Prospect Thread XIII
View Single Post
12-21-2012, 09:51 AM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Originally Posted by
I donít think the Canucks have been quite as bad at drafting as many of you claim.
One metric I think would be useful in determining a teamís long term scouting/developing success would be to see what their team of drafted players (along with undrafted discoveries) would look like. In theory a team that is average at this would have a full complement of players. I have based this roster on players that played a fair number of games (25+) in the NHL last season. Players with italics split their time with the AHL.
As you can see, the Canucks are about 4-6 players short of a full team. So they are below average. However, I think part of this is to do with Vancouverís lack of draft picks (they love to trade them away
Letís contrast this with what many consider a fairly good drafting team in Nashville:
As you can see, Nashville appears about average. They have a far superior defense and have the slight edge in goal, but the Canucks are the better team up front.
Letís look at the two teams drafting success between 1998 (Nashvilleís first draft) and 2009 (when the youngest NHL player of either of these teams was drafted):
First Round Picks: NAS - 7/12, VAN - 8/12
Second Round Picks: NAS - 5/17, VAN - 1/8
Third Round Picks: NAS - 1/17, VAN - 1/11
Remaining Rounds: NAS - 9/83, VAN - 3/59
Undrafted: NAS - 0, VAN - 2
Based on this it appears the teams are about the same at drafting first rounders. Both teams have been poor at selecting third rounders, but the Canucks have selected far less. In the later rounds Nashville outperforms. However, if you include undrafted players in the statistics of the later rounds both teams are shooting around a respectable 10%. The one area where Nashville far exceeds Vancouver is when it comes to second round picks. However, they have selected over twice as many. Therefore, I do not believe Nashvilleís scouting/developing has been as superior to Vancouverís as many would claim (although it has been better for sure). The discrepancy is also an issue of the number of draft picks.
I'm tired of looking back 14 years to make our drafting seem average.
Start your analysis after the Sedin's and it looks considerably worse, agreed?
We can talk about this discrepancy of picks, and while it's a factor it doesn't carry that much weight.
Look at the AHL roster of The Wolves and Admirals, for the most part Nashville's affiliate is almost ALL predator drafted players. And not players drafted 10-14 years ago, mostly within the last half dozen years.
They have more picks but they are at least finding more players that are ahl caliber than we are.
I don't think it's fair to say we're average and base it on the Sedin's. Look at us after 2003 and we're hella bad.
*edit* by quick glance nashville's ahl affiliate has over 15 predator drafted players on their roster.
The wolves has about 6 draftees and a bunch of hit and signings (for every lack/Tanev there's a Schneider/Sweatt.
Good first post though, definitely helps add context to the discussion.
Last edited by arsmaster: 12-21-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by arsmaster