It's the first glance at the top of the draft with their scoring stats placed on a level (or almost level) playing field. We don't have time on ice (not even the teams have TOI totals, incredibly) and we're lacking all kinds of vital data but it's a glimpse no matter how imperfect.
Here are the CHL NHLE's for Bob McKenzie's first rounders from his February list:
Forwards
- Ryan Strome 12-28-40 (BM #6)
- Sean Couturier 14-24-38 (BM#4)
- Ryan Nugent Hopkins 11-27-38 (BM #2)
- Jonathan Huberdeau 15-21-36 (BM# 9)
- Sven Bartschi 13-19-32 (BM #14)
- Gabriel Landeskog 17-14-31 (BM #3)
- Matt Puempel 15-16-31 (BM #18)
- Ty Rattie 10-19-29 (BM #17)
- Mark McNeill 11-17-28 (BM #22)
- Mark Scheifele 8-20-28 (BM #21)
- Boone Jenner 10-16-26 (BM #24)
- Daneil Catenacci 10-16-26 (BM #30)
- Brandon Saad 11-12-23 (BM #8)
- Nicklas Jensen 11-12-23 (BM #26)
- Richard Rakell 10-12-22 (BM #20)
- Lucas Lessio 10-10-20 (BM #29)
Strome at the top is impressive and RNH had a strong close to his season. Couturier's flaws are not in the math, so we have to assume it's foot speed or failure to launch when the going gets rough. Landeskog remains an intertesting player.
Defensemen
- Ryan Murphy 10-21-31 (BM #7)
- Dougie Hamilton 4-17-21 (BM #5)
- Nathan Beaulieu 4-12-16 (BM #13)
- Duncan Siemens 2-13-15 (BM #11)
- David Musil 2-8-19 (BM #27)
Murphy is crazy good by the slide rule, and the rumble on Hamilton is growing as we get closer to the draft. The two WHL kids have abilities defensively that impact their ranking miles more than their offense.
The system works. It just does. Here are some names from past drafts with their NHLE and their actual numbers the following season:
- Patrick Kane: 26-36-62 (ACTUAL: 82gp, 21-51-72)
- Sam Gagner: 16-39-55 (ACTUAL: 79gp, 13-36-49)
- David Perron 13-14-27 (ACTUAL: 62gp, 13-14-27)
- Steven Stamkos 23-19-42 (ACTUAL: 79gp, 23-23-46)
- Drew Doughty 6-23-29 (ACTUAL: 81gp, 6-21-27)
- Mikael Boedker 12-17-29 (ACTUAL: 78gp, 11-17-28)
- Josh Bailey 11-24-35 (ACTUAL: 68gp, 7-18-25)
- John Tavares 25-21-46 (ACTUAL: 69gp, 18-18-36)
- Matt Duchene 13-21-34 (ACTUAL: 81gp, 24-31-55)
- Evander Kane 19-20-39 (ACTUAL: 66gp, 14-12-26)
- Ryan O'Reilly 6-18-24 (ACTUAL: 81gp, 8-18-26)
- Taylor Hall 17-29-46 (ACTUAL: 65gp, 22-20-42)
Hmmm. To me COuturier was projecting 10 points ahead of RNH.
ReplyDelete(CHL)
Ah yes. The disparity between the QJMHL and WHL in the Desjardins ratings.
ReplyDeletehow can we say the math works when 50% of the numbers from the kane draft are 20-40% off?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf games played was taken into account, replaced with a scoring rate per game, then some of these comparisons would be off.. (with the player further surpassing expectations in most cases, but with others it comes out about even)
ReplyDeleteWow, Duchene killed the expectations..
The system works. It just does. Here are some names from past drafts with their NHLE and their actual numbers the following season:"
ReplyDeleteYou know LT, you keep sating that but it really is pretty leaky.
Kane, for example outperformed his NHLE by 16 percent. Over the course of a career, that's a huge difference.
On the other hand, Gagner underperformed his expectation by 11 percent (and continues to do so.)
Matt Duchene is a striking example of how "dartboardish" this stat is...by outperforming Gabe's projection by 38 percent.
You could likely get a more accurate projection from the Magic 8 Ball or asking a crusty old guy who "saw him good."
Math doesn't work here...too many variables...what was Jeff Skinner's NHLE?
Bet you a beer it wasn't even close.
Raterc...what my epiglottis does every time LT brings up this stat.
I see garg has beat me to it.
ReplyDeleteHe was "foryma"
It is numbers with an error of 30% or something. I remember Gabe saying that on the show
ReplyDeleteA stat with that much deviation isn't useful.
ReplyDeleteIt's noise.
Come on, it's at least a weather forecast.
ReplyDeleteThat's about right.
ReplyDeleteIt's " bablyettl"
Man oh man. Tambellini phones up Stu to ask him about Teubert in the Penner trade. Stu says "We don't NEED to make a trade."
ReplyDeleteClassic.
Ribs: Was it Sather he was talking to at the end there? I wonder which deal they had set up with the Rangers (if true)?
ReplyDeleteDoes somebody have a link to all the Oil Changes? I watched the first, I think, four, but would like to see the rest.
ReplyDeleteIt sure sounded like it was Sather who he was talking to. I don't recall hearing too many rumours coming from the Rangers on deadline day, though. Were we that close to losing Penner and Hemsky on the same day?
ReplyDeleteOil change episodes here
ReplyDeletehttp://oilers.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=65827
Steve: episodes 3, 4 and 5 appear to be available on the front page of the Oilers site currently.
ReplyDeleteOil Change link...Here
ReplyDeleteThanks, all.
ReplyDeleteRibs: That's what I was wondering. I don't know the Rangers needs, but they seem well set on D so it must have been a forward.
ReplyDeleteAnd it was after Penner was dealt, so maybe.
I am not an advanced analytics guy but the list cited by Lowetide is astonishingly accurate, a year later, new coach, new teammates. i think it is a very helpful tool
ReplyDeleteOnce I saw DSF was stridently down on it as a tool, I feel much better in my first Impression
Sorry, that was Lowe talking to Stu about the Penner trade.
ReplyDeleteThe Magic Gabe-ball on the Oilers' future "Outlook Not so Good."
ReplyDeleteIf Stu was telling Lowbellini that we don't need to make a trade...........LISTEN !!!!!!
ReplyDeleteIt was also interesting how they fumbles letting Penner know about the trade before it was on TV. Communication still a problem or is that just how it works sometimes on a fast paced deadline day?
ReplyDeleteWhat was weird is that they KEPT IT IN! I mean, if you've made a mistake but you control the final cut why on earth include that?
ReplyDeleteHah, yes. Mind boggling.
ReplyDeleteLT : Mutiny!
ReplyDeleteI'm just watching episode four now (I'd only seen the first three, as it turns out), and, speaking of things they'd probably like back, it portrays Penner in an awfully flattering light (on the ice).
ReplyDeletewell DSF
ReplyDeleteI think it is a very good tool and it definitely works. How you wish to see it, i dont really care
LT
ReplyDeleteI think there is something wrong with Duchene/Tavares/O Rielley numbers
Or am i missing something?
Other hindsight highlight of episode 4: Renney giving a speech after a 4-1 loss, saying "You are here because we want you here. We want you here because we believe that we can win with you." Camera pans to players' faces as they listen to it.
ReplyDeleteFirst up: Zach Stortini.
SumOil said...
ReplyDeletewell DSF
I think it is a very good tool and it definitely works. How you wish to see it, i dont really care
Good for you.
Measuring how far we are from..the sun with a tape measure works too....unless you have a a more sophisticated method,
Fill yer boots.
Measuring how far we are from..the sun with a tape measure works too
ReplyDeleteUm, no it doesn't.
Sum Oil: Fixed. Thanks for that, I grabbed it from a previous post and must have missed the last few games of that season.
ReplyDeleteBlogger "Steve Smith" said...
ReplyDeleteMeasuring how far we are from..the sun with a tape measure works too
Um, no it doesn't.
Perhaps that was my point :)
Steve Smith: THE line of this latest episode came from Penner after he was traded. He was leaving Rexall and had to hurry, someone said get out of his way or he'll run you over (or some such) and Penner said something to the effect of "I don't hit on the ice but out here things are different."
ReplyDeleteFunny guy.
Perhaps that was my point :)
ReplyDeleteIf your point is habitually the opposite of what you say, I've been selling you short.
DSF
ReplyDeleteWhaaat?
The two are not even comparable. One is a prediction and other is a measurement!
.,SumOil said...
ReplyDeleteDSF
Whaaat?
The two are not even comparable. One is a prediction and other is a measurement!
Stumbling around between an elegant solution...and a best guess is just silly.
There's no math here.
I get the impression that Lombardi offered up Teubert rather than Tambellini asking for him. I'm concerned that it seemed like none of the guys in that room knew anything about Teubert and were going back to reports they had on him from his draft year and U18 tournament. This worries me because the Oilers apparently were unaware of Teubert's struggles since turning pro. I haven't been a fan of the current regime's moves with regards to pro players and this did not help.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if this is the same thing that happened when we traded Smyth to NYI. Snow says "Nilsson and O'Marra" and Lowe scrambles back to check scouting reports from their draft years, ignoring their struggles since then.
My sense of Oil Change is that the Oilers had set the final terms of what they required of Lombardi for Hemsky and for Penner.
ReplyDeleteSchenn was in the conditions for Hemsky, which made the Hemsky trade improbable.
The extra conditional 3rd round draft pick was in the conditions for Penner (in addition to Teubert and the 1st), and Lombardi was reluctant on the extra pick.
Lombardi finally relented on the extra pick, called Tambellini, and said they would do the Penner deal...hence Tambellini's "It's Penner."
TSN seemed to have the deal almost instantly before anyone in the room had a chance to talk to Penner. Dreger and MacKenzie are good.
Five assets!
ReplyDeleteGreat if you're playing monopoly, but there's only 22 slots on the roster. Some of those assets need to be LT's Real NHL players.
Like that cheeseburger from MB.
A 20, a 40, and Colton for the AHL. Dennis was out of his mind, no wonder.
Tambo bargains like I do, and that ain't very damn well. It's not everyone's strong suit. He needs some bullshit and some bluster, but he's a straight-on guy. Should find a prick to work the deals for him, a lawyer with a big mouth and small ears.
Moved on to the most recent one now, which has Vandermeer playing some of the best hockey of his career.
ReplyDeleteI generally like him, but if that's an accurate assessment somebody should probably have been fired for that $2.3 million contract.
Some of the spin doctoring that goes down on Oil Change is just fucking blatant. Anytime they show one of the talk radio guys saying something, for example.
ReplyDeleteThe episode before this one was particularly horrendous for that.
I see DSF's point though. You could just say 40 points is the expected production of the top five picks and I'd probably be as good as the NHLE stats.
ReplyDeleteJust diminish the points the further you go in the draft.
It basically just says
ReplyDeleteWith less junior points, comes less NHL points off the bat.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMoved on to the most recent one now, which has Vandermeer playing some of the best hockey of his career.
ReplyDeleteI generally like him, but if that's an accurate assessment somebody should probably have been fired for that $2.3 million contract.
Well, technically the guy responsible for the signing was fired; it just took a while (about 2.5 years).
That's the scary thing about numbers LT, they can be manipulated any way you so choose.
ReplyDeleteMartin Marincin
YTD: 67GP 14-42-56 -12
MAR: 8GP 1-3-4 -8
MAR (excluding MAR19): 0-1-1 -8.
Seriously, I'm worried about this one. He's gotta tone down the Grebeshkov/MAB in his game next year.
LT: I want some best case for a player. For me Desjardins key is not production out of junior it is production at Age 22.
ReplyDeleteDesjardins curves are consistent. Based on Birth of player you can extrapolate the Age 22 value on the curve.
Plus players tend to produce at a slightly lower goal scoring rate than junior. Give me the 40 % or better guys please.
Courtier Dec 92 NHLE is .5 + .6 = .56
.56 X 1.73 = .97ppg
.37G/.63A 30G 50A
Huberdeau june 93 is .5 + .18 = .68
.68 X 1.55 = 1.05ppg
.41G/.59A 35G 51A
Zach Phillips Oct 92 .5 + .2 = .52
.52 X 1.45 = .75ppg
.40g/.60a 25G 36A
Duffy March 93 .62 NHLE
.62 x 1.09 = .67ppg
.46G/.54A 25G 30A
Jurco Dec 92 NHLE .56
.56 x 1.04 = .58ppg
.55G/.45A 26G 22A
Strome jul 93 .7 NHLE
1.63 x .7 = 1.14
31g/69a 29G 63A
Prince Dec 92 .56 NHLE
.56 X 1.49 = .83ppg
28G/72A 19G 49A
Landeskog Nov 92 NHLE .54
.54 X 1.25 = .68PPG
.55G/.45A 30G 25A
puempel Jan 93 NHLE .58
.58 X 1.25 = .73PPG
.49G/.51A 29G 30A
Noesen Feb 93 NHLE .6
.6 X 1.13 = .7PPG
.44G/.56A 25G 30A
Khoklachev Sep 93 NHLE .75
.75 X 1.13 = .71PPG
.45g/.55A 26G 32A
Jenner jun 93 NHLE .7
.7 X 1.02 = .71PPG
.37G/.63A 22G 37A
Jensen Mar 93 Nhle .62
.62 X .97 = .6PPG
.50G/.50A 25G 25A
RNH APR 93 NHLE .64
.64 X 1.47 = .94PPG
.25G/.75A 19G 58A
BARTSCHI Oct 92 NHLE .52
.52 X 1.33 = .69PPG
.37G/.63A 21G 36A
RATTIE FEB 93 NHLE .6
.6 X 1.20 = .72PPG
.37G/.63A 22G 37A
St. Croix Apr 93 NHLE .64
.64 X 1.14 = .73PPG
.36G/.64A 22G 38A
Mcneil feb 93 NHLE .6
.6 X 1.11 = .66PPG
.39G/.61A 21G 33A
Give me Goals
Is it just me or is the concerning aspect of the math that all of the draft class project far below even a Sam Gagner?
ReplyDeleteNow I like Sam Ganger, but the depth of this draft is worse than I imagined if Gagner is well above the ceiling of this class.
schlnese: a Chinese dude with a schlong.
Jay:
ReplyDeleteYou forgot to include the LKCF (London Knight Correction Factor) in your assessment.
Studies have shown it's importance. See the case of Schremp, Rob.
That 40 point range coincides with Tavares, Stamkos and Duchene, too, so not entirely bad company...
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers have three possible strategies:
1. Take much needed skilled grit, and the top goal-scorer, but miss out on adding something top level up the middle of the ice, at either F or D, for the second year in a row--Landeskog.
2. Take a possible franchise Dman and a player who can likely step right into the line up, but whose recent year was his worst of his three adult league years-Larsson.
3. Take a very good but likely not elite C, considering their warts, and also not as likely to step right in as the other two choices--Couturier, RNH, or Strome. One of them might turn out to be elite but it is damn impossible to know right now which damn one that is. Can Stu?
I don't envy having first overall pick. In fact I would be very very tempted to trade down depending on what was offered. Drop 3 or 4 spots in the draft order for a high 2nd rounder?
It's like shots and shooting percentage. If the Magnificent Bastard's shooting percentage is expected to drop than have him take more shots while as much quality is on the Board as possible. In this draft isn't a 5, 20, 31, 36 better than a 1, 20, 31 in this draft?
Nothing to add to the thread, but when your word is "rauxi" you just have to post it. Dude could still be our best defenceman...and he's 50 years old.
ReplyDeleteWould LA take the first overall for Schenn?
ReplyDeleteIf so, would you do that deal?
@Spoiler: I sure wouldn't. I've seen Schenn twice and he was outstanding, and RNH five times and he was outstanding. Schenn may be the slightly more dominant player now. Difference is, Schenn is 20 months older.
ReplyDeleteextorso - my younger body, the one before the fat one
To expand slightly, first overalls generally make the jump to NHL right out of the draft. Schenn is TWO years past his draft and still in junior. He's chewing it up, but he Should be chewing it up.
ReplyDeleteBruce...
ReplyDeleteThe trade moves our development forward as Schenn has already spent the two years in development--an advantage which none of this year's picks will have.
I think the best thing about the last Oil Change was just how intelligent Morey Gare appeared to be.
ReplyDelete