Scouting, Statistics, and St. Louis
View Single Post
08-23-2012, 03:58 PM
Join Date: Nov 2007
Originally Posted by
This is largely true for major junior players (which is why Steve Sullivan's numbers are not impressive). But it's not at all true for NCAA players, who are playing against men several years older than them. There are no 22- and 23-year-old CHLers, but there are plenty of NCAA players of that age, and
that's why a 19-year-old NCAAer who produces is a viable prospect.
And of course, in St. Louis' first NCAA season he was 18. Still time to impress, apparently.
I am also well aware of the weaknesses inherent in my model, and you'll certainly grant me these. I am also, however, aware of its successes, which you will not admit to.
But the first eligible draft age is when a player is 17-18, not 19.Why a sophmore 19 year old in the NCAA does not get drafted while a 19 year old + CHL or European player gets drafted is not strictly a question of talent but a question of signability. The 19 year old CHL player or the European drafted in June could be in a team's September training camp. St. Louis and Perrin were set on finishing their NCAA careers so NHL teams were not willing to wait.
Now if you look at the 1995 draft, the number and quality of post 6th round successes is much lower than the 1994 draft. So the scouts and NHL GMs obviously adapted.
At best you have enjoyed some success with St. Louis balanced against the listed bumps in the road that I provided. Do the same for some of the players like Lidstrom - older than the 1988 first overall pick Mike Modano or Daniel Alfredsson and you will add a few points to your scoreboard. Project some of the undrafted 2012 players and we'll see roughly 3 - 7 years down the road.
Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-23-2012 at
. Reason: addition
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Canadiens1958