Ryan Murphy can rush the puck. Smooth skating, good decisions, elusive. He's a special player. I'm not certain what his NHL career looks like or who really to compare him to, but by eye and by math this young man is special.
Of the 8 kids we're talking about at the top of the draft, the two truly unique teenagers are Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Ryan Murphy.
Yesterday, I interviewed Kirk Luedeke from Bruins Draft Watch on the Nation Radio Show. At the end of the interview I asked him who the Bruins would take at #9. The response was that Boston was all over Murphy but there's a great deal of certainty that a team ahead of Boston is very strong on him too.
Ryan Murphy has an enormous future.
- Kirk Luedeke, Bruins Draft Watch: The most skilled prospect at the defense position in the entire 2011 draft, and you can make the case that he could be the most talented player overall. A 5+ skater on the 1-5 scale; explosive acceleration, dynamic top speed with extra separation gear. A master of his edges; can cut and turn on a dime and shake would-be forecheckers with ease. When he revs it up through the neutral zone, few can slow him down.
- NHL Central Scouting's Chris Edwards: "Ryan's work on the power play is outstanding, He sees the ice very well and is creative, [has] excellent passing ability and a great shot that he gets through to the net. (He's) also an excellent all-round skater. He's got real good mobility. He's a bit of a gambler. He does move the puck well, but he's going to have to concentrate on making good plays."
- Kitchener Rangers head coach Steve Spott: "He’s like no one else in this league. You can’t get to him, you can’t hit him. He’s a kid that’s slippery, his vision is second to none, his hockey sense is second to none. He can skate and he’s got a rocket. He’s got all the intangibles to be an all-star not only in this league, but the National Hockey League."
- Redline Report Scouting Report at the Top Prospects Game: Showed off how dynamic he can be with the puck on his stick. Wheels easily out of his own end, and if you let him build up a head of steam through the neutral zone, it’s all over. He can go end-to-end and roast even top-notch defenders. Terrific foot and hand speed. Won every race to loose pucks. Tried to play physical and step up on bigger guys, but unsurprisingly got knocked around quite a bit.
Either he'l be something unique, or he'l be a powered-up MAB.
ReplyDeleteI think this is, outside of the need for a 1C, is the Oilers most pressing need. These offensive top flight D men are a rarity in the NHL, and they tend to play their entire career with one team. They're nearly impossible to acquire through trade in their prime and my comp for him is Oiler Killer version 1.0, Mr. Zubov. Great defensive D men and good defensive D men have a solid gap between them, but these types of top flight offensive D have miles of separation between them and good-strong offensive guys. Trade Hemmer plus, for the chance to get RNH and Murphy. The Oilers Power Play Coach has the easiest job on Earth for the next 7 years. Hall, RNH, Eberle, Omark, and Murphy. Forget about it. Set up men, trigger men, creative men, and cerebral prowess in spades. GET IT DONE TAMBO!!!! Oilers will be scary up a man and impossible to defend against as players like that don't need to rely on 2 set plays that make a power play easy to shut down. They read, react and score; period.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTrade Hemmer plus, for the chance to get RNH and Murphy.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how and why people are anxious to give away NHL level players like Gilbert and Hemsky for a chance at another "lottery ticket".
I like the sounds of another high-end prospect as much as the next guy, and believe me, Murphy is intriguing, but we've got so few players that are both experienced and have the "wide range of skills" that Lowetide refers to (Hemsky, Horcoff, Gilbert, Whitney...and that's it), I can't see how dealing either 83 or 77 makes sense if there's any interest in contending for a playoff berth anytime in the next three seasons.
Then again, that might be the plan. Total scorched earth. Personally, I don't think it has to be this way, I'm not convinced following the "80's blueprint" will work in the 2010's under a salary cap, and there's no guarantee that "building by being crappy for years" will work (for every Pittsburgh or Washington, there's a Florida or NY Islanders).
I'd rather see a couple more playoff games in Rexall place before the Oil "head downtown", thank you very much.
It's interesting to hear that you are high on the kid LT. There has been such a push from most people recently for the mountain-sized dmen that for me Murphy has seemed to have been writen off from an Oilers perspective. There is certainly a great deal of worry in my mind about how much his size will impact his ability to play at the next level. If he is limited by his size, is selecting him at that position (top 10) worth it?
ReplyDeleteIf the scouts are convinced the offense will translate, does that make his downside a more skilled MAB - a 3rd pairing pp specialist? Maybe average 25 pts/year? And upside might be someone in the rafalski/visnovski tree who averages 50+pts/year on 2nd D? Maybe 1st D with the right partner?
If that's actually the projection, I can understand the hype for the top 10. The question then becomes is he a player that the Oilers would actually select if they could? Or would he be Parise 2011?
HBomb: Its the same people that think we won the Penner deal. We'll be chasing the next Penner around for awhile. This is the type of org that robs Peter to pay Paul. There's no happy medium here.
ReplyDeleteAs for Ryan Murphy, dynamic Dman. Just grabs the puck and goes, but for a team that drafts him, better have some defensively responsible wingers, otherwise it will be feast and famine.
GM's would do well to review this Lowetide post regarding a study of previous draft picks prior to trading at the draft:
ReplyDeletehttp://lowetide.blogspot.com/2010/05/start.html
For ALL draft picks, there is only a 21% chance that they will have a decent NHL career with the majority of those being pluggers. Those odds would be much worse if you take out the first 10 picks of the draft with the chance of a draft pick turning into an impact player becoming quite dismal. For picks 5-10 in most drafts, we can cross our fingers for an impact player knowing that the odds are against them. After pick 10, we should mostly just be hoping for some picks to turn into pluggers to fill out our a bottom six knowing that a fair number of them won't even have meaningful NHL careers.
It seems at draft time, every player in the first three rounds is made out to be a future superstar. The cold reality says otherwise. As I think Schitzo noted in the previous thread, the smart GM's play the hype, especially to the "rebuilders", selling them hope in exchange for real NHL players at the draft. The Bruins trade for Horton for essentially #15-OV was a great example last year. This year it might very well be one of the most talented RW's in the game...Hemsky, for some draft pick who will likely never achieve Hemsky's level of success and skill at the NHL level. But we get younger, and cheaper, and the never ending cycle continues because, after all, we are a 30th place team, so we find hope more valuable than the high end talent we already have right underneath our noses.
Ashley: It always depends on how you draft.
ReplyDeleteIf you spend that pick on a 6''3 kid with +90 points you have 90% it's going to be at least a good NHL player.
If you spend that pick on a guy with a guy who's got 4+ points under his GP it's in the 5% range.
All depends on what's available.
Same for D-man being riskier. Odds game.
Paul Coffey was a great player, but he was the most expendible piece of the dynasty. He was the first to go when Sather began being forced by money considerations to choose.
ReplyDeleteThe Bruins have the luxury of taking Murphy. He fills a desperate need, and they have Chara, a big physical team, and two very good NHL goaltenders.
The Oilers have two centres, two defensemen, and one goaltender, and are a small unphysical team. Murphy would be a foolish indulgence.
Building blocks first. Cherry on top later.
The plan should be RNH, and work a miracle to get #4 out of NJ to get Larsson.
ReplyDeleteRNH and Larsson, RNH and Hamilton, RNH and Zibanejad/MacNeill/Sheifele...NOT RNH and Murphy.
Ashley - the argument for shopping Hemsky in order to move up is due to injuries and only having one year left. Asset management: if Hemsky can't play or isn't gonna sign, and Magnificant Bastard sees the possibility of gold around picks 7-10, then a trade makes a degree of sense. Simples.
ReplyDeleteGlasgow Oil
The handling of Mr. Murphy will show how far teams have come in terms of offensive defencemen. The handling and treatment of this type of player has, for so many years, been utterly pathetic. They've been ruined by unintelligent coaches who cannot see their skill and how it can be applied to winning hockey games.
ReplyDeleteThis holds true for both truly great players such as Paul Coffey and very talented players such as Marc-Andre Bergeron (who could have and should have been refined into an excellent NHLer).
I suppose I shouldn't say unintelligent coaches; I should say coaches who are incredibly closed-minded.
ReplyDeleteKind of like NFL coaches being able to conceive of how to utilize a successful college QB who doesn't play in a "pro-style" offence.
this guys is supposed to be better than ellis and fowler.
ReplyDeletecount me as one who saw fowler "very good" this year.
if larsson is gone in top 3, i don't think this kid makes it past NJ.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGlasgow:
ReplyDeleteA fair point, although Hemsky has indicated in the press he would like to stay. If that is true, I think we're crazy to trade him. You can't guarantee talent like Hemsky on any draftboard save the first handful of picks. If he wants to leave, I wouldn't trade him for any draft pick below #5 or equivalent package thereof.
ashley,
ReplyDeletehow do you pay hemsky moving forward? if we pay him 4m to play 40 games, he's really an 8m player.
and how do you predict that the injuries haven't affected his top end?
hemsky's fragility is a huge "warning sign" moving forward. oiler's need players who can suit up for 80.
what if we sign hemmer and he averages 50 games a year with a 20% decrease by year due to injury? strome's NHl equivalency is basically the same as what hemmer actually produced last year.
hemmer is easily my favourite oiler but signing him long term for real cash is a bit like what the flames did with bork...or, dare i say, what we did with souray.
if we can go hemsky for stome/murphy straight across i think we really need to consider it.
i think hall's comment that "hemsky is hard to play with" needs to be considered too.
LT,
ReplyDeleteIt might be a good idea to make the "Murphy" label a little more specific. It's a pretty common name and there's a decent chance there's going to be two Murphy's selected in the first round. Kind of like using "Hamilton" as a tag unto itself: Curtis, Dougie, Wacey, or Balsilly.
You're selling Larsson way too short.
ReplyDeleteHe's vastly better than D. Hamilton or Murphy, yet he's not touted so highly due to a lack of CHL numbers, despite playing in a tougher league with grown men.
I almost wish that Larsson had come to Canada last season, then this #1 discussion would be over.
Given a trade to move up to the top 8, how is RNH and Murphy is a better pair to build with than Larsson and one of Couturier or Strome?
@rick, because RNH is the next gretzky!!! ;)
ReplyDeleteJfry:
ReplyDeleteHall said Hemsky is "tricky" to play with, but the comment was taken out of context. It was part of a compliment to the skilled forward in the prime of his career.
The concern for Hemsky's injuries is a good point, but I think overstated. Hemsky's injuries have all been fairly mild, things that players play through all the time and that he would have played through at a high level if the games had any meaning. When you're bee-lining for a 30th place finish, and half the 6 real NHL'ers on your team are already on the IR, your motivation to play through pain is limited. When the games are meaningful, Hemsky is not only there, but he elevates his game.
I think you have actually made an argument in favour of signing Hemsky since his injury problems could be used to leverage another value contract extension...as you say $4 million/year. That's good value for an exciting ppg player. On the other hand, his trade value is muted because of the perceived fragility, and you may only get 50 cents on the dollar.
It's a tough sell to a rebuilding team's fans, I realize. We want shiny new things with *unlimited* potential. We have contempt and exhaustive criticism for the valuable talent we have had for years.
You know, it's funny. Every year we mull over the list and then settle on a guy we believe would be perfect for the Oilers. I think it's Couturier, Rick thinks it's Larsson and many think it's RNH.
ReplyDeleteMy memory is such that I can't remember my home address, but it'll be interesting to read through these threads a few years from now.
We can't know for certain, but someone is going to be brilliant 5 years from now. :-)
LT: Absolutely, I was just going over my draft stuff from last year, its good stuff to look, see what went right, see what went wrong. Thing about is, its a continual education process.
ReplyDeletePut me down in teh Couturier camp, I"m really hoping I'm wrong as I'm sure the Oilers are going with RNH. This pick is awfully crucial to the rebuild.
Skates like Orr, shoot like Souray, has hair like Bourque.
ReplyDeleteCan't go wrong.
Lol. I wish that was Bourque's shot and Souray's hair.
ReplyDeleteThe Oil should trade Gilbert to CBJ for their 8th pick and then choose Murphy. Because it wouldn't be redundant at all.
ReplyDeletetiolamic - tio's lame move
Rick: His production translated into CHL points was something like 45.
ReplyDeleteBetting on d-men seems like the lotto.
I know Gilbert is a laughing stock for Oiler fans, but we're all agreed he's a good player right.
ReplyDeleteRight?
Yep.
ReplyDeleteI can rationalize trading Hemsky before I can Gilbert. If Hemmer wants big money to stay 5 mill+ and he continues down this unfortunate path of season ending injuries, I think a decent return on him could be justified. Gilbert has a decent contract and he is a solid NHL d-man who is durable as hell. I'm not calling for a trade of Hemsky but he would be out the door before Gilbert if I had the reins and had to make Sophie's Choice.
LT: no question. I'd happily deal Hemsky before Gilbert (assuming it came to that). Our D is thin enough and Gilbert is remarkably reliable on the health front.
ReplyDeleteBut speaking of drafting, here's a question I've been mulling over: when you're sitting at #1 overall, what is the appropriate balance between drafting for upside and drafting for reliability? For example, many RNH boosters have thrown around words like Sakic and Datsyuk, while detractors put him as a poor man's Sam Gagner. In contrast, most of the projections for Larsson seem to be of a good, but perhaps not elite defenceman - a number 2 or 3 type.
Assuming this is true (perhaps a risky assumption, but there you go), is it better to get a good player who will certainly have a role or a potentially great player who can flame out?
Cactus: Defenceman are way more risky than forwards.
ReplyDeleteI'd trade Gilbert before Hemsky.
Why? Because it's way easier to get a Gilbert on the cheap than a Hemsky.
There's a bunch of serviceable guys in his range of skills traded for a meager pick at the deadline, or leftover in august. Just gotta be sharp.
I am presently split between the Larsson and the RNH camp. Leaning towards Larsson...
ReplyDeleteLarsson having played against men since 16 yo in a very good league blows me away. Considering the minutes he was handed, I can see why his PP time was given away to an older, more one-dimensional player. Being able to play those minutes at his age while bothered with a groin injury is a real testament to the player he is. Against 19 yos in the WJCs, he was dominant and showed off his true offense. While he might never be a 60 point guy (and he might be), a 45-55 point guy with all the other things he does is exceptional.
RNH seems to be a "tools pick" by the scouts. From what I've read, they think he's a better player than what his numbers indicate. Speed, shot, pass, vision, sense, creativity, defence are all +skills. He's missing a bit of size and strength, but has shown an ability to put on weight, and can beat you with brains in any case. He's likely to show up at camp about 10-15 lbs. heavier than he played last year and is one player where his first ten league games are gonna make or break whether he stays up.
Landeskog is interesting because he s cut from the same mold as Richards, Toews, Messier, Iginla, Wendell Clark--offensively, a bigger tougher Ryan Smyth. While he might not have upside talent, just like Smytty before him, these tough direct guys win you hockey games and playoff series. They battle in front of the net, fight along the walls, scrap with anyone who takes liberties. It's tough to put a value or ranking on something like that. If he played centre and showed better ability to distribute the puck, he might be #1.
As it is, there's too much possibility he turns out like Ethan Moreau to take him in the top 3 IMO.
Couturier is another one where there's enough concern about his initial steps and skating grace that the worry is like a Doug Wickenheiser the offense might not translate. The issues are mechanical and the feeling is his issues can be fixed, but they aren't at the moment and it leaves a question mark on how good a skater he will end up being. Scouts don't talk about his vision or creativity in the same terms as RNH. So on a scorecard of skills he would be behind Hopkins despite producing as well offensively. Much better actually, on goals and EV scoring. Throw in the mono issue and I have a tough time nicking SC too much for his play this year, but it is clear that he doesn't have the offensive ability of a Hall and would be a poor match at 1C.
That's the bugger with RNH.
ReplyDeleteIf he's so excellent in all those aspects of the game, how come he struggled at ES? How come he couldn't beat a guy with mono at the WJC? How come he couldn't outscore him?
I'd have no problem to pick him if his scoring was indeed superior, but here it's not, neither was his defense or his size.
It's betting a whole lot of money on the eyes.
spOILer: I disagree, I think Couturier would be a better complement to Hall and Eberle than RNH would be. I know I'm in the minority here, its something that I strongly feel.
ReplyDelete//But speaking of drafting, here's a question I've been mulling over: when you're sitting at #1 overall, what is the appropriate balance between drafting for upside and drafting for reliability?//
ReplyDeleteIf you don't have the face of your franchise (i.e. Taylor Hall, Stamkos, etc) you draft for upside potential.
The question is what do you do when you already have Taylor Hall or Stamkos.
RNH is #1 because the scouts believe he (and probably now Huberdeau) is the guy with the upside potential to be elite 1st line centre, with the downside being a 2nd line centre. They must have taken stopwatches to Rebels games and have accurate TOI information.
The tipping point this year between RNH and Larsson may be that there are supposedly many top defensemen next year, and this is their best shot at a potential elite centre, whereas they have another shot an elite D next year.
//If he's so excellent in all those aspects of the game, how come he struggled at ES?//
ReplyDelete"Struggled" is an unfair characterization.
The ES goals and points per game is imperfect information. It tells you that you need the actual even strength TOI.
The problem with drafting and/or finding good players is that if they aren't rotting-off-the-vines obviously good that you just have to trade them for the newer model of magic beans.
ReplyDeleteThe day awaits when there are faults with the 4, 14 and 91's and another patch of grass smells all the more greener and it certainly won't be Lowe's fault for wanting to visit there!
Godot: Assuming he'd be the only one pinched would be risky.
ReplyDeleteEven then we know such PP production won't translate. No one in the NHL does that. Exept some elite guys who were in a bad season, and they were all giants.
Dennis:
ReplyDeleteIt's only a matter of time for the beloved trio. As a mother, I liken it to children. They arrive innocent and helpless, and as a parent you are enamoured and can only see unlimited potential. As time goes on, they disappoint you in one way, then another (and more to come for me since mine aren't close to being teenagers yet) because, after all, they are human beings, and can't possibly live up to the perfect potential you have prescribed for them at birth. Only with kids, you adjust your expectations, and love them just the same and learn to enjoy the other ways they can surprise you with their talents and abilities. With an actual NHL player on the Oilers, you learn to despise them in spite of obvious talent, and trade them for half price.
Hemsky is that dream child who has exceeded all expectations with his only failing an history of relatively minor injuries.
If we don't want Hemsky on our NHL team, then who do we want?
FPB: You're right about Hemsky vs. Gilbert in a vacuum - much harder to find a nearly point-per-game winger than a 3-4 possession D-man like Gilbert. My problem is that I'm increasingly concerned that Hemsky is descending into chronic injury status - I'm worried about those shoulders holding up. As it stands, if you had to resign Hemsky today, what would you give him? I ask, because I honestly don't know and it's because of that that I'm at least receptive to trading him for the right thing (though I'd prefer to hold on to him and play it out).
ReplyDeleteGodot: I think I'm with you on the upside issue. I hear the Ohlund comp with Larsson and it concerns me. The Oilers desperately need more help on D, but if at best we're going to get a #2 or 3 in Larsson, that seems like something to get in FA or the 2nd round.
I'm not a scout and we don't have the numbers necessary to be proper amateur prognosticators, so I'm increasingly compelled by the fact that RNH seems to have the #1 ranking from just about everyone. Given the vast differences in the rankings of 2-10, you'd think at least a few reliable sources would judge another player to be a better selection than RNH, but that's not happening. Without some compelling evidence to the contrary, at what point does he not simply become the obvious choice?
Cactus:
ReplyDeleteSince 1970 90% of the 6''3 + guys who recorded at least 90 points in the CHL went on to have at least one 70 points season in the NHL. To me numbers tells he's the obvious choice.
Just to please some ''Scout guys'' on Couturier's skating
Dave Cameron ''What is good about him, is that he just doesn't have any glaring weaknesses''
Craig Button ''Couturier's skating is very powerful''.
I would give Hemsky in the 5,5M$ range, a contract similar to Plekanec and Kesler. At worst what happens is that he ends up on the LTIR and we spend the cash elsewhere. To me the odds of him getting injured + Not finding a replacement is much much lower than finding a man his caliber with the N8 pick. If you can stray away the N2-3 selections and get Larsson + Couturier I say that's fine, because big guys have incredible conversion rates, so i'm down with that.
Note that if you go back to the 1970 you are including the high scoring 80s in your sample. Not useful.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGogliano: Note that if you go back to 1970, you include the low scoring 1990's. O
ReplyDeleteDurp.
I compared with the 6''1 to 5''11 guys and it drops to 65%.
Your comment isn't very useful.
And I only included the high scoring 70's and 80's.
So according to that if would drop down even further. And only 1 guy had this 70 points season in the 80's. The others were all 90's-00's
If Hemsky wants to sign in Edmonton, the Oilers would be wise to get his name on a contract. However, I'm not certain Hemsky's willing to sign up for a rebuild that should turn the corner about the time he turns 40 and I sell the house and move to Phoenix.
ReplyDeleteChanging subjects, I'm wathcing my first Washington Nationals game today and good lord they're frustrating. They've had 90 men on against SD and haven't scored a run yet!
Argh.
LT: I've switched to the Royals. At least they seem to have recently get how to draft.
ReplyDeleteThe Nationals destroyed the Expos' brilliant procurement department.
I remember once at spring training, I saw a guy bobble two pop-ups in centerfield, and get K'd on pitches hitting the ground near the plate. And he made the starting lineup that year.
They just fill in with old uninterested guys instead of young guns ready to play. Bullocks.
FPB: Yeah, they seem like a sad bunch. Did they trade that 3b Zimmerman? I didn't see him today, always liked watching him.
ReplyDeleteLT: Nope. He's still alive. He may be taking a break for today.
ReplyDeleteThey just try to fill the void of an inept development system with high price UFA's (Soriano, Dunn, Werth).
And their pitchers are horrible. You just aren't supposed to put Livan Hernandez in your rotation at that age... c'mon.
I remember when the Expos used to roll out a good arm every damn night. Steve Rogers, Bill Gullickson, Sanderson and they always had guys who could spot start like Schatzader. Remember Charlie Lea? Crap I miss that team.
ReplyDeleteNats win, and all day it was FP Santangelo doing the analysis. Man, remember FP?
ReplyDeleteLT: Not old enough to know those guys.
ReplyDeleteThe best I had were an in shape Herdandez, Javier Vasquez, promising Tony Armas Jr and Zach Day, plus 20 games of Bartolo Colon.
John Patterson used to be promising.
The Expos could at least consistently pitch and oft-times not be able to hit.
ReplyDeleteThe Nats can do neither.
Strausberg was a star but now he's on the comeback trail but this Zimmerman guy seems like he has a bit of a clue; I know I've won a couple of under bets when he's pitching.
Overall, though, I can't take to that team or any other.
The expos always pulled a 25-30 Hr's guy out of absolutely nowhere.
ReplyDeleteBatista, Wilkerson, Lee, Sledge... was mad.
Anyone remember little Wilton Guerrero?
F.P. Santangelo, he was a beauty, just a pint-sized guy that you felt obliged to cheer for. Pure hustle. Little talent, but pure hustle. Thats more in my era of the Expos as opposed to the early '80s.
ReplyDeletefbv: Wil Cordero was another one. Sean Berry and Mike Lansing were pretty good hitters for the 'Spos that didn't hit a lick anywhere else. David Segui was another one too.
ReplyDeleteWho was that shithead manager who showed up in a jeep and MacArthur pipe?
ReplyDeleteLT: A guy who didn't last long.
ReplyDeleteRemember old Felipe used to eat his weight in sunflower seeds.
I was listening to Tencer in that online show he has with Rob Brown at the end of a late season game and he came out and felt he didn't think Hemsky was signing. Surprised me he said it, doesn't usually make pot stirring comments like that.
ReplyDeleteDan Shatzader. I used to like how Dave Van Horner said his name.
Here is an interesting clip from ESPN on Gary Carter and his fight with brain cancer.
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?categoryid=2494144&id=6627999
Tom Runnels.
ReplyDeleteRight before he got kicked to the curb and replaced by Alou.
He's the guy who switched Wallach to 1st so Brett Barberie could take over 3rd. Poor kid, never saw such jittery feets on a 3b.
Anyroads, I second FBP on Vasquez/Hernandez/Colon. That was a mean 1-2-3 punch. The 94 rotation was, of course, mental. But the one from 95 wasn't bad either.
I just don't follow baseball anymore. Now, the Jays are attempting to make inroads in the Montreal market. I hope they rot in hell.
Tom Runnells in '92; Alou came on in mid-May I believe and we'd have a team to be mostly proud of from 92-97; save the post scorched-earth year of '95.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of FP, Segui and Lansing, I just finished Torre's book and it came about to getting into Clemens and Kirk Radomski and the steriods saga - all hands were on them but anyway - and did some digging around and Segui was a trendsetter in that area.
Fuck, even Tim Laker took the plunge which is fucking hysterical in hindsight.
Note: Expos hauled Berry out of KC and the fucker was a nice littler hitter.
Not great range though and had a terrible hitting stance and fielded on his tippy-toes.
And when they dealt him for Dave Veres it was the first time I really took note of the on-again off-again nature of the relief pitcher.
I wasn't a huge Shane Andrews guy in terms of replacing Berry at 3B but when you looked at Veres stats from '95 you couldn't helped but be excited about that deal.
These days I would hate it and talk about how much easier it would be to find a Veres than a Berry:)
I remember running around Calgary airport the day Zane Smith got traded from Montreal. I remember being disappointed in the return but maybe a week later it was announced that Moises was also in the deal. Beauty.
ReplyDeleteWhen Zane Smith came to the Expos, part of the trade was a former first rounder named Kevin Dean. One winter he was playing in the Mexican league (this was when he was still an Expo prospect) and I was at a game he was supposed to play in. I was a little in the bag and when Dean wasn't part of the starting lineup i raced down to the home dugout, motioned the manager over and gave him shit for not playing Dean.
Buddy listened patiently and then told me Dean had bolted the team a few days earlier. :-)
So then I wandered over to where they were selling baseball uniforms and talked this American guy out of over-spending for an Indians uniform. The guy selling the uniforms said some very rude things to me and in hindsight I was being an ass but demon liquor does stuff to a person.
On Tom Runnells, here is the wiki blurb on the army outfit.
ReplyDelete"Succeeding the very popular Buck Rodgers, he had trouble establishing his credibility with the media and the team. He was General Manager Dave Dombrowski's hand-picked man but failed to replicate his minor league success as the Expos finished the 1991 season in last place for the first time since 1976. In what became his defining moment, he made an entrance at spring training in 1992 dressed in marine fatigues, apparently trying to channel the spirit of General Norman Schwartzkopf."
Lol ...stormin Norman he thought he was.
LT: Must have been quite a bust. Because when I search on google, all I get is (In order) A trumpestist, A gay pornstar, and a beer league hockey player.
ReplyDeleteI must admit I totally forgot how good the '95 rotation was.
ReplyDeleteWhich brings me to more thoughts:
- how did Butch Henry do it? and I never read a thing about him because it was pre-internet but was there any guy easier to root for?
- the pen was bad that year and how much did I hate Jeff Shaw? and how flummoxed was I when he went on to become a great closer.
- I had high hopes for Tavo Alvarez.
- easy to forget that Carlos Perez missing that entire '96 season.
- easy to remember a Sat night TSN game from Atlanta that I was settling in for only to hear that Carlos had attempted a backdoor slider with a local lady;)
Who was the pitcher , who used to fidget all the time and talk to himself, think he played for Atlanta as well. He used to have this big softball slowpitch style overhand curveball that went maybe 65-60 mph?
ReplyDeleteMark Fidrych talked to the ball and was a bit out there but that was 35 years ago. You're probably talking about the one and only Pascual Perez, who once missed a start because he couldn't find the off ramp to the ballpark.
ReplyDeleteHis HOME ballpark. :-)
I remember there was a pitcher for the Expos who only had one hand. That was something spectacular.
ReplyDeleteAhh yes, Pascuel Perez, thanks.....what a character...... The arc he got on that slow curve was something else.
ReplyDeleteSorry LT, I got a little tunnelled in there today.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Washington Nationals, I couldn't even tell you who's on first since I know nothing of baseball (it is baseball, right?).
You are on your own gentlemen. ;-)
DangerMan,
ReplyDeleteI think the idea is to find a centre for Hall who plays at the same speed and creates at the same level. It sounds like the scouts feel RNH is more that guy. Its kind of like would you play Ovechkin with Backstrom or Arnott? I can understand the dissenting opinion given the line's size, but I think in that case, Eberle is the one you sub out. My one problem with RNH is he's a leftie and a rightie like SC would be a better servicer for Hall. But if Hall is always going to be 3 strides ahead of his centre who maybe doen't have the vision to find the passing lanes, how much service will he get?
Spoiler: Backstrom... that guy is monster strong. No way you compare that fella with RNH.
ReplyDeleteBackstrom or Arnott... Gagner or Staal...
3 Strides behind? C'mon. That doesn't have the vision? How did he score so many points than? Magic Tricks?
And if he's so oh damn slow why did he finish in the leaders in SH scoring?
ReplyDeleteNice to see Oilers have welcomed back Kevin Lowe's brother.
ReplyDeleteWith all of the trainers in the world to pick from, it's pretty safe to assume Oilers are getting the top man in the business.
Welcome back!
Ken Lowe is not coming back to his old job. He went to the Oilers with a proposal to something entirely different...i.e. coordinate training and information transfer with CHL teams and trainers.
ReplyDeleteFPB... This act of responding to every single post that doesn' t pick SC AS #1 is getting tiresome. Trust me, everyone is well aware of your position on the issue. You are not furthering the conversation. You are repeating it.
ReplyDeleteGodot10
ReplyDeleteDo not think Ken Lowe, Stafford or Kulchinsky should have been let go. Our problem was identifying NHL level talent. Not the guys running the training room.
But Ken Lowe is hired back"........ why? again?
Forgot that is completely in keeping with the 2 separate Jim Matheson puff pieces on Keegan Lowe. Understand one article. 2nd article kinda makes Matheson look like an Oiler shill.
Seriously Dude.......... just because Klowe wants to justify the Oilers selecting his son in anything other than the 5th round does not mean you should give away whatever credibility you retain
In honour of LT's Top 30 and the two week countdown to the draft, I've decided to try my hand at my own list. I've seen most of these guys on TV and video and have read a ton about each. That said, I'm no scout, but what the hell...
ReplyDeleteMy Top 30:
This ranking is based on a few principles. First, that elite in any given tool is given the most weight. Hockey history is made by players who are elite in one area. If they can also skate, most of the other tools can be brought to at least Good level. Skill and upside rule. As LT is fond of saying, scoring is the toughest thing to do in the NHL.
Second, I evaluate skill with the understanding that numbers don't necessarily translate well (up or down) and that equivalencies give us a bell curve of possibilities, not a precise translation. Context is important and largely either anecdotal or missing completely.
Third, given equal levels of ability the nod is given to size. And finally, I don't nick as hard as some for injuries, if there is a good idea of the player hiding behind the hurt.
I also like to tier. The first six players all have elite tools. They have the potential for first line or first pairing.
The comps for the first tiers are based mostly on expected level of offense and defense the player will deliver. Style is secondary. My understanding is that comps are given in pairs, reflecting a player's low end and top end.
This is not a mock draft.
1. Larsson. Has elite vision, sense and pass. Is a plus skater, has a hard low slapper, a wrister with juice, good size and very good strength. Has a little more edge than most Swede blueliners, hits well but relies on smart angles more than the big hits. Because he's proven himself against men, I have him ahead of RNH -- there's close to the same upside with less risk. At the very least he's Adam Foote, and at the best Lidstrom.
ReplyDelete2. Hopkins. Also has elite vision, sense, puck skills and pass. Quick release wrister with accuracy. Doesn't use the slapper much. Excellent skater. Poor size and strength. That's the other big reason why I have him behind Larsson. Larsson has more tools with the same elite upside and another reason for less downside. Durability might be an issue. Tim Connolly to Adam Oates, maybe Forsberg if he gains size and strength.
3. Murphy. Much the same as RNH has all the elite offensive skills, along with double plus skating but lacks even good size and strength. Unfortunately his position relies far more on these abilities than 1C. There's a ton of upside here, but an almost equal amount of risk. Still, he's gonna get his reps at the NHL level, even if it is just as a PP specialist. Hawgood to Coffey.
4. Hamilton. He is elite on the basis that few his size can skate that well. We are not talking Hal Gill or Willie Mitchell, we are talking Bouwmeester, Jovanovski, Pronger level with respect to this combination. And like those three he can skate for an eternity. Passes, moves the puck, well. Scholastic player of the year, he's a smart man. Work ethic is outstanding. His release can use some improvement, but otherwise has a good shot. Puck skills, defensive reactions can still be a bit clumsy but he has grown a ton in the past year. Offence might be a bit slight, presenting some risk, but should be above the Gill level. Brewer to Chara.
5. Brodin. Brings the most elite hockey sense out of any of the top 6. I think it is dangerous to under ratspe this ability. Off the charts anticipation. Is a plus plus skater. Very good passer. Has only average size and strength. It's tough to tell how much offence he will generate, but he had 4 assists without PP time and that's a good number for the SEL. With his brains and passing ability he should be at least a solid point producer. His sense and skating make him about as much a can't miss pick out of the top 3 as can be had. Hejda to Suter. Zubov, if his shot develops.
6. Landeskog. Elite grit, will, determination if that can be said. Cut from the pisscutter mold. Has the size and strength to back it up. Reigns in the dirty areas. Will score a lot of ugly goals. Should be worth his weight in gold during the playoffs. Is above average in most offensive skills but excellent in none and thus has the most risk to deliver the least offense out of the top tier. Moreau to Smyth.
The next tier represents very good players, mostly with second line potential, but with a some chance to be top line or pairing.
ReplyDelete7. Couturier. The best of the rest. Excellent size and strength, above average puck skills, vision and sense, poor agility and starts. Already understands the defensive side of the game and is dominant at the dot. Perfect second line guy like a Staal, Kesler, Koivu, Arnott. Can play first line minutes but will likely lose some offence in the bigger, faster league. Gratton to Arnott.
8. Huberdeau. Gets the nod ahead of Strome on the basis of speed, goal scoring ability and big game poise. I rank them about the same but give Huberdeau a slight nod in those areas. Has an unusual loping stride coming from a speed-skating background as a teen. His versatility at wing and centre is useful, but he's more likely to be a winger in the Bigs. Creative and very opportunistic. Peverley to G. Anderson.
9. Strome. Came out of nowhere so might have a little more bust risk than the rest of this tier. He has good wheels but his top gear isn't quite as good as the good skaters above him. This could change with some work. Excellent puck skills, handling. Has an accurate shot but it isn't a real ripper. There are some questions on whether his offence will translate despite his gaudy boxcars. Has leader qualities and drive so I would hate to bet against him. Marchant to Drury.
10. Zibanejad. His numbers are poorer than MPS' and he doesn't have the same elite speed, but plays a grittier, more physical game, initiates contact far more and has a little better natural finish. Has that centre/winger versatility. Good motor/work rate. Plays a solid two way game for his age. Morrow to Hossa.
11. Klefbom. Skates like Doughty with a hammer of a slap shot. Has NHL size. Loves to hit. If he had the hockey sense and defensive abilities of his partner Brodin, he would be ranked with Larsson. But when thinking about Larsson's alleged lack of offence, keep in mind he scored at about the same rate as this kid, who is touted as an offensive threat. Right now Klefbom is a little one dimensional with decision-making issues to rate top pairing. Bit of a boom-bust in that regard. MAB to Jovanovski.
After that, things fall off a little again as the bust factor goes up. Since these prospects now start to have decent bust potential, I'll discontinue the bookend comps.
ReplyDelete12. Bartschi. Lacks the high end skating to slot higher. Has excellent puck skills. Could be a little more physically engaged but smart enough to find time and space. His shot is good enough that the other issues could be overlooked. Solid 2nd line winger upside.
13. Beaulieu. Has above average size, but lacks the offence to be a true top pairing option. Pretty well-rounded and ranks above average or average in most areas. Tends to over complicate things and sense is a concern. Graded ahead of Morrow as he plays a tougher game. Decent chance to be second pairing stalwart.
14. Morrow. Another well-rounded Dman who probably doesn't quite have the high end offence. A little small but makes up for it with good positioning. Bit of a long back swing on his shot. Better skater than Beaulieu, but strength and reach will be a concern till he proves otherwise.
16. McNeill. Had a weak U18s where a good showing might have vaulted him to the head of this group. Probably has the least downside risk out of this tier, but lacks some of the high end offensive potential. If he makes it he could be a useful Jarret Stoll type at the least and maybe as much as a Richards or Toews.
17. Siemens. Another guy who lacks offensive potential but because he can skate and bring size and strength and meanness has stuff teams will value. Has more polish to his game than Oleksiak right now so gets the nod in ranking. Not as mean or dependable defensively as a Teubert type but probably the best straight shutdown prospect available.
18. Oleksiak. Here sheerly on physical attributes, which are certainly elite. He's a project though and no one really knows what they're getting with this player. He looks like he will skate well enough to at least play a Hal Gill role and those guys are always in demand due to their scarcity.
We're starting to get into guys who are either boom-bust or have shown limited upside. Toolsy guys who haven't put it together or offensive guys with serious drawbacks to their game, like commitment and size. Once you get to this point in the draft, it's choose your poison.
ReplyDelete19. Jurco. A game breaker with great moves and creativity. Reminds of guys like Afinogenov who have all the skill but lack sense and defensive willingness. If he learns to play without the puck and to battle in his own end, could be a real steal.
20. Puempel. Elite shot and it's hard to push these guys down the list, but he is pretty average in every other area. If he had the compete levelof Skinner, he would surely rank higher. Injury didn't help him out much this year.
21. Scheifele. All around player who took a step forward at the U18s. Nothing exceptional but does everything well. Should have low bust potential but trades it off with limited upside. Might be one of those guys who's a 3rd liner with scoring ability who can play up and down the line up. Needs to add strength.
22. Brett Ritchie. Prototypical power forward. Injury and playing on a mediocre team hurt his rankings on many lists. Excellent size and grit, a nose for the dirty areas along with a goal scorers hands. I have him ranked higher than most.
23. Saad. A toolsy guy who has yet to make it add up. But with his size and speed, there are plenty of teams who will take a chance on him and see what comes of it. Should be a solid 3rd line guy with 2nd line power forward potential and a lesser chance of flameout than the more talented forwards around him.
24. Jensen. Has more talent than the guys ahead of him in this tier but is inconsistent and seems to lack battle and drive. Battle and drive are what keep you in the NHL, so while I don't doubt Jensen will get his shot, he will need to find soemthing within himself to stick. Probably I would have nicked him more but he gets some leeway for adjusting to a new league.
25. Phillips. I might be nicking this guy too much for benefitting from Huberdeau, but we all know the dangers of drafting a kid too high when someone else is driving the bus. Very smart player with excellent hands and puck distribution but his skating is a weakness. 2nd liner C top end but could completely flame out.
26. Rattie. Talented but small, he's a perimeter player who might have dfficulty translating his game to the NHL level. He'll have a shot but the feeling is his skating needs to improve to be a top 6 guy at the Bigs. Screams tweener.
ReplyDelete27. Grimaldi. Similar to Rattie, almost as skilled but even smaller. Doesn't have the perimeter knock and is a better skater than Rattie and has phenomenal drive, but whether it is enough to overcome the physical deficiencies remains to be seen. He might end up as a Marchant with hands.
28. Connor Murphy. Had injury troubles all year but when he did play he was outstanding. Size and grittiness are the other concerns but is an excellent passer, skater, shooter. If he hadn't been so hurt there's a good chance he would've ended up Top 20. Durability is going to be a question.
29. Noesen. Player who's motor never stops. Forechecks like a demon and plays a smart two way game. Played without much team help and racked up great numbers considering. Some questions about his first couple of steps. Some questions about whether his offence comes more from work than skill. Should be a lock for a 3rd line role with 2nd line potential if he maintains the development curb.
30. Miller. Another toolsy guy who has struggled to put it all together. Had a great U18s which should get him into the first round. Interesting combination of skill, speed, and size with consistency and sense questions. Could be Kesler, could be Fraser.
Armia, Catenacci, Mayfield... guys like that fall into the 2nd because they look more like project types with too much bust potential.
Next weekend, I might attempt a mock draft.
Excellent stuff, spOILer. do you mind if I use it as a post?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLT, absolutely. Hopefully more people throw their hat in the ring.
ReplyDeleteSpoiler:
ReplyDeleteOut of curiousity.
Do you watch that many games or?
Well if the invitation is out there, might as well do something.
ReplyDeleteFPB, I watched every game I could that involved legit prospects, whether Canadian teams were involved or not. Tourneys, the CHL playoffs on the Shaw network, the videos that Luedeke and other throw up on the interwebs. Oh and we got the power to PVR at Xmas which helped greatly.
ReplyDeletePlease do a list too and put it out there!
I don't recommend doing it on your mobile though like I foolishly did.
LT, I will clean up my typos (like curb instead of curve) and email it to your radio show email, if that's cool.
spOILer: Cool. I'll delete for now and post it again when you send it.
ReplyDeleteSpoiler: Nice. Sorry if I'm an ass sometimes. I guess this all would be friendlier if we all were face to face.
ReplyDeleteI'm doing a top 10 now.
Umm, I wouldn't delete it just yet, as my only record exists here. I did it on my phone so don't have it saved. With the limited ability to edit quickly, it took me forever as the order evolved. I will copy it into a Word doc when I get home, some time later tonight, if that's cool.
ReplyDeleteSpoiler: No he deleted the post on his blog. Not yours.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who has a full time job, but has desires for scouting, PVR is your best friend.
ReplyDeleteOkay, whew.
ReplyDeleteA pure math point of view.
ReplyDeleteTop 10 prospects
N1. Sean Couturier: Skill, size and results have rarely missed in the draft. He was an absolute dominator at the junior level. His +62 and +55 in the two last seasons are witness of this. You could note a regression, but his starting G's save % went from ,933 to ,895, so it's in fact a bit of a progression. He was a lone man in that category, leading the team by almost 20. Put up good numbers in SH with 4-4-8. Had a mononucleosis that slowed him down during the season but still progressed in terms of scoring.
Junior comparable: Eric Staal
N2. Jonathan Huberdeau: He's probably the guy who's progression has been most notable as he made a 70 points jump in his junior season. But what is reassuring is, his first season playoffs, and this year's playoffs, which combined almost make 2 complete seasons for someone who's team missed the playoffs, and a far less notable rise in scoring. Is probably the best pure scorer in the draft. His ES scoring was amazing, the best in the whole crop. There's concern about his teammates' quality, but by the numbers he was clearly driving the bus. Played very well at the Memorial Cup.
Junior Comparable: Steven Stamkos
N3 Dougie Hamilton: The player who has rose the most in my mind. Notably for his growth spurt which made him go from 6''4, to 6''6. The number of defenseman with that size who score like this are immensely rare. In fact I'd bet that he would be mightily alone with Chris Pronger in that department. There's just too much there to pass at the N3 spot. One thing that sealed the deal was his playoff performances. Not that it's such a criteria, but it's extra games to see if the player can follow up. He did well even outperforming his season scoring. Should be the anchor of a defense, or at least a very serviceable giant defenseman.
Junior comparable: Chris Pronger (A bit under)
N4 Adam Larsson: Had the occasion to be the clear-cut number 1 of this draft, and originally looked like a generational talent. He was shifted offensively by older teammates Erixon and Rundblad. Still logged a lot of minutes with Skelleftea. Was injured a good part of the season. Even with regression still had a decent offensive year, stats comparable/better to recent top products from Sweden such as Hedman and Ekman-Larsson. His +- improved from -7 to 12 which denotes a defensive progression. Might not have the offensive potential initially suggested by his 16 years totals, but could very well end up as 40 point anchorman.
Junior Comparable: Kenny Jonsson
N5. Ryan Nugent-Hopkins: Probably the best passer in the whole draft. Has a flow of skill. Despite his disbalance of ES/PP scoring, he still put up some pretty good scoring, that would put him ahead of most other prospects anyway. Ahead of Strome because of the lesser gap between the two years. Math tend to suggest that steady production is more important than the progression (If two players end up the same). Had the lowest +- of the top forwards in the top 5. ES is really a concern due to his splits of ES/PP, and the fact that he had a red hot goaltender (,933) which probably inflated his +-. Still, it's hard to blame a player for producing on the PP if he does it right. Probably could do wonders for the Oilers PP. Seems to be agile from the half-wall. Seems like the most unstable player in the draft, but the upside is still there. Could become very interesting if he adds weight
Junior Comparable : Jason Spezza
(A bit under)
N6. Ryan Strome : Oh wow Ryan... how you complicate things. Strome is the living proof of how this draft is deep. When was the last time you could draft a 100 points kid with no size issue this late? Strome's biggest foul, is his immense progression. (Yes I said foul). He had a very lackluster first junior season, so it's without data, I think it's hard to assess if luck was in play or not. Still when you're the most successful player the Icedogs' franchise has seen, you're not that bad. Might have been a top 2 pick in a weaker draft. His obvious asset is playmaking, and unlike RNH he wasn't nicked for his ES scoring, which is a point for him. So one is nicked for progression and the other for lack of ES, I guess it comes down to which data you value the most.
ReplyDeleteJunior Comparable: Jason Spezza (Again a tad under)
N7. Gabriel Landeskog : As I went researching trough the hockeyDB an absolute insane number of times I remarked that only a infinitely small portion of players end up scoring over their full projected 70 games junior season, and most of them are late bloomers/late picks. Well gladly for Landeskog, his scoring proves to be just enough to still log as a 1st liner in the NHL. And I think he's the best bet to cover his draft year on the long run. He had the best ES/PP ratio in all of the top forwards from the CHL. He scores a lot which is a + for him. In the end he'l probably be a serviceable player who could turn in the top 6 for injuries at worst.
Junior Comparable: Dustin Brown
N8. Mika Zibanejad : One of the players who rised trough the rankings. His scoring and conditions were comparable to MPS' draft year. Doesn't have the same speed but has force in other areas. Data is less accessible, but since he played on a team with a lot of veterans, it's safe to say that he had limited view. Only played 26 games, but still managed to pot in 9 points, and 5 of them were goals which plays in his favor. Scored well in his previous Swedish Junior outings which bodes well for him.
Junior Comparable: MPS
N9. Jamieson Oleksiak : Probably the poster boy for upside in this draft. Is 6''7 with already 240 pounds on his frame. Is already a man at 17. Usually numbers don't like these kinds of players too much, nicked Mcilrath big time last year and ended up being on the right side of the fence. What really pushed Oleksiak into the top 10 is his production at the College level. Most of the guys his age are still playing in the USHL, but he was right away in the NCAA and had a decent production. It's production where some guys get drafted in the first round as forwards, and for a 17 years old defenseman, that is impressive. His downside is a lack of scoring in previous USHL outings which might indicate a bit of luck. If his team doesn't rush him into the pros and lets him develop his offence, he might be the next Chara.
Junior Comparable: Mike Komisarek (He had offense at one point!)
N10. Sven Bartschi : Surprise, surprise it's the swiss kid. Bartschi raised like a rocket in the records. He ended up shifting already drafted teammates Niedderreiter and Ross. Was the best man between him and Rattie. He gets major props for beating out top prospect Nino Nieddereiter to the race. He seemed like a guy who really helped propel Johansen to another level after he struggled in the first half. His foul is again, lack of record, as his swiss stats weren't all that great (Altough it's hard to judge at that point with Swiss leagues). Altough he was marvelous in the Hawks' long playoff run, which adds a bit in the track record department.
Junior Comparable: Bobby Ryan
Spoiler:
ReplyDeletebased on RNH EV PP production in junior.
1.53 X .63 = .96NHL @ 23.
78 points
44%EV 56%PP 34EVPT 44PPPT
He would have to get 3 more points than the average of the #1 PP points getter in the NHL the last 2 years (41) To maybe get his projected NHLE at 23.
8 better than the average of the top 5.
14 better than the average of the top 10.
What is interesting is these elite guys have a ratio of 60%EV and 40% PP. Most top 30 b y position are 2/3EV and 1/3PP.
So with a projected 34 EV points and the standard 60 40 rule we should expect 23 points. which makes him a 57 point guy at 23.
God for bid he should be 2/3 1/3 that would 51 points @23.
Can you explain to me how a 1.55PPG guy is going to be better than two 1.75 guys and two 2.00 guys?
Does that advance the discussion.
Cause looking at that it says he has a fat chance in hell delivering his expected nhle.
Thought i would look at a diffrent approach to RNH. It still says wasted #1.
All you guys who say he will be the PP savior. Are you sure?
If you answer yes please give your favorite flavour of Kool aid.
FPB, that was truly excellent, well done.
ReplyDeleteRicki, please note the philosophy in my ranking process and the effect that has on numbers. My ranking is more of a tools based list, informed by numbers, given that the numbers we have are limited, come sans context and only provide a range and not an exact spot.
ReplyDeleteWhat is freaky. when you go back post lockout. he will be good enough at age 23 to be in the same range as 06/07, 07/08, and 08/09, Horcoff.
ReplyDeleteGood thing we are going after a real #1 center.
Oh this just gets better!
Superb work by SpOILEr and FPB
ReplyDeleteGood job boys!!
@spOILer: I think #15 is missing.
ReplyDeleteVerification word: bulin FFS. I think it's a Russian word meanin drinkin to forget.
spoiler: My post was not about your work. I just take offence to the advance the process. visual review of a player may say stay away. but results count. See Thomas, Hacek.
ReplyDeletethere are those players who generate relative to unorthadox play as well as players who say #1 but do not translate.
I too am a draft junkie! give me the NFL, NHL, MLS, MLB drafts. pass on the nba. Never really considered it a team sport until tonight when dallas beat Miami.
Give me as many
1. numbers re performance and league trends.
2. Video.
3. Physical testing
4. family History
5. School History
to help me with my selection.
Martin mayhew the detroit GM who is quickly becoming a draft guru in the nfl. Says some key things.
Video highlights are the best of a player but the worst plays of a player tell you what you are really getting. Seing RNH get flipped like a rag dollin oil change was play #1, 50 more bad to go to know what we are getting. Draft bpa is allways the key. that is the BPA for structure you are running. Never draft for need. modify your picks accordingly.
I'l write 11-20 tomorrow. Starting with Puempel.
ReplyDeleteI'd be nice to keep the records and see which list comes on top.
Bruce, it's kind of like the Free Space in Bingo, lol. Caught it on the email to LT and added a 31 too in honour of the shame of finishin last.
ReplyDeleteOh and sorry for taking Larsson over RNH. It was pretty close to a coin toss, and I'm not sure my draft would read that way, in any case.
ReplyDeleteNallywad: why is this not a real word?
Hiring Ken Lowe, the president of Hockey Operations, and the young Oil King possibly getting drafted...it just doesn't get better than this - for Flames fans.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking it'd be cheaper to trade for Ellis than jockey into a position to draft Murphy and quite frankly I don't think there's much difference between the two.
ReplyDeleteReally not getting the love for Couturier at all. Be real surprising for me if he goes top 3. Larsson, RNH, and Huberdeau go before him if I'm a betting man and there's legitimate arguments for the kid going 5 - 8 after Landeskog, Murphy, Hamilton, and even Strome.
The QMJHL is a crapshoot outside of goalies when it comes to the draft and even thats been suspect the past few years. IMO the OHL and WHL are way up the list on the "what you draft is what you get" safe scale and are far better development leagues. I haven't done any indepth googling but I can't think of too many QM'ers that have really brought it outside of Crosby and Giroux the past few years unless someone wants to make an argument for Brassard, Kulikov, Perron, or Voracek.
I'm not sold on RNH myself and would prefer the Oilers go with Huberdeau, Landeskog, or even Larsson after trading down a spot or two for another asset, but I think I've already said that umpteen times.
So I've been reading the Bruins 2011 Draft watch top 50 series (just phenomenal, by the way: see them all here ) and I just got to #11. I honestly think this is the first time I've read Joe Morrow's name - can anyone more knowledgeable than me comment on him? The quoted praise from scouts is effusive, at the very least.
ReplyDeleteCabbiesmacker: The OHL and WHL have had the lowest conversion rate on top 10 picks of all leagues. Then comes the QJMHL and Europe.
ReplyDeleteFPB: The OHL and WHL have had the lowest conversion rate on top 10 picks of all leagues. Then comes the QJMHL and Europe.
ReplyDeleteHow far are you going back?
2010 - 0 drafted
2009 - 0 " "
2008 - 0 " "
2007 - 1 " "
2006 - 2 " "
3 total drafted in the top 10 in the past 5 years from the Q.
WHL - 14
OHL - 19
If NHL production by top 10's is the criteria it gets even worse for the Q over the past 5 years. They flat out have not produced anywhere near the number of picks nor the NHL production that the other two major leagues have.
But... But... Mario came from the Q!
ReplyDeleteCabbiesmacker: I said conversion rate, not prospects.
ReplyDeleteThe WHL and OHL indisputably produce more players, but they do not become automatically reliable for that.
McKenzie MacT watch...
ReplyDeleteHearing Paul MacLean and Ottawa Senators are in final stages of completing a deal for him to become the next head coach.
Also hearing unsuccessful candidates in Dallas have been told. Looks as though Texas (AHL) coach Glen Gulutzan is last man standing.
ReplyDeleteRetweet of EJ Hradek by Tencer...
ReplyDeleteThe Wild likely will announce their new coach by the end of the week. I expect Craig MacTavish will get that job.
FPB: The WHL and OHL indisputably produce more players, but they do not become automatically reliable for that.
ReplyDeleteI guess I took "conversion" as rate at which they became NHL worthy / produced at the NHL level. The past 5 years shows very little of either vs the other two leagues. I would argue Brassard/Voracek as MEH with some upside and Sheppard as BUSt with MEH upside. I'm only dealing recent history of course. Guy Lefleur was a fine enough player.
End point? Only Draft from the Q if you enjoy playing with fire or the kid's last name is Crosby.