HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Notices

Some Analysis on Getting a Top 3 Pick

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-08-2010, 06:10 PM
  #1
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,722
vCash: 500
Some Analysis on Getting a Top 3 Pick

Since this argument usually finds its way into most of the other threads, I figured what's one more? I threw some numbers around trying to find out just how bad you have to be to get into the top 2 or 3 picks in the draft.

Note: this includes information from the 2003/04 season & 2004 drafts through last year, not including the 2005 draft because that wasn't based on results, but rather a league-wide lottery.

Since 2004:

The average number of wins/points by the team that finished last in the league: 25 wins/65 points
The average number of wins/points by the team that finished 2nd to last in the league: 27 wins/66 points
The average number of wins/points by the team that finished 3rd to last in the league: 28.5 wins/69 points

Basis of comparison: Minnesota's WORST finish in this time period: 30 wins/83 points in 2003/04
Basis of comparison 2: Minnesota's WORST finish ever: 25 wins/68 points in 2000/01 (a team that prominently featured Scott Pellerin, Darby Hendrickson, Aaron Gavey and Stacey Roest). That finish was good enough for SIXTH worst that year (we selected Koivu).
Basis of comparison 3: Minnesota's 2nd WORST finish ever: 26 wins/73 points in 2001/02. That finish was good enough for EIGHTH worst that year (we selected PMB).
The thrill of having hockey back aside, does everybody remember how brutal those teams were?

If we were to average 61 points over this span (2003/04 - 2009/10) we would've picked:
4th in 2004 (bad enough to pick Andrew Ladd)
3rd in 2006 (Toews, Backstrom, Kessel available - not bad)
2nd in 2007 (or 3rd after Chi jumped over everybody; bad enough to take JVR or Turris)
1st in 2008 (last overall, Stamkos or Doughty; not a bad choice)
Tied-1st in 2009 (Tavares, Hedman or Duchene)
1st in 2010 (Hall or Seguin)

Naturally, if we averaged the 2nd worst record, our chances would diminish:
4th in 2004
4th in 2006
2nd/3rd in 2007
1st in 2008
Tied 2nd in 2009
2nd in 2010

My point is this, in order to ENSURE your place in the top 2 picks in the draft, you have to one of these 3 things:
1. Assemble a good team and DRASTICALLY underachieve
2. Assemble a good team and get obliterated by injuries
3. Assemble a historically bad team (one whose ceiling is 25 wins)

And, even if one of the above scenarios plays out, we would also have to get lucky in that, a) we don't overachieve, b) another team doesn't out-suck us, c) we don't get ****ed over in the lottery (like Philly did in 2007), d) we don't time it wrong and get a weak draft, and e) our GM/scouting doesn't **** up

Thoughts? Comments? Smart remarks? Did I just waste 2 hours or my life?

Dr Jan Itor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 06:30 PM
  #2
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,773
vCash: 500
You probably did waste two hours, but I'm not one to judge. It is true that there is no guarantee with tanking or finishing 30th other than you get what appears to be a good player. There's hope that your team ends up with the next generational player but that can also happen in other ways.

EDIT: Seriously though, it was a good read.

__________________
Blog: First Round Bust: A Cast of Thousands celebrating a rather dodgy track record of Minnesota Wild Drafting.

"Will beats skill when skill doesn't have enough will."
-Doug Woog
1974 1976 1979 2002 2003 2014?

Last edited by GopherState: 11-08-2010 at 08:18 PM.
GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 06:50 PM
  #3
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 21,203
vCash: 50
other ways being the league has another lockout year and we win a lotto pick? Or Bomber sees a seventeen year old skating around shooting rocks into an overturned trash barrel in Viyuysk while waiting for his train to get fixed on a development assignment and gets the scouting staff to fly him over for a look, discovering this kid can skate like Gaborik, hit like Ovechkin, reads the ice like Lidstrom, and shoots like Kovalchuk. He doesn't speak english so we sign him to a 15 year deal for $12 million dollars.

edit: speaking of doing poorly in a season...is it true we're on pace for 101 pts?

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 07:01 PM
  #4
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,189
vCash: 500
Interestingly the parity in the NHL is increasing such that 75 points would be 3rd-worst two out of the past three seasons. The really bad aren't quite as bad as before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Did I just waste 2 hours or my life?
Nooo, since you learned more about history that can help forecast the future.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 07:55 PM
  #5
Generic User
Dynamic as they come
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 6,549
vCash: 500
Backstrom, JVR, Stamkos or Doughty, Duchene, and a toss up between Hall and Seguin would've been pretty slick. I mean, 4 years straight of 1st or 2nd overall picks isn't unthinkable like you said. Pittsburgh happened to get crazy lucky in 2005 with Crosby. They had '03 #1 overall (Fleury (would've loved to have had multiple 1st round picks for that draft)), '04 #2 overall (Malkin), '05 #1 (Sid) and '06 #2 overall (Staal). God, look at the turn around that happened after that. But, knowing the Wild's scouts, they would've blown the picks, even at 1st or 2nd overall. Two hours well spent, sir. I enjoyed myself.

Generic User is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 08:08 PM
  #6
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Generic User View Post
Backstrom, JVR, Stamkos or Doughty, Duchene, and a toss up between Hall and Seguin would've been pretty slick. I mean, 4 years straight of 1st or 2nd overall picks isn't unthinkable like you said. Pittsburgh happened to get crazy lucky in 2005 with Crosby. They had '03 #1 overall (Fleury (would've loved to have had multiple 1st round picks for that draft)), '04 #2 overall (Malkin), '05 #1 (Sid) and '06 #2 overall (Staal). God, look at the turn around that happened after that. But, knowing the Wild's scouts, they would've blown the picks, even at 1st or 2nd overall. Two hours well spent, sir. I enjoyed myself.
And almost became the "Kansas City Penguins" in the process.

Dr Jan Itor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 09:13 PM
  #7
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 21,203
vCash: 50
well if we only lose 2500 season ticket holders for every year we don't make the playoffs from now on, we can hang on for a few years. Now if the number of people that don't show goes up by 150% after every non-playoff season we have how many seasons before the building is completely empty? less than three?

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2010, 11:31 PM
  #8
Generic User
Dynamic as they come
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 6,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rynryn View Post
well if we only lose 2500 season ticket holders for every year we don't make the playoffs from now on, we can hang on for a few years. Now if the number of people that don't show goes up by 150% after every non-playoff season we have how many seasons before the building is completely empty? less than three?
Ha. Is this old math or new math?

Generic User is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 06:26 AM
  #9
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,790
vCash: 500
Less fans in the stands = cheap tickets!

LOL.

Tanking isn't as hard as it looks. Go through 2/3 a season, end up towards the bottom of the league, then just start trading away your quality vets, play AHL kids instead, and the NHL will do the rest.

The trick is to pull it off without people thinking you are doing it intentionally. Don't tell me the Oilers didn't look around last year in February and say "screw it".

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 07:49 AM
  #10
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,417
vCash: 500
The numbers are skewed because of the charity point, but interesting nonetheless. Funny that people are so obsessed with us tanking this year even though we're top 10 right now...

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 08:09 AM
  #11
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,790
vCash: 500
Just because we've won three games doesn't change the fact that the Wild are complete horrible at producing offense in 5v5 hockey, and they have been that way since the beginning of time.

If this team is going to move forward, offensive firepower is needed. And there are a very limited ways to get that, because you can teach players to be more defensive, but you can't teach them how to have a goal scorers natural instincts.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 08:13 AM
  #12
BuddyMcCormick
Registered User
 
BuddyMcCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,873
vCash: 934
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
Just because we've won three games doesn't change the fact that the Wild are complete horrible at producing offense in 5v5 hockey, and they have been that way since the beginning of time.

If this team is going to move forward, offensive firepower is needed. And there are a very limited ways to get that, because you can teach players to be more defensive, but you can't teach them how to have a goal scorers natural instincts.
And just because we don't score 5 goals a night doesn't mean we can't be a winning team.

BuddyMcCormick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 08:26 AM
  #13
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinneWildSota View Post
And just because we don't score 5 goals a night doesn't mean we can't be a winning team.
Winning team does not mean stanley cup champion.

Take the most "defensive" team to win a Stanley cup in recent years: the 2007 Anaheim Ducks. That team was based on Pronger, Niedermayer, and Giguere.

And still, that team was stacked with offense. Selanne, Getzlaf, Perry, Penner, Kunitz, and McDonald were the top-6, plus a very productive in the playoffs checking line Pahlsson, Moen, and Rob Niermayer.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 08:35 AM
  #14
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,417
vCash: 500
We get it; you want the team to tank. You don't need to reiterate that point in every post.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 08:40 AM
  #15
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,790
vCash: 500
I actually don't want the team to tank.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 08:44 AM
  #16
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,790
vCash: 500
Just pointing out that it is important to think long-term and that 3 wins doesn't mean much, especially when you have the lowest shots in the league.

In fact, I've probably been one of the most consistent posters on these boards who believe that the Wild have a good shot at making the playoffs.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 10:11 AM
  #17
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,462
vCash: 50
Tanking is such a cop out. Worked out well for the Cleveland Cavs too didn't it? As a hockey guru friend of mine said about the Oilers:

"ya they are getting all these hot players right now, but once they are actually UFA's they'll be out of there quicker than you can say Lidstrom wins another Norris"

He has a point with this too. Ya, while you can get some of these amazing players...you need to start making the push to get better as time marches on. If you don't then they will just leave and go to a team that will pay them the same amount in a better area, or to a team that may get them a ring if they don't believe Minnesota can. I'm inclined to believe that while we could of had many of those players, most would of ejected as soon as they could.

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 02:01 PM
  #18
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,417
vCash: 500
This may or may not be helpful...

I went through the drafts from 1993-2005 and labeled each player drafted one of five categories:

Bust - never played meaningful time in the NHL
Call-up - played a very limited role in the NHL
Role Player - a couple seasons in the NHL
Quality - a good roster player with a solid NHL career
All Star - high end NHL player over many years
Elite - elite level talent (not necessarily generational)

*** note that I'm not a brilliant hockey mind that goes back many decades, so some of these guys are guesstimates and the lines are blurred, but you get the point

Pick RangeBustCall-upRole PlayerQualityAll StarElite
1st Overall0.0%0.0%7.1%28.6%28.6%35.7%
Top 30.0%2.4%2.4%38.1%28.6%28.6%
Lottery4.3%1.4%11.4%40.0%22.9%20.0%
Top 1011.7%6.6%19.0%35.8%16.1%10.9%
Top 1521.3%5.8%18.4%31.4%13.0%10.1%
Top 2023.5%7.6%19.9%29.2%11.6%8.3%
First Round26.2%8.5%19.9%28.0%11.1%6.2%
Second Round65.6%7.3%11.1%12.0%3.3%0.7%
Third Round72.4%6.5%11.7%8.5%0.5%0.5%
Rest85.7%3.3%5.2%4.3%1.2%0.4%

Cumulative (i.e. that level or better):

Pick RangeBustCall-upRole PlayerQualityAll StarElite
1st Overall100.0%100.0%100.0%92.9%64.3%35.7%
Top 3100.0%100.0%97.6%95.2%57.1%28.6%
Lottery100.0%95.7%94.3%82.9%42.9%20.0%
Top 10100.0%88.3%81.8%62.8%27.0%10.9%
Top 15100.0%78.7%72.9%54.6%23.2%10.1%
Top 20100.0%76.5%69.0%49.1%19.9%8.3%
First Round100.0%73.8%65.3%45.3%17.4%6.2%
Second Round100.0%34.4%27.1%16.0%4.0%0.7%
Third Round100.0%27.6%21.1%9.5%1.0%0.5%
Rest100.0%14.3%11.1%5.9%1.6%0.4%

For instance, drafting 1st overall gives a 35.7% chance of an elite player, 64.3% chance of all star or better, and 92.9% chance of a solid NHL'er or better.

As expected, the lower you draft, the less likely you are to get as good a player.

We're not uncovering fantastic new information, but it's nice to see the numbers.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 02:45 PM
  #19
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,790
vCash: 500
Nice stats.

That just makes Pouliot, Sheppard, and Thelen that much hard to swallow, unfortunately.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 04:33 PM
  #20
Generic User
Dynamic as they come
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 6,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
Cumulative (i.e. that level or better):

Pick RangeBustCall-upRole PlayerQualityAll StarElite
1st Overall100.0%100.0%100.0%92.9%64.3%35.7%
Top 3100.0%100.0%97.6%95.2%57.1%28.6%
Lottery100.0%95.7%94.3%82.9%42.9%20.0%
Top 10100.0%88.3%81.8%62.8%27.0%10.9%
Top 15100.0%78.7%72.9%54.6%23.2%10.1%
Top 20100.0%76.5%69.0%49.1%19.9%8.3%
First Round100.0%73.8%65.3%45.3%17.4%6.2%
Second Round100.0%34.4%27.1%16.0%4.0%0.7%
Third Round100.0%27.6%21.1%9.5%1.0%0.5%
Rest100.0%14.3%11.1%5.9%1.6%0.4%*
*Bolded sections drafted by the Red Wings.

Generic User is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 04:36 PM
  #21
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,773
vCash: 500
I'd like to prove you wrong Generic User, but that was my first thought as well.

GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 04:47 PM
  #22
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,417
vCash: 500
Sad but true, and I had that in my head the whole time.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2010, 05:56 PM
  #23
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,462
vCash: 50
Do you think Holland would let us rent their scouts for a year

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 07:23 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.