.
Drafting kids at 18 trying to figure out what they are going to be like at 22 cannot be an easy task.
Its in the latter rounds of the draft where I think watching Stu's picks develop will be fun and I agree with your "arrows" post the other day.
5th rounder Phillipe Cornet 133rd overall being a late cut for the Canadian World Junior team.
Another 5th rounder (133rd overall too!..weird) Oliver Roy being the last goalie cut from the same World Junior team.
Those teams are full of 1st rounders and seeing two of Stu's 5ths almost make it is beautiful and hopefully speaks to the future.
LT: Well... he did fairly good in the NHL (0,5 PPG) and pretty much exploded the AHL when he was there.
ReplyDeleteI think it's also an issue of small players being shoved aside in the old times. Simon Gamache is an example. Pretty much rocked every level he played in but never got a long term stint in the show.
BDHS: I think Sakic and Trottier are good comps for Seguin in one very important way: they both went BACK to junior after being drafted.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you say that, as someone who claims a connection to an Oiler's media person told me that the 1st overall will be Seguin and he will go back to junior.
Woodguy: I think it has something to do with a bunch of teams just racking up Coke Machines in the later rounds. While other teams focus on smaller guys that other teams might have passed on due to a certain flaw or inexposure.
ReplyDeleteSay what you want to say, but a guy scoring 70 points in the USHL should not fall in the 7th round while guys who had 10 points were drafted.
Usually pearls of the late rounds were either unexposed, or had a massive arguement for theyr pick in the form of stats, but got ignored for whatever reason. (Mostly being size)
It is infinitly rare, a non-skill player in the junior will become one in the show.
(The only one i can think of is Kris Versteeg)
WG - It would be quite controversial to send the first overall back to junior (I don't disagree)
ReplyDeleteAnyone know offhand when it has happened before?
One thing I just found that is kind of funny because Edmonton has supposedly been rebuilding via the draft since Prongs left town:
ReplyDeleteIn the last 4 years Edmonton has only had 23 draft picks. By comparison the Los Angeles Kings had 38 draft picks in the same time period.
Deano: Mike Modano.
ReplyDeleteFPB: But they also got injured. LOTS of small guys played right up until they were maimed.
ReplyDeleteActually, the small guys who have careers are often able to compete as 2-way players. Like Gregg Sheppard.
Back in the day there were lots of small forwards, but the headlines usually involved trade and injury:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1946&dat=19740318&id=kJEuAAAAIBAJ&sjid=WaEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5926,580338
"Interesting that you say that, as someone who claims a connection to an Oiler's media person told me that the 1st overall will be Seguin and he will go back to junior."
ReplyDeleteDid they tell you how Seguin looked at training camp?
fpv - nope - contract dispute (he held out).
ReplyDeleteDeano: Mats Sundin. Played in the SEL. Which is like Junior for a Euro.
ReplyDeleteWoodguy: Hemsky wasn't off the board. #13 was at the uppper end but within the range of picks he was expected to go.
ReplyDeleteMy point with the tangent that fpv has indulged me on is:
ReplyDeleteWhen push comes to shove, I doubt these guys have it in them to make such an unconventional decision as to send the first overall pick back to junior.
Did they tell you how Seguin looked at training camp?
ReplyDeleteMore importantly, did they tell you which UFA veteran center they signed this summer to a one year deal?
It's all well and good to say what "the plan" might be, but there's a lot to play out before then. If they draft Seguin and bring him to camp and he happens to be one of the five best centers during the exhibition season, logically he should make the team, no? The exact same thought process should apply to Eberle and MPS.
And if all three play their way onto the team? Good on 'em, and God help us that Hitchcock is the coach and he sets it such that all three are sheltered appropriately (such a scenario with Quinn behind the bench would be a potential disaster).
Did they tell you how Seguin looked at training camp?
ReplyDeleteSaid that OTC kept calling him Kerr.
Deano: Well, if you want to follow the Pittsburgh model (draft high over 4 seasons, get a new building) then it behooves you to do just that thing.
ReplyDeleteHbomb: That would imply benching MPS for Jason Chimera and then pissing him off so that he returns to SEL.
ReplyDeleteBen,
ReplyDeleteAgreed.
Perhaps "off the board" is too strong a phrase for Hemsky(but appropriate for Niinimaki)
LT - I would also like it combined with Davidson's first year plan in StL where all we sign this summer are guys to be moved out at the deadline.
ReplyDeletehbomb - raiding Hockey Canada now for Armstrong and Hitch would put us in good stead.
Spezza was a #2 overall who went back to junior.
ReplyDeleteHithcock sucks ass.
ReplyDeleteIf you complain about the Habs Anti-Hockey, don't come rooting for Ken Hitchock. He's fucking bad with kids.
He's fucking bad with kids.
ReplyDeleteFrom Wiki:
Hitchcock began his coaching career during the 1984-85 season where he was coach of the Kamloops Blazers of the Western Hockey League. Hitchcock spent six seasons with the Blazers, leading them to two WHL championship victories in 1985-86 and 1989-90. During his tenure with the Blazers, Hitchcock accumulated a 291–115–15 record and never had a losing season. He also named the Top Coach in all of Canadian Major Junior Hockey in 1990.
Yeah, he's never had any success with kids.
I think Renney will be head coach in the fall, with Quinn in a management "advisory" capacity.
ReplyDelete"I like that boy from Scott Thompson's hometown," he'll say.
Good news in the Journal today. Apparently the exit meeting with Hemsky went well on the Oilers plan to rebuild, and the Oilers might want to ''re-sign him anyways''
ReplyDeleteThis was from Matheson's article, a mere few weeks after he indicated ''no chance Hemsky is back after his contract expires.''
I'm hoping Brownlee's sources are also vastly inaccurate re: SMB's preference for Seguin.
All season long, Quinn distanced himself from the personnel decisions. He always said 'they want'.
ReplyDeleteI found it odd.
Hitch would be a disaster (he's as stubborn as MacT). I hope we get a coach fresh out of junior.
ReplyDeleteNo more Lenny Wilkens please.
I was just thinking abut the Niiiiniiimaaakii (sp?) selection at 15th overall.
ReplyDeleteIt was a stupid pick, granted. But that draft looked pretty weak to me. If you were ever going to go off the board in the 1st round -which is never really warranted- that seemed like a good time to do it.
Does anyone remember who the consensus pick(s) were for who we should've taken at that spot? (Don't BS and just pick the guy who turned out to be the best player)
WG,
ReplyDeleteExcellent point about confirmation bias and the Oilers. Every success proves they're right. Every failure proves that winning is hard, given injuries, we can't compete with big money teams, bad luck, etc.
Another life lesson from poker.
Kris: I'd guess Grebeshkov since playing full time in the RSL at that time as a D was something.
ReplyDeleteBut for a forward i would guess Jakub Klepis.
Re: 2002 draft.
ReplyDeletehttp://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=1189251&postcount=14
I hope we get a coach fresh out of junior.
ReplyDelete...
He's fucking bad with kids.
I was going to make a Graham James joke here, but it's still too soon.
Guy Boucher anyone?
ReplyDeleteI call Mcfarland and Nidereiter the busts of this draft
ReplyDeleteNot a forward, but fairly recently Erik Johnson played one year of college after being drafted 1st overall.
ReplyDeleteAt the 2002 draft, Hudler was the guy ranked highest left on my list when EDM picked at 14 (well, 15, after they traded with MON to move down a spot).
ReplyDeleteMuch hair was pulled out when they passed on him 3 more times before DET drafted him at 58 OV.
FPV:
ReplyDeleteNiederreiter is a guy I wonder about as well, but one thing really in his favour is his age. He's a Sept 8, 1992 birthday, so he's one of the youngest players in the draft - if he were born 8 days later, he'd be in the 2011 draft.
I remember that very well, speeds. Hudler has certainly covered the bet, but in fairness to the Oilers they also got some good value along the way (Stoll, Greene).
ReplyDeleteI still think the Oilers (during that period) simply didn't scout the European talent pool properly. It was all about Nilsson renting a SAAB and getting to a tournament, but little about actually seeing these kids and God forbid someone found out about their background, etc.
I think it was reflected during the KP era by where the Swedes were chosen. Later picks.
LT,
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean you wanted Semin at that pick?
Who was the sort of scouts and media consensus pick at that point? That is, who was the conventional pick?
It wasn't Hudler, because he went -as speeds points out- much later.
There's a redline report from June 2002 that has the following players listed from 12-20*
ReplyDelete12. Jakub Koreis C 6-3 204 L 6-26-84 Plzen (Czech Republic)
COMMENT: The Czechs sure make good tanks, don't they?
13. Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers G 6-4 180 R 5-15-84 Chicoutimi (QMJHL)
COMMENT: An octopus. He's big enough to blot out the sun.
14. Petr Taticek RW 6-2 188 L 9-22-83 Sault Ste. Marie (OHL)
COMMENT: Nice combination of size and puck skills.
15. Petr Kanko RW 5-10 191 L 6-26-84 Kitchener (OHL)
COMMENT: So annoying he could give Darcy Tucker lessons.
16. Daniel Paille L/C 6-0 196 L 8-4-84 Guelph (OHL)
COMMENT: One of the most underrated players in the draft — a winner.
17. Valdislav Evseev RW 6-2 196 L 9-10-84 CSKA (Russia)
COMMENT: Million dollar body/skills — but a 10 cent head.
18. Sergei Anshakov LW 6-1 183 L 1-13-84 CSKA (Russia)
COMMENT: Rugged power winger can skate and score.
19. Tobias Stephan G 6-3 178 L 1-21-84 Kloten (Switzerland)
COMMENT: Flexible as Gumby. Steals games all by himself.
20. Michael Tessier LW 6-1 177 L 8-14-84 Acadie-Bathurst (QMJHL)
COMMENT: Great acceleration and can really dangle.
Seems like slim pickings. Again, I'm not defending the selection or going off the board in general in the 1st round.
*http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/draft02/rlrrankings.htm
LT:
ReplyDeleteGreene is a pretty good example for my general theory that you shouldn't draft a defensive D in the first 2 rounds, and he was a guy that actually worked out.
What would you have really missed out on, if you took a chance on a skilled forward instead and drafted a bust?
Greene spent 3 years in college after the draft, signed at 22, split a year between AHL/NHL, and has been in the NHL since. His first year or two (or three?)at the NHL level you could have had an equivalent or better player for the same money from the UFA market.
So, arguably, you get him from ages 24/5-27 (he would be a UFA THIS summer if he hadn't signed his long term extension with LA) where he plays above his UFA replacement value?
Kris:
ReplyDeleteAs your link shows, Hudler (Babchuk was actually higher on RLR's list, but from memory Hudler was rated higher, on average, by most of the sources I read at that time) actually was the conventional pick - he was ranked 8th on that Redline list.
Speeds,
ReplyDeleteVery much agreed on the defensive D point. Under the current cap, there's a strong incentive to not draft goalies and defensive D, since they're likely to be a valuable role player on a cap-friendly entry level or an RFA deal. (There are exceptions, true star defensemen and the even rarer true star goalie.)
Clearly lots of people and scouts thought Hudler was the best pick left at 15. But lots didn't as he wasn't picked there. It's hard to burn management for not picking him, as no one else did either for a lot of spots after that.
I still think the bigger knock on our drafting and scouting is how we use 2nd, 3rd and later round picks. Selecting Abney was about as likely to pay off for the club as drafting a beer leaguer. Seriously.
I mean, "unlikely" to be a valuable player...
ReplyDeletespeeds: Yeah, I think taking a D there was a riskier pick than Hudler would have been.
ReplyDeleteBut I think they'd scouted Greene and liked him and I'm not sure the club had seen Hudler near as much. The Oilers during the KP era showed a willingngess to pick Swedes in later rounds (there's an endless list 01-07) but not invest an earlier selection.
Flawed? God yes. Hudler would have been a welcome addition.
Having said that, they did get two NHL players (plus JDD) in the second round of a draft that wasn't stellar. Hard to get too angry at them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletespeeds: I haven't seen one, but will say that taking the ISS/Redline/McKenzie top 30 and applying Desjardins' math to it has been beneficial in identifying good players.
ReplyDeleteSo I think a team could reasonably enter draft day 2010 with McKenzie's list and kill in the first round, and then apply Desjardins' math to the top 70 forwards and walk away with some legit prospects.
If you just listed the top, say, 70 scoring forwards among draft eligible players (however you would identify the "top 70 scorers" when they are coming out of 10 + different leagues), would that list identify THAT much less of the forward talent than NHL scouts do? Are there any studies on something like that?
ReplyDeletespeeds: I appear to have answered your question before you asked it (need to stop eating those mushrooms!) but no, I haven't seen one.
ReplyDeleteI think Desjardins' application to the top 70F's might give a really good draft list.
I do recall Colby Cosh doing an article on his blog a few years ago where he just drafted the bpa based on some published list. He made out like a bandit iirc.
I guess my question is IF such a list were comparable or better than a list made by NHL scouts, how could we say they are "very good" at identifying talent?
ReplyDeleteI mean, maybe they are very good at identifying talent in absolute terms, but IF one can do as well or better simply looking up the stats online, firing up excel and taking one or two days to find the desjardins numbers for draft eligible players, what does that say about the current scouting process?
speeds: I don't think there's a reasonable answer. Teams by definition would draft the most sucessful forwards and those forwards would be (by definition) top scorers.
ReplyDeleteI guess you could go back and identify the top 70 forwards and then find out which teams are drafting ahead of that (Abney being an example) but we can see most of those mistakes with the naked eye.
speeds - thanks for pointing out Johnson (and also finding Matt Watkins btw)
ReplyDeleteLT - I really like the simplified Desjardins ranking method for bfa - especially if you limit the boxcars to even strength performance ala Johnathan Willis.
Doubt there would be much hand-wringing after the fact.
Oilers scout, Musil was really pushing for Hudler - they still didn't take him. I don't know what they saw in Niinimakki. I remember the 2002 draft as it was my first draft I watched. I remember the shock in Gord Miller's voice for us going off the charts.
ReplyDeleteThe whole 2002-2004 was a debacle of monumental proportions. To some extent, 2007 as well.
The good news is we finally may see the fruits of the labour re: 2002 draft, as Niinimakki not being signed yielded us Jeff Petry.
Again though, I subscribe to Speed's theory of avoiding drafting defencemen in the top 2 rounds. It just simply takes too long to develop them, costing pre-UFA years. Unless there is a clear cut top pairing defenceman on there (Doughty, Hedman)
I do recall Colby Cosh doing an article on his blog a few years ago where he just drafted the bpa based on some published list. He made out like a bandit iirc.
ReplyDeleteI can't find the link, but I remember it too. His scenario was that you replace your GM with an elderly woman who knows nothing about hockey and tell her to pick the highest ranked player remaining on either of the Central Scouting lists. As I recall, it produced a bias in favour of Euros (since on average the Xth-ranked North American skater is a better bet than the Xth-ranked European skater), but still blew the Oilers' record out of the water.