HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Elite talent in the draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-16-2012, 02:11 AM
  #101
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raider917 View Post
Has anyone found out how many stars were drafted 1-5 and compared that number with the amounts drafted at 6-10 and 11-15?
If only someone did that and someone else posted it in this thread!

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...53&postcount=8

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:19 AM
  #102
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,955
vCash: 500
http://www.hockeydraftcentral.com/1969/69facts.html

Quote:
The seventh NHL Amateur Draft is commonly known as the first modern draft because it was the first draft that was not affected by the old sponsorship system. At the time, it was referred to as the first NHL Universal Amateur Draft because all junior players born before 1950 were eligible.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:57 AM
  #103
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
If only someone did that and someone else posted it in this thread!

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...53&postcount=8
LOTS of players forgotten in the list of superstars outside top 30... only 24 ? really...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:07 AM
  #104
Steve Doan
RIP Oscar
 
Steve Doan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Eureka
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 10,066
vCash: 500
canadian fans talking about tanking a season, i dont believe it

Steve Doan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 05:59 AM
  #105
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
1 or 2 player out of a 23 man roster is less than 10% yet these guys represent 50% of the top10 list. These guys were also some of the best players on their cup winning or finalist team. Just since the lockout ; Pronger, the Sedins, Luongo, Niedermayer, Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, Staal x2, Heatley, Spezza... These guys were all key to their teams achievements since the lockout and they were not alone, some solid support guys were picked in the top 5 ; Horton, Whitney, Ladd, Phillips. I'm sure I missed some, you could likely find many more guys if you included top8 or top10 picks in deeper drafts. The Red Wings escape this rule but they were lucky - they found Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Lidstrom in later round while these guys would have went top5 had european scouting been on par with what it is today.

Seriously what are we arguing here? Its undeniable that having a top5 pick is an incredible asset. If we wanted to trade for one we would likely have to part with excellent young players. We have the opportunity to acquire one now, the only cost being that we wouldn't have a strong finish which might or might not affect some players next season.

Nobody wants this team to tank for 5 years. What we want is to get a tremendous asset basically for free. Even if the guy we draft does not pan out as planned it doesn't matter since its free. We won't make the playoffs. At best we're going to tell everyone we're not as bad of a team as we seem but we know it, so whats the point? Ten games into next season everyone will have forgotten 2011-2012 and moved on - what we need a strong start to 2012-2013 and a star forward coming up so we can win something before everyone here loses all their hair and/or have entirely white heads.

you're missing the point...


sure, the players you named were important parts of their team going to the SCF...


but saying they made it cause they had a top 5 pick or two (drafted by) is like saying they made it cause they had two goalies on their team... wake up dude! every single team in the league has a pair of goalies, just like every team has at least one top 5 pick...


you think we have a better chance of winning with a top 5 pick in our rank ?

Great, we have one... just like the NYR, Bruins, Panthers (Weiss), Pens, Flyers, Devils, Sens, Caps, Sabres, Jets (Kane), Bolts, Leafs, Canes and NYI in the East... and Blues (Pietrangelo), Canucks, Stars (Lehtonen), Wings (Stuart), Preds (Legwand), Hawks, Yotes, Avs, Sharks, Flames (Jokinen), Kings, Ducks, Wild, Oilers and B. Jackets in the West...

every single team...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 07:22 AM
  #106
onice
Registered User
 
onice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
What you're doing is not statistically valid.

You ended your sample at exactly the year (1989) where your argument stops being true. You are cherrypicking.

Bill Guerin was drafted 5th in 1989. Brendan Shanahan was drafted 2nd in 1987.

Bill Guerin contributed to the first cup win, and Shanahan turned into Scott Stevens, who contributed to both cup wins.

You know your post shows 1) you're incapable of reading & understanding what you read; and 2) you don't know what you're talking about.

I started at 1990 because I've maintained that since the mid 1990s the prospect pool has become deeper. That's one point

The second point Guerin was gone by 1998 and Shanahan by 1991.

Any more misrepresentation of the facts you want to share with us?


but I'll play your silly game

89 - 5 Guerin --gone by 98
88 - 12 Foster
87 - 2 Shanahan - gone by 91
86 - 3 N Brody - a real elite player
85 - 3 C. Wolanin - another superstar
84 2- K Mueller - gone by 91
83 - 6 J Maclean
82 - 8 Rocky Trottier - another HOFer

As the Colorado Rockies
81 5 Joe Cirella
80 - 19 P Gagne
79 - 1 Rob Ramage

Did I go far enough or would you prefer I went to the start of the draft in general?

Check your facts before you ^&%$ open your trap. I don't mind being contradicted but don't insult me when you have shown yourself to be totally unaware of the facts.


Last edited by onice: 03-16-2012 at 07:45 AM.
onice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 07:40 AM
  #107
onice
Registered User
 
onice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
By 1995 they are winning cups with the players they built with. And for the rest of the 90s they are contenders. Why are you showing those years when the club was already built? They are perpetual contenders by then man.

.
Check the post just above this one. what I told DA Champion goes double for you. So who embarrassed himself? I'd like to see you squirm out of this one.


Last edited by onice: 03-16-2012 at 07:48 AM.
onice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 11:21 AM
  #108
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I don't dispute that it's referred to as the dawn of the modern draft. I dispute that it should be referred to as the modern draft. And for the purposes of your study I definitely think that you should start at 1970 because that weird Quebec rule messes things up. That's all I was saying. Not a big deal but I would omit 1969 here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
You know your post shows 1) you're incapable of reading & understanding what you read; and 2) you don't know what you're talking about.

I started at 1990 because I've maintained that since the mid 1990s the prospect pool has become deeper. That's one point
So what? Not sure how listing NJ's draft picks in that decade illustrates anything in regard to prospect pools being deeper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
The second point Guerin was gone by 1998 and Shanahan by 1991.
Doesn't matter. Guerin won a cup with them, so did John Maclean. Shanhan was replaced by Stevens and Niedermayer was a central figure for all their cups. Other players like Muller were leveraged for others like Richer. Even if you ignore the other stuff though Niederrmayer is a top pick HOF player central to that team's success.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
Any more misrepresentation of the facts you want to share with us?
?

Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
but I'll play your silly game

89 - 5 Guerin --gone by 98
88 - 12 Foster
87 - 2 Shanahan - gone by 91
86 - 3 N Brody - a real elite player
85 - 3 C. Wolanin - another superstar
84 2- K Mueller - gone by 91
83 - 6 J Maclean
82 - 8 Rocky Trottier - another HOFer

As the Colorado Rockies
81 5 Joe Cirella
80 - 19 P Gagne
79 - 1 Rob Ramage

Did I go far enough or would you prefer I went to the start of the draft in general?
What we'd expect you to do if you're looking at cup winning clubs is to look at their roster and see where they were drafted. I'd expect you to look at the years preceeding those wins and how they got the players on those rosters. I'd expect you to actually realize that Scott Niedermayer is a future 1st ballot HOFer and played a key role on those teams. I'd also expect that you wouldn't start listing their finishes after they already started winning cups and then point your finger and scream 'SEE!; when those clubs aren't finishing last.

Obviously we're expecting too much from you.

You're so caught up in trying to save yourself from embarrassment in this thread that your arguments are becoming more and more absurd as the thread goes on. Stop looking at this as a fight. Consider what's actually being shown to you.

Your argument about the prospect pool is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the pool is bigger because the best players continue to get drafted first. I show you a list of the top ten scorers and rather than acknowledge the point you try to change the topic to something else. 'Look 22 year old Stamkos hasn't won a cup!' I mean, get real man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
Check your facts before you ^&%$ open your trap. I don't mind being contradicted but don't insult me when you have shown yourself to be totally unaware of the facts.
Take your own advice. We've shown you the facts and have blown your arguments away. Instead of fighting it why don't you consider what's been shown to you? Seventies' study is the most detailed you're going to get. The guy is our resident statistician and his study clearly shows the difference between top picks and lower ones. Why do you continue to argue against something that is so plain as day?

And like I said, Guerin won a cup with that club. Shanahan was lost and replaced with Scott Stevens... another main cog. Even if we ignore both those guys though Scott Niedermayer was a main cog leading them to cups. There's no way around this dude.

Again, the Devils tanked for years and got top picks and good players out of it. Did some of them go to other clubs? Sure. That's always going to happen. But they still rebuilt by drafting high and one of those picks is a future HOFer who was a main part of those clubs. In fact, once he left the Devils didn't win again and he immediately led his new team to a cup and won the Conn Smythe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
Check the post just above this one. what I told DA Champion goes double for you. So who embarrassed himself? I'd like to see you squirm out of this one.
Squirm out of what? I"m not sure what it is you think you're proving... What is your point here?

No matter how you slice it NJ tanked. No matter how you slice it top picks yielded good players. No matter how you slice it Scott Niedermayer was a main cog that helped lead them to cups.

What are you trying to prove?


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 03-16-2012 at 01:29 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 11:35 AM
  #109
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,096
vCash: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
you're missing the point...


sure, the players you named were important parts of their team going to the SCF...


but saying they made it cause they had a top 5 pick or two (drafted by) is like saying they made it cause they had two goalies on their team... wake up dude! every single team in the league has a pair of goalies, just like every team has at least one top 5 pick...


you think we have a better chance of winning with a top 5 pick in our rank ?

Great, we have one... just like the NYR, Bruins, Panthers (Weiss), Pens, Flyers, Devils, Sens, Caps, Sabres, Jets (Kane), Bolts, Leafs, Canes and NYI in the East... and Blues (Pietrangelo), Canucks, Stars (Lehtonen), Wings (Stuart), Preds (Legwand), Hawks, Yotes, Avs, Sharks, Flames (Jokinen), Kings, Ducks, Wild, Oilers and B. Jackets in the West...

every single team...
Sure every team has a top5 pick or more and these guys are usually the top players on their teams. Only one cup can be won per year but there is a lot of parity in the league exactly because star talent is well spread.

Right now Carey Price (5th overall) is our only top pick and our best player. We have the opportunity to add another ''star'' to the team. You compare it with goaltenders which makes little sense. Only one goaltender can play in a game and even then no team would pass the opportunity of getting a potentially great starter for free.

Whats so hard to understand?

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 11:38 AM
  #110
WeeBey
Registered User
 
WeeBey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Sure every team has a top5 pick or more and these guys are usually the top players on their teams. Only one cup can be won per year but there is a lot of parity in the league exactly because star talent is well spread.

Right now Carey Price (5th overall) is our only top pick and our best player. We have the opportunity to add another ''star'' to the team.

Whats so hard to understand?
Don't you know it's better to finish strong and then hope that we can sustain the momentum for five months of not playing Hockey!?!?

Duh!

WeeBey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 11:50 AM
  #111
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,096
vCash: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey View Post
Don't you know it's better to finish strong and then hope that we can sustain the momentum for five months of not playing Hockey!?!?

Duh!
The most important thing about next season is to start strong. The finish this year is going to have little impact, these guys are pros and know they have to work hard to get better next year.

Lets win the last two games or something and it will be enough.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 12:01 PM
  #112
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Sure every team has a top5 pick or more and these guys are usually the top players on their teams. Only one cup can be won per year but there is a lot of parity in the league exactly because star talent is well spread.

Right now Carey Price (5th overall) is our only top pick and our best player. We have the opportunity to add another ''star'' to the team. You compare it with goaltenders which makes little sense. Only one goaltender can play in a game and even then no team would pass the opportunity of getting a potentially great starter for free.

Whats so hard to understand?
And again, we limit it to superstars. We limit it to clubs that drafted those players in the top five or top ten. We limit it to players who actually helped lead their teams to cups. We're not talking passengers, we're showing that clubs who get those players are more likely to win than clubs that don't.

We haven't had those players for a long time. Toronto hasn't had those players for a long time. Other clubs haven't had those players... and those teams haven't won as many cups as those that have.

Again though... it's all background to the main point that superstars win cups. Without them, good luck. It's going to be really hard for you to do so. We haven't had those players and it's killed us. Rebuilding is merely a path to get there. If you get top picks you're more likely to get superstars. That's just a fact. And you would think that a club like us that hasn't had superstars in forever would've figured this out by now.

Free agency is another way but superstars in their prime don't usually become FAs to begin with and we've shown no ability to get them. Trading for one would be great but I don't think you're going to get Jonathan Toews from Chicago. So... that leaves trading for picks and prospects and the draft. And again... our only trade for a 1st in recent memory yielded Max Paccioretty. Our only top 5 is our best player...

And yet we've got guys who continue to think that drafting 15th is just as good as drafting 3rd. We've got guys who continue to defend trading for players who will give us short term gains but no real long term success. We've got guys who scream at the thought of dealing away vets for prospects... and every year we're a bubble club.

Folks have said that I'm singled minded... they're right. I am single minded. I only care about building towards a cup. That's what I'd expect from my GM btw. If a move doesn't get us closer to a cup then we shouldn't do it. Dealing for Brian Gionta or Scott Gomez doesn't do anything from that perspective. Trading for Rene Bourque does nothing from that perspective. EVERY single move we make should be made from the standpoint of building towards a championship and that's not the way we run our club.

I'm just surprised so many people defend it.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 12:04 PM
  #113
WeeBey
Registered User
 
WeeBey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
The most important thing about next season is to start strong. The finish this year is going to have little impact, these guys are pros and know they have to work hard to get better next year.

Lets win the last two games or something and it will be enough.
I know, probably should have put a in the post.

People acting like a strong finish this year will really carry over to next season are blowing my mind.

WeeBey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 12:30 PM
  #114
Bullsmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey View Post
I know, probably should have put a in the post.

People acting like a strong finish this year will really carry over to next season are blowing my mind.
That attitude is straight out of Leafs Nation the last few years. Things are different in the fan base this season, but in recent years there was a consistent pattern- they'd fall out of a playoff spot, finish hot and the GM and most of the fan base would pretend that the strong finish was the true measure of the club. I, on the other hand, think the overall standings were a better indication of the true measure of the club. As they are for the habs this year.

Bullsmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:18 PM
  #115
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
LOTS of players forgotten in the list of superstars outside top 30... only 24 ? really...
If that's the case, then I just used a different standard for "superstar" than you would prefer to. That means that Greschner, Fleury, Kiprusoff, Elias, Chara, and B.Richards made the cut. Alfredsson, Goring, Taylor, Vernon, Zubov, and below that did not.

You can disagree with where the cutoff should lie, and even on which players should be above and below said cutoffs (I definitely disagree with these rankings in a lot of ways; my knowledge of all players has increased exponentially since joining the all-time drafts)

But rest assured that the same difficult standard applied to all blocks of picks, not just sub-top-30. Regardless of which cutoff you choose, and regardless of which players you shuffle around above and below those cutoffs, the relationship is undeniably linear.

Again: top-5: 35/160 = 22%
6-10: 14/160 = 9%
11-30: 23/672 = 3%
31 and beyond: 30/6141 = 0.4%

no amount of fudging could ever generate this plainly obvious relationship.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:38 PM
  #116
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
If that's the case, then I just used a different standard for "superstar" than you would prefer to. That means that Greschner, Fleury, Kiprusoff, Elias, Chara, and B.Richards made the cut. Alfredsson, Goring, Taylor, Vernon, Zubov, and below that did not.

You can disagree with where the cutoff should lie, and even on which players should be above and below said cutoffs (I definitely disagree with these rankings in a lot of ways; my knowledge of all players has increased exponentially since joining the all-time drafts)

But rest assured that the same difficult standard applied to all blocks of picks, not just sub-top-30. Regardless of which cutoff you choose, and regardless of which players you shuffle around above and below those cutoffs, the relationship is undeniably linear.

Again: top-5: 35/160 = 22%
6-10: 14/160 = 9%
11-30: 23/672 = 3%
31 and beyond: 30/6141 = 0.4%

no amount of fudging could ever generate this plainly obvious relationship.
Don't worry, ECWHSWI will give it his best shot to fudge it the other way...

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:47 PM
  #117
onice
Registered User
 
onice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
You're so caught up in trying to save yourself from embarrassment in this thread that your arguments are becoming more and more absurd as the thread goes on. Stop looking at this as a fight. Consider what's actually being shown to you.
You are either a very dense person or you're just pretending to be to save face.

You claimed that New Jersey build Stanley Cup winners by tanking. I showed you you're full of it. That wasn't the case.

And your ridiculous example of trading Muller for Richer disapproves your point. They got rid of a 2nd overall pick and brought in Richer a 29th.

According to you shouldn't they have gotten elite talent as in the top 3-4 picks. But instead they unloaded their "elite" player, Muller, and got a not-so-elite player, Richer.

And this is the last time I comment to any of the horse droppings you put up on this site. You make declarations, don't back them up and then try to bluff your way with BS,

onice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:12 PM
  #118
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Sure every team has a top5 pick or more and these guys are usually the top players on their teams. Only one cup can be won per year but there is a lot of parity in the league exactly because star talent is well spread.

Right now Carey Price (5th overall) is our only top pick and our best player. We have the opportunity to add another ''star'' to the team. You compare it with goaltenders which makes little sense. Only one goaltender can play in a game and even then no team would pass the opportunity of getting a potentially great starter for free.

Whats so hard to understand?
reading comprehension isnt your thing I guess... I'll help you out...

but saying they made it cause they had a top 5 pick or two (drafted by) is like saying they made it cause they had two goalies on their team or that every player used a pair of skates, or the teams have home and away jerseys, or that they played the game with a puck, and so on...

IE : every single team has a top 5 pick, just like every player use skates, like every team has goalies, use home/away jerseys, etc...

So, saying a team won cause they had top 5 pick(s) is a retarded argument.

was that hard to understand ?

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:45 PM
  #119
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
If that's the case, then I just used a different standard for "superstar" than you would prefer to. That means that Greschner, Fleury, Kiprusoff, Elias, Chara, and B.Richards made the cut. Alfredsson, Goring, Taylor, Vernon, Zubov, and below that did not.

You can disagree with where the cutoff should lie, and even on which players should be above and below said cutoffs (I definitely disagree with these rankings in a lot of ways; my knowledge of all players has increased exponentially since joining the all-time drafts)

But rest assured that the same difficult standard applied to all blocks of picks, not just sub-top-30. Regardless of which cutoff you choose, and regardless of which players you shuffle around above and below those cutoffs, the relationship is undeniably linear.

Again: top-5: 35/160 = 22%
6-10: 14/160 = 9%
11-30: 23/672 = 3%
31 and beyond: 30/6141 = 0.4%


no amount of fudging could ever generate this plainly obvious relationship.
oh yes, and even though our genius LG will make it sound like it's not the case... not once I said the opposite...

yup, there's a few Markov, Datsyuk, Robitaille, Zett here and there, but the most talented players are generally picked earlier...

GREAT!

but at the end of the day, wether they drafted, traded for or signed him as a UFA, every single team in the league has top 5 pick(s)...

no further than last year we had 3 on the Habs (Price, Hamrlik, Pouliot)... and over the last 10 / 15 years, there's probably a year or two where we had four (maybe even five ?)...

hell, even the team that will pick 1st overall this year (CBJ) have at least 3 top 5 picks playing for them this season...

so...

top 5 picks = better players ? Yup
top 5 picks = more succesful team ? Nope

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:54 PM
  #120
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
You are either a very dense person or you're just pretending to be to save face.

You claimed that New Jersey build Stanley Cup winners by tanking. I showed you you're full of it. That wasn't the case.
It IS the case. Without a doubt it is.

Moreover, they drafted high and got Niedermayer a HOFer who they won with. It's the same with Pittsburgh. They drafted high for a while and not all of those players went on to win cups with them. It didn't matter, drafting high yielded Jagr and Lemieux. They don't win it by themselves but they are key ingredients of those wins. Does the fact that Craig Simpson wasn't with them when they won the cup change the fact that they drafted high and won? Of course not.

Ditto with the Devils and Niedermayer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
And your ridiculous example of trading Muller for Richer disapproves your point. They got rid of a 2nd overall pick and brought in Richer a 29th.
It doesn't disprove my point at all. If you're a contender and you feel that you're one player away... then by all means deal for another guy. That's what the Wings did when they traded for Shanahan.

What I'm saying is that top picks yield better players than anywhere else. The Devils drafted a whole whack of good players who helped them win the cup. Along the way some players moved on but it still doesn't matter. When you've got Niedermayer he makes a huge difference. Same with Jagr or Lemieux.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
According to you shouldn't they have gotten elite talent as in the top 3-4 picks.

But instead they unloaded their "elite" player, Muller, and got a not-so-elite player, Richer.
Neither Muller, nor Richer, nor Maclean, nor Guerin were superstars... but all are solid players. Muller, Mclean and Guerin were all drafted high. Yeah, they dealt Muller for Richer but they wouldn't get him to begin with if they don't have that pick.

Moreover, even if we ignore all of this... Niedermayer is a huge cog on that team and still proves my point. They drafted high and he helped lead them to multiple cups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
And this is the last time I comment to any of the horse droppings you put up on this site. You make declarations, don't back them up and then try to bluff your way with BS,
The only declarations that I've made is that top picks yield superstars better than anywhere else. You tried to argue against this with horrific results.

You then tried to argue that top picks don't necessarily win cups and everyone agreed with you.

Try to listen to me without getting all defensive dude. Here's what I've argued for years. First, my arguments are only about how to get superstars. We all know that cup winners need depth players but that's not really been a problem for us and it's not what I've focused on. Our problem has been a lack of top end talent.

1. Superstars are a key ingredient to winning cups.

It's hard (very hard) to win cups without superstars. It's possible to do it but the overwhelming majority of teams have multiple HOF superstars in their prime on cup winning rosters. That's just a fact. Rebuild or not, Boston had Chara. Rebuild or not Anaheim had Pronger, Selanne and Niedermayer. Rebuild or not Calgary had multiple HOF players on it. Superstars are essential to winning. The more you have the better your odds.

2. Superstars are drafted more often in the top five than anywhere else.

This is fact. Just accept it. You saw the numbers, 22% of top fives turn into superstars. 9% of 6-10 become superstars. 3% from 11-30 become superstars and outside the 1st round it's next to impossible to find one.

Once you get multiple top fives it becomes increasingly rare that you won't find one. Yes, Florida has somehow managed to not get one but most clubs that draft high for a sustained period of time find at least one superstar along the way. And when you aren't drafting high it makes it a lot harder to find superstars. Toronto and Montreal are perfect examples of this. Even with our supreme drafting we haven't managed to find a real superstar since Roy. Our best player is also a top five pick. Will we eventually find one if we draft low long enough? No doubt. But we've wasted 25 years trying to do this.

3. Superstars in their prime usually don't become free agents and when they do it's for a weird reason or they want to go to a specific team. There are 30 other clubs bidding for this guy as well and it's going to be hard to get him unless you're already a contending team.

4. Trading for a superstar in his prime is hard to do as well. Nobody wants to trade away a Toews, Forsberg or Jagr once they've shown what they can do. Sometimes rip-off trades like Joe Thornton do happen but you can't count on this happening for you. And more than likely to get a superstar in his prime you will pay dearly for it and could rip the guts out of your team.

5. The vast majority of cup winning teams have at least one top pick supestar leading the way. We're not taking about passengers or top fives who happen to be on the roster. We're talking about key cogs to cup wins. This is the part that guys like ECWHSWI aren't smart enough to understand - there is a direct relationship with those top picks and cups. They didn't just happen to be on the roster. As an example Petr Svboda doesn't count but Scott Niedermayer most certainly does.

Sometimes that pick was traded for or it was a prospect but there is a common thread there. Even if drafting high four years in a row only nets you... Steve Yzerman. You still landed a superstar who you can build around. Sometimes you get lucky and land a superstar with only one top pick. That's what happened for Dallas with Modano. Once you get a Modano, Niedermayer or Yzerman, you can build around those talents. They're all HOFers that will go a long way in helping you win a cup so it's not a surprise that most cup winning teams have at least one of these guys on it who's been drafted by that cup winning team.

So there's a path for success. It is winning via superstars. So how do you get them? We've tried drafting mid rounds... it hasn't worked. We've tried the Free Agent market, it hasn't worked. We haven't been able to trade for one so that hasn't worked.

So... why aren't we going a different route? We not try to deal for prospects and picks? Why load up on mediocre talent and try to win that way? That's what we've tried for years and it hasn't worked. All that happens is you squeak into the playoffs and maybe win a round or two.

Like I said earlier, our only true rebuilding move got us MaxPac and Gorges. Our only top five is our best player. Why not go the rebuild route? Deal away vets for prospects and picks and develop them ourselves. Trade for as many picks as you can... the higher the better... and prospects that you believe in. You probably will fall in the standings in the short run but long term we'd probably be better off.

Thing is though... none of this is going to make sense to you unless you accept the simple fact that on average higher picks yield better returns than lower ones at an exponentially higher rate. If you can't even grasp this simple concept with the stats that we've shown you, then you're never going to get it.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 03-16-2012 at 04:42 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 04:14 PM
  #121
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice View Post
According to you shouldn't they have gotten elite talent as in the top 3-4 picks. But instead they unloaded their "elite" player, Muller, and got a not-so-elite player, Richer.,
Itís a lot easier to trade for the pieces you need when you have these young, highly-drafted assets though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
oh yes, and even though our genius LG will make it sound like it's not the case... not once I said the opposite...

yup, there's a few Markov, Datsyuk, Robitaille, Zett here and there, but the most talented players are generally picked earlier...

GREAT!

but at the end of the day, wether they drafted, traded for or signed him as a UFA, every single team in the league has top 5 pick(s)...

no further than last year we had 3 on the Habs (Price, Hamrlik, Pouliot)... and over the last 10 / 15 years, there's probably a year or two where we had four (maybe even five ?)...

hell, even the team that will pick 1st overall this year (CBJ) have at least 3 top 5 picks playing for them this season...

so...

top 5 picks = better players ? Yup
top 5 picks = more succesful team ? Nope
This is all fine except the very bottom. Hereís the connection youíre missing:

top 5 picks = better players ? Yup
better players = more succesful team ? Yup

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 05:10 PM
  #122
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,096
vCash: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
reading comprehension isnt your thing I guess... I'll help you out...

but saying they made it cause they had a top 5 pick or two (drafted by) is like saying they made it cause they had two goalies on their team or that every player used a pair of skates, or the teams have home and away jerseys, or that they played the game with a puck, and so on...

IE : every single team has a top 5 pick, just like every player use skates, like every team has goalies, use home/away jerseys, etc...

So, saying a team won cause they had top 5 pick(s) is a retarded argument.

was that hard to understand ?
Wow

Saying ''every team has a top5 pick or two'' proves nothing. Top5 picks are often star players that carry their teams. Getting another star player that can carry a team is good.

I don't think I misunderstood your ''argument'', its just that it is incredibly silly.

Person A ''I need to get a job with a better pay if I want to buy a house''
Person B ''What for? Everyone has money! IT WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE''
Person A ''????????''

Also the bolded part is just ridiculous. The top5 picks in question are often the team's leaders and best player. Does Anaheim win the cup without Pronger and Niedermayer?

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord
This is all fine except the very bottom. Here’s the connection you’re missing:

top 5 picks = better players ? Yup
better players = more succesful team ? Yup
Thank you sir

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 10:28 PM
  #123
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Itís a lot easier to trade for the pieces you need when you have these young, highly-drafted assets though.



This is all fine except the very bottom. Hereís the connection youíre missing:

top 5 picks = better players ? Yup
better players = more succesful team ? Yup
actually I'm not... better players obviously means better team... but thinking the simple fact you have a few top 5 picks will get you a succesful team is ridiculous at best...

look at the winning teams, they're not winning cause they have one or two top 5 picks... they're winning because ON TOP of their top 5 picks they have good players... they have depth... their role players are very good role players...

look at the Habs, they already have Price, will probably get another top 5 at the draft... that's two...

and like I said, there's a few years in the past 10 / 15 we had 3 or 4...

were we contenders ? nope...
will we be contenders next season ? nope...



So yeah, we'll get a good pick, probably top 5, top 10 at worst...

now get over it, we far from being contenders, even if we add a top 5 / 10 pick... we're still not contenders... very very very far...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 10:32 PM
  #124
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Wow

Saying ''every team has a top5 pick or two'' proves nothing. Top5 picks are often star players that carry their teams. Getting another star player that can carry a team is good.

I don't think I misunderstood your ''argument'', its just that it is incredibly silly.

Person A ''I need to get a job with a better pay if I want to buy a house''
Person B ''What for? Everyone has money! IT WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE''
Person A ''????????''

Also the bolded part is just ridiculous. The top5 picks in question are often the team's leaders and best player. Does Anaheim win the cup without Pronger and Niedermayer?



Thank you sir
given the example you wrote below it's obvious you didnt get a thing of what I said.

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 10:38 PM
  #125
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
actually I'm not... better players obviously means better team... but thinking the simple fact you have a few top 5 picks will get you a succesful team is ridiculous at best...

look at the winning teams, they're not winning cause they have one or two top 5 picks... they're winning because ON TOP of their top 5 picks they have good players... they have depth... their role players are very good role players...

look at the Habs, they already have Price, will probably get another top 5 at the draft... that's two...

and like I said, there's a few years in the past 10 / 15 we had 3 or 4...

were we contenders ? nope...
will we be contenders next season ? nope...



So yeah, we'll get a good pick, probably top 5, top 10 at worst...

now get over it, we far from being contenders, even if we add a top 5 / 10 pick... we're still not contenders... very very very far...
We have not had 3 or 4 top 5 picks in the past 10/15 years. We've had one, Carey Price.

DAChampion 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 01:58 PM.

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.