HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

What is your definition of a very good draft?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-01-2004, 09:14 PM
  #1
HOZ
Registered User
 
HOZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 650
vCash: 500
What is your definition of a good draft?

Beyond the obvious of having homerun Mario Lemieux pick. What would call a good a draft?

I have to admit there are levels of goodness but for me a good draft would be...

One that, within 1-2 years of the draft, at least one player picked is able to play in the NHL and be productive. Scoring, defensively, back-up, role-player, whatever.

What do you think?

HOZ is offline  
Old
07-01-2004, 09:54 PM
  #2
Lowetide
Registered User
 
Lowetide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,281
vCash: 500
In the 90s, your avatar would have made a great SNL skit: Barry Fraser has had a bad year scouting, let's let Tounces draft!

HollyG has mentioned in the past that 2 NHLers in a single season is considered a solid draft. Her definition is the one that makes the most sense to me.

Lowetide is offline  
Old
07-01-2004, 10:19 PM
  #3
mackdogs*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Van, left coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowetide
In the 90s, your avatar would have made a great SNL skit: Barry Fraser has had a bad year scouting, let's let Tounces draft!

HollyG has mentioned in the past that 2 NHLers in a single season is considered a solid draft. Her definition is the one that makes the most sense to me.
2 players per draft would make a solid average but could be hard for a team like the Leafs this year who didn't pick until the 90th spot.

I'd break it down statistically into rounds. Say 25% of your first round picks should make the NHL, 15% of second round picks, 10% in the 3rd round... etc. The numbers are not exact but you get the gist. There's only one exception in my mind though, the #1 overall pick should always make it. It's like the freebie on a bingo card.

mackdogs* is offline  
Old
07-01-2004, 10:21 PM
  #4
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackdogs
There's only one exception in my mind though, the #1 overall pick should always make it. It's like the freebie on a bingo card.
I'd go a step farther and say top 5 picks...

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-01-2004, 10:28 PM
  #5
BrooklynCanuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: I ated the purple berries, they taste like burning
Posts: 3,152
vCash: 500
A good draft is made by getting the player you want in the last possible spot you can get him in. I've never been a fan of backward looking analysis.

If you take a player that would be available several picks later, that is poor asset management. Asset management is what the draft is all about.

BrooklynCanuck is offline  
Old
07-01-2004, 10:31 PM
  #6
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynCanuck
If you take a player that would be available several picks later, that is poor asset management. Asset management is what the draft is all about.
Interesting... but how do you know if a guy would have been available several picks later?

I don't think you can look immediately after a draft and determine it a success... you can be up or down on it, but to reall determine if it was a success you need to see how the players turn out.

If you pick a guy at 5 who was ranked 66 and he turns into a first liner, you've done good.... regardless of where you might have been able to get him.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-01-2004, 11:46 PM
  #7
The Rage
Registered User
 
The Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Stamford Bridge
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynCanuck
A good draft is made by getting the player you want in the last possible spot you can get him in. I've never been a fan of backward looking analysis.
I think your definition only applies to the actual preformance on draft day. IMO, the stuff that comes before is far more important. Personally, I think macdogs has it right, because he takes into account both getting quality, and where you are exactly drafting.

The Rage is offline  
Old
07-02-2004, 01:04 AM
  #8
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
I believe it is a matter of getting enough from a draft to equal one star player. I have a draft report on my website and it essentially goes with this:

1 Star = 1 Solid Player + 1 Journeyman = 2 Journeymen + 1 Borderliners = 1 Journeyman + 2 Borderliners + 2 or so Cups of Coffee

My definitions worked like so:

Hall of Fame level (grade A+ / score 600)

We know who these guys are, their accomplishments speak for themselves. While Hall of Fame players are often called 'superstars', this is actually quite limiting. A Hall of Fame player can also be a player who has been a 'star' long enough, and consistently enough, to earn the universal respect of the hockey world. Kevin Lowe only has one remarkable statistic on his Hall of Fame resume - the number 6 - which is the number of Stanley Cup rings he earned in his underrated, and brilliant, career.

Kevin Lowe, Mark Messier, Glenn Anderson, Paul Coffey, Jari Kurri, Grant Fuhr


Star level (grade A / score 300)

Star caliber players have excelled, literally excelled, at their position or role on the team. However, they have never done enough to be considered one of THE elite players at the position. Players that get this rating don't always have to have amazing point totals; Guy Carboneau never had great point totals but he did win a whack of Stanley Cups and trophy hardware, enough in fact that he could be Hall of Fame material - let alone a 'star'. Brendan Shanahan will be hard pressed to get in the Hall, as will Doug Weight, but they are both 'star' caliber players.

Andy Moog, Esa Tikkanen


Solid level (grade B / score 150)

Never quite gaining 'star' status, a 'solid' NHL player is welcome on any NHL team. Their contribution(s) to their team’s - whether from talent (think Slava Kozlov) or desire (think McSorley – pre-hatchet work) - is generally not in question. They have produced enough, long enough, to be considered an asset of some worth. Note that there are two additional sub-classes of 'solid' players - high-level 'journeymen' who have incredible longevity (a Van Allen type) and those 'star' players who don't have the longevity (think Poddubny).

Walt Poddubny, Steve Smith, Jeff Beukeboom, Kelly Buchberger, Shaun Van Allen, Shjon Podein, Martin Rucinsky, Kirk Maltby, Jason Arnott, Miroslav Satan, Ryan Smith, Tom Poti, Mike Comrie


Journeyman level (grade C / score 90)

No NHL team can survive without the role-players on the team; someone has to do the dirty work. They are 'solid' players in their own right but never achieve the higher rating for one of two reasons: they never played enough games or they never really rose above the 4th line/#6 defenseman status they had. Where a player like Grier will probably attain a 'solid' player ranking (given a few more years), a player like Dowd will be hard pressed to ever be considered more than a 'journeyman' (even though playing with Gaborik may obfuscate the issue).

Marc Habshied, Todd Ewen, Brad Werenka, Geoff Smith, Josef Beranek, Anatoli Semenov, Tyler Wright, Georges Laraque, Boyd Devereaux, Shawn Horcoff


Borderline level (grade D / score 30)

Players who never fulfilled their potential, and ultimately, frittered away their NHL career. Some players in this category could have had one, or even two, remarkable seasons - they just never put it all together for any real length of time. 'Borderline' also describes players in the NHL right now who have careers in a state of flux - will they pan out, or not? Consider Jimmy Carson - a great rookie (L.A.), a decent sophomore (Edm.) and a lackluster career (everywhere). Too talented to be a 'journeyman', never a 'star' and not around long enough to be a 'solid' player.

Jaroslav Pouzar, Raimo Summanen, Francois Leroux, Peter White, David Oliver, David Vyborny, Mike Watt, Ladislav Benysek, Steve Kelly, Jussi Markannen, Ales Pisa


Coffee level (grade E / score 00)

As in 'Cup of Coffee'. This is the guy who shows up for a few games as an injury fill-in but is sent right back down when expendable. No impact at all on the major leagues (as a player at least).

Jim Playfair, Selmar Odelein, Daryl Reaugh, Scott Metcalfe, Dan Currie, David Haas, Jim Ennis, Davis Payne, Darcy Martini, Kelly Fairchild, Joe Hulbig, Ralph Intranuovo, Joaquin Gage, Nick Stajduhar, Brad Norton, Ilja Byakin, Jason Bonsignore, Mike Minard, Matthieu Descoteaux, Chris Hajt, Michel Reisen, Kari Haakana


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.