HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Toronto Maple Leafs (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   Was Turning Down 4 1st Round Picks Wrong? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1122599)

30Rinks 02-29-2012 11:14 AM

Was Turning Down 4 1st Round Picks Wrong?
 
As we all know, 4 1st round picks were offerred to Burke at the deadline for...

Schenn
Kulemin
MacArthur
Grabovski

Each of these players are NHL regulars - but none of them are NHL Allstars (past) or likely in the future (with Grabo being the closest)

Taking a look at the numbers, what does the average 1st round pick produce?

Over the past 10 years...

2001:
5 NHL All Stars
16 NHL Regulars

2002:
5 NHL All Stars
21 NHL Regulars

2003:
14 NHL All Stars
25 NHL Regulars

2004:
3 NHL All Stars
16 NHL Regulars

2005:
4 NHL All Stars
18 NHL Regulars

2006:
4 NHL All Stars
19 NHL Regulars

2007:
2 NHL All Stars
15 NHL Regulars

2008:
4 NHL Allstars
17 NHL Regulars

2009:
2 NHL Allstars
11 NHL Regulars

2010:
2 NHL Allstars
10 NHL Regulars

2011:
4 NHL Regulars

We've got some outliers there, and the most recent years don't give time for development... but it does indicate a fairly strong calculation for the development of a 1st round pick.

If we average it out over 10 years, you have a 15% chance of drafting an NHL All Star. Yes, the 1st overall picks are far more likely then the 20th pick, but overall the distribution is fairly even after the first pick.

You have a 57% chance of drafting an NHL regular (defined by being someone that plays most games for their team).

Take out the last three years to give time for development and those numbers shoot up to 19.5% for an All Star & 70% for an NHL regular.

What does this tell us?

With 5 first round picks, the numbers tell us that the "10 year assets" will give

3.5 NHL Regulars, with 1 of them being an all star.

Again, just going by the percentages, you could trade those 4 players above for a VERY high likelihood of having an NHL all star within 10 years. Would you do that? Add that to our already bulging prospect pool and we could have an extremely talented club in 5 years.

Playoffs or no playoffs this year, burke himself says this team will get blown out - so why not build for the future? Ideally this happened 5 years ago, but what can you do.

For the record, I like cmac, but getting a 1st for him would have been a steal. Kuli is similar because of his down year - schenn and grabo, sure, the arguments for keeping them are there.

Want more justification? 9 of our current players were 1st round picks. Don't look at the fact that they suck, look at the fact that they are actual NHL players. 1st round picks, more often then not, make the NHL and have solid careers.

Just something to think about while we sit in our sorrows :cry:

Skyver 02-29-2012 11:16 AM

Seeing how Paul Gaustad got a 1st rounder, no, it was not a mistake. They were being cheap on the offer. Blowing up just for the sake of it is stupid.

Thee Implication 02-29-2012 11:16 AM

Some were conditional?

Woodman19 02-29-2012 11:17 AM

mid to late 1st round picks in this draft class does not hold that much value. For example, we could get those four 1st round picks and never equal the value we gave up for Kessel (2 first rounders) simply because of the draft class and location.

Giuseppe Sallo 02-29-2012 11:17 AM

Yes! Stock pile those picks. Could be a gem in one of those.

SeenSchenn2 02-29-2012 11:18 AM

For MacArthur definitely. Guy kills momentum every game.

Eb 02-29-2012 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleedsToronto (Post 45243641)
Some were conditional?

Mac's was. Who knows what the condition was. Probably a borderline team making the playoffs offered a first if they made the playoffs.

GhettoHockey 02-29-2012 11:19 AM

isnt it backwards logic tho? Were trading 4 players who are practically 1st round picks in respects to past stats the present and future improvement for 4 1st round picks just to gamble with it again why not stay with a core and go forward...

also

Burkes stategy of buy low sell high is working and we should not be a victim of that.. why sell low on kulemin he might actually pan out as a gritty forward... grabo and schenn are good choices going forward... MacArthur is expendable

Darkhorse1280 02-29-2012 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giuseppe Sallo (Post 45243739)
Yes! Stock pile those picks. Could be a gem in one of those.

And in another 5 years they may have a chance at being as good as the above.

:shakehead

mooseOAK* 02-29-2012 11:20 AM

If first round picks are being offered around that frequently then chances are the draft isn't very good.

Eb 02-29-2012 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkhorse1280 (Post 45243849)
And in another 5 years they may have a chance at being as good as the above.

:shakehead

Exactly, and the same people would be complaining about the "10 year rebuild"

Gatorade* 02-29-2012 11:22 AM

Burke never should have said he was offered four first round picks.

Mansfield 02-29-2012 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyver (Post 45243619)
Seeing how Paul Gaustad got a 1st rounder, no, it was not a mistake. They were being cheap on the offer. Blowing up just for the sake of it is stupid.

This. Keeping the players was the right choice.

Thee Implication 02-29-2012 11:23 AM

I guess I'd be pretty happy with not taking those picks. I find it pretty unlikely that they were in the top 15. Last year we drafted twice late, and those boys aren't going to be helping anytime soon

Nasty Nazem 02-29-2012 11:24 AM

We shouldn't trade Kule or Schenn for a 1st round pick because I think they're more valuable than that but as I was saying at the deadline, Leafs definitely should have traded MacArthur in this seller's market and maybe even Grabo. Leafs were falling and it was another tough schedule rest of the way and Colborne, Kadri needed some playing time.

But I can understand keeping Grabo if you feel you can re-sign him but MacArthur? Definitely should have traded him.

30Rinks 02-29-2012 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GhettoHockey (Post 45243833)
isnt it backwards logic tho? Were trading 4 players who are practically 1st round picks in respects to past stats the present and future improvement for 4 1st round picks just to gamble with it again why not stay with a core and go forward

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkhorse1280 (Post 45243849)
And in another 5 years they may have a chance at being as good as the above.

:shakehead

I get that logic - and understand it. Here's the thing though - you need to have a "moneyball" mindset for playoff success in this NHL.

You need 3-5 players playing on cheap, entry level contracts to produce.

If this team is 5 years away from making a legitimate stanley cup run, then this was the year to get those picks. Losing any of those 4 players would not make our team significantly worse (when you compare their replacements (frattin, kadri, colborne, franson/holzer).

Burke keeps chanting that we're building a contender and not a a team to get blown out - but why not put money where his mouth is? Are any of those 4 players core pieces moving on? Schenn was supposed to be, but how long do you wait? Grabo, sure, at the right price he could be your 2nd center.

MajorityRules* 02-29-2012 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mooseOAK (Post 45243865)
If first round picks are being offered around that frequently then chances are the draft isn't very good.

Sounds about right. At least now the same ol people will have something to point to and complain about a few years down the road.

30Rinks 02-29-2012 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eb (Post 45243897)
Exactly, and the same people would be complaining about the "10 year rebuild"

The percentages say that with 5 first round picks, you'd have an NHL allstar. None of those players are NHL allstars, and I'd trade all four for almost any all star.

IWD 02-29-2012 11:26 AM

I think in a deal for Grabovski, I'd have wanted more than just a first. The team would be, in essence, forcing us to concede on the playoffs. For MacArthur, absolutely. Kulemin, possibly. Schenn, no. Multiple picks and assets allows us to move up in the draft. Three firsts or two firsts and an asset to land us a top five pick that can become our new franchise center. Or target several players all throughout the first with deficiencies in their game that you think coaching and training can overcome.

Darkhorse1280 02-29-2012 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 30Rinks (Post 45244045)
I get that logic - and understand it. Here's the thing though - you need to have a "moneyball" mindset for playoff success in this NHL.

You need 3-5 players playing on cheap, entry level contracts to produce.

If this team is 5 years away from making a legitimate stanley cup run, then this was the year to get those picks. Losing any of those 4 players would not make our team significantly worse (when you compare their replacements (frattin, kadri, colborne, franson/holzer).

Burke keeps chanting that we're building a contender and not a a team to get blown out - but why not put money where his mouth is? Are any of those 4 players core pieces moving on? Schenn was supposed to be, but how long do you wait? Grabo, sure, at the right price he could be your 2nd center.


Most D-men usually don't hit their stride until their mid to late 20's. You wait as long as it takes. There's no doubt in my mind that Schenn will be a wrecking ball for us out there, but people have to be patient with the process.

Joseppi 02-29-2012 11:28 AM

I'd recommend taking a look over this article if you want to get an idea of the value of a draft pick. It was written in 2009 and encompasses the 1994-2004 drafts.

http://www.tsn.ca/columnists/scott_cullen/?id=267960

Thee Implication 02-29-2012 11:28 AM

The other thing is how can we be certain four different teams offered us each a 1st? It could have very well been one team that offered a first for one of the following players

Woodman19 02-29-2012 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nasty Nazem (Post 45244039)
We shouldn't trade Kule or Schenn for a 1st round pick because I think they're more valuable than that but as I was saying at the deadline, Leafs definitely should have traded MacArthur in this seller's market and maybe even Grabo. Leafs were falling and it was another tough schedule rest of the way and Colborne, Kadri needed some playing time.

But I can understand keeping Grabo if you feel you can re-sign him but MacArthur? Definitely should have traded him.

Agreed, with the way things have gone with this organization you would think Burke would play it safe and move at minimum Grabovsky for a 1st + prospect instead of risking him bailing on us in the off season and lose a massive piece that he will no doubt use up assets to replace.

ACC1224 02-29-2012 11:29 AM

How do we know that these picks were offered? Has Burke confirmed?

Stephen 02-29-2012 11:30 AM

Outside of Grabs all those deals could be revisited later if necessary. I think they should have fire saled it, but if this group fails you get a great pick and Wilson gets canned.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.