HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Colorado Avalanche
Notices

2012-13 Colorado Avalanche Prospects Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2012, 06:19 PM
  #526
Avs_19
Peter the Great
 
Avs_19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,379
vCash: 645
SEPH, you forgot Stefan Elliott.

I think Pracey is great. Sign him to a lifetime contract.

Avs_19 is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 06:24 PM
  #527
Sean Monahan
#Moneyman
 
Sean Monahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Cowtown
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,207
vCash: 50
Came in to say Colin Smith was a great pick

Sean Monahan is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 08:07 PM
  #528
Nihiliste
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Nihiliste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,415
vCash: 542
Pracey is pretty good. Every team misses good players with some of their picks, though I really wish we had taken Bartschi in 2011. Nor do I particularly like Mitchell Heard in the 2nd round.

I do agree that we overrate him somewhat though, but SEPH is also right that he hasn't had as many picks to work with as some other rebuilding teams who stockpiled picks (e.g. FLA, EDM). Our FO has a somewhat different philosophy I guess.

I do think he sometimes passes on high potential players based on his character assessments and whatnot, but then most teams do.

Nihiliste is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 09:15 PM
  #529
Zandar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 384
vCash: 500
While the Silas pick didn't work, it was a text book swing for the fences move that a lot of fans want to see. Luckily it was a later pick so no harm there. Hard to pass on an extremely young kid who was an offensive juggernaut with Canada (out produced Skinner even) then goes on to put up great numbers his draft year and finish near the top 10 in D scoring. I believe he outscored every single forward on his team despite being a D. This was a kid taken a pick or two after Fowler in his OHL draft and Pracey's personal bread and butter is the O. I think most would gamble that pick after you see us taking bottom 6 role guys like Heard, Bournival, etc. with higher picks in drafts.

Zandar is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 11:03 PM
  #530
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 18,674
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
Hahaha, we're judging him after four drafts? Besides the logical decisions of our front office staff, I think our scouting department is the strongest of our management. Maybe not the best or top 3, but I say we are definitely in the top 10. Let's take a look at Pracey's record of his four drafts and see how bad he did. Also forgive me about 2008 because I don't know if he took over at that time or not.

2009
003 - Matt Duchene: Great pick when he had other options, only player I would potentially take over Matt is OEL.
033 - Ryan O'Reilly: Fantastic pick.
049 - Stefan Elliott: Great pick.
064 - Tyson Barrie: Looking like an outstanding selection.
124 - Kieran Millan: Too early to tell, but is starting to turn heads so far in his brief pro career.
154 - Brandon Maxwell: Definitely was picked to improve our goaler pool, can't make every player into a starting goaler I guess.
184 - Gus Young: Like all 7th round picks, they're projects and he simply didn't improve since his solid high school year.

2010
017 - Joey Hishon: Controversial pick at first, but Pracey saw something that none of his did. If it wasn't for **** McNabb he would be alongside Sgarbossa putting up good numbers.
049 - Calvin Pickard: So far is looking like a solid pick.I
071 - Michael Bournival [MTL]: I don't know if you've ever seen him play, but he is fantastic. Picture a 3rd line version of O'Reilly.
095 - Stephen Silas: Terrible pick, especially considering we traded picks to get him, but did have a great draft year statistically.
107 - Sami Aittokallio: Fantastic pick for a 5th rounder.
137 - Troy Rutkowsk: Not a bad pick at all, saw this more of the management not wanting to sign him than Percy's own opinion.
139 - Luke Walker: Too early to tell, but looking like he could become a solid bottom 6 forward.
197 - Luke Moffatt: Another example of a 7th round project, they drafted him because he potentially had raw top 6 potential. No biggie that he didn't improve, like I said can't win all of them.

2011
002 - Gabriel Landeskog: Fantastic pick when "draft experts" were calling him a 3rd line grinder and how they couldn't pick franchise Larsson.
011 - Duncan Siemens: I personally wanted Bartischi, but you must think that Siemens brings something our team has lacked since Adam Foote. Plus we took a forward already with the Viking.
093 - Joachim Nermark: Too early to tell, but should get a good look at for the WJC and is showing he's too good for their junior team.
123 - Garrett Meurs: Personal favourite and project pick, but has good potential to be consider as a top 9 forward. Needs to gain a lot of strength, but talent is there.
153 - Gabriel Beaupre: Too early to tell, but is looking like a very nice player for a 6th round pick.
183 - Dillon Donnelly: Too early to tell what the Avs will do with him, but he is another defenseman you HATE to play against and heart/soul player.

2012
041 - Mitchell Heard: Not a big fan of this pick as I believe we could've gotten someone with the same skill with much higher offensive potential. But I think the player the Avs wanted was drafted before their position.
072 - Troy Bourke: Fantastic pick for a 3rd rounder, considering he could've been a second. Too early to tell, but I have liked what I've seen so far.
132 - Michael Clarke: Project player as he is still raw and is suffering from inconsistent streaks. All tools are there though to be a solid top 12 forward.
162 - Joseph Blandisi: Too early to tell for all these players in the 2012 draft, but I must say that this kid has improve since last season and is looking like a keeper.
192 - Colin Smith: Definitely a top 6 or bust player, Smith is looking like a fantastic darkhorse 7th rounder.

You can say that Pracey is actually suffering from a lack of picks through trades and I think the Silas pick was probably the worst out of the bunch. Though I think you should out of all people that draft picks are very overrated compared to proven players which we've traded majority of our picks for.
No, I'm saying we tend to give him credit for what we think players will develop into, not based on what they have developed into. It's not like Pracey was new to the organization 4 years ago. He was one of the top scouts, and arguably the most leaned on. I made a clear point to acknowledge guys still can develop into what is hoped for, but I don't think we're being objective by heaping praise on him. My point wasn't to **** on him, but rather to point out guys still have work to do, and that it doesn't make sense to blindly praise him for prospects that haven't made the NHL yet.

It was more a way to acknowledge the greater point that the Avs have problems with D prospects, and that things haven't necessarily changed, outside of the hope and promise of some of the younger guys.

In order to accurately evaluate a team's success, or a team's draft success, you have to do it with a large enough sample, and you have to be results oriented. In the case of Pracey specifically, his picks are either still too young to fully evaluate, or on the verge of being disappointments. Either way the results aren't there at this point. Again though, he is just the most recent part of the larger sample.

Look at the last ten years as an example going back to the 03 draft. Obviously, once again the young guys from the last few years clearly still can establish themselves as NHL regulars..

Siemens, Duncan
Beaupre, Gabriel
Donnelly, Dillon
Silas, Stephen
Rutkowski, Troy
Elliott, Stefan
Barrie, Tyson
Young, Gus
Gaunce, Cameron
Chouinard, Joel
Holos, Jonas
Shattenkirk, Kevin
Cohen, Colby
Hellgren, Jens
Williams, Nigel
Montgomery, Kevin
Macias, Raymond
Lynch, Jason
Cumiskey, Kyle
Demen-Willaume, Richard
Peltier, Derek
McClellan, Stephen
Liffiton, David

In the last ten drafts, they've only drafted one defenseman that was able to establish himself as an NHLer, and that's Shattenkirk. A pretty good one no doubt, and it would be a decent track record if it was just him, and maybe one or two other guys that made it as 2nd or 3rd pairing guys, but that's it.

The years before that going back to 95 (as far back as wiki goes) wasn't like Nashville's or LA's track record with top end guys, but it was clearly more successful than the last ten years.

Boychuk, Johnny
Lundberg, Eric
Kalteva, Mikko
Gilbert, Tom
Christie, Taylor
Viitanen, Mikko
Saviels, Agris
Sauer, Kurt
Fahey, Brian
Liles, John-Michael
Bahen, Chris
Grenier, Martin
Lindstrom, Sanny
Magnuson, William
Finger, Jeff
Skoula, Martin
Regehr, Robyn
Riazantsev, Alex
Grimes, Kevin
Berry, Rick
Schmidt, Doug
Lafleur, Stephen
Ratchuk, Peter
Storey, Ben
Scorsune, Matthew
Smith, Dan

I will certainly agree that proven players are more important to draft picks, but that doesn't negate the fact that the Avs as a whole have not done well in this regard and it has forced them to go outside the organization, and it is currently the biggest weakness on the big club's roster.

You can point to a low number of picks, and that would make a good point, but I don't think you can really judge this type of thing in the short term anyway. Every team has boom and bust years in terms of drafts, but the Avs have had a bust of a decade, and before that they really only had success with mid to lower echelon guys. Again, just for clarity, I am not blaming Pracey entirely for this, rather just pointing out that he technically hasn't reversed this trend. As of yet at least.


Last edited by Foppa2118: 12-12-2012 at 11:51 PM.
Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:42 AM
  #531
Lonewolfe2015
Registered User
 
Lonewolfe2015's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 11,060
vCash: 239
The problem with judging an organization's ability to draft/develop a particular position is that typically organization's do not maintain enough consistency in management to really make it a credible argument.

The Avs for instance only have Lacroix as far as I can tell, from the past '20 years' of our existence.

So I'd speculate it is more a combination of drafting for need, post-lockout drafting philosophy of speed > size (I'd be willing to bet the bigger you are the higher % success ratio in reaching the NHL at least briefly) and dumb luck.

Lonewolfe2015 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 07:49 AM
  #532
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewolfe2015 View Post
You guys bring up Gaunce and Siemens, yet ignore Beaupre. I expect good things from him once he gets his chance in the AHL to turn heads.
In my case, this is because I haven't seen him play enough to intelligently comment. Isn't he playing right here in town now?

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 07:52 AM
  #533
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewolfe2015 View Post
The problem with judging an organization's ability to draft/develop a particular position is that typically organization's do not maintain enough consistency in management to really make it a credible argument.

The Avs for instance only have Lacroix as far as I can tell, from the past '20 years' of our existence.

So I'd speculate it is more a combination of drafting for need, post-lockout drafting philosophy of speed > size (I'd be willing to bet the bigger you are the higher % success ratio in reaching the NHL at least briefly) and dumb luck.
I've always maintained that a certain amount of drafting 'success' is dumb luck.

On the other hand, when you have 18 (or so) years to look at drafting and developing players, and the team hasn't developed but one (or so) players at a given position into legit top 2 line/pairing NHL players, this is simply failure. We can dissect why the team made the decisions it made - I can certainly see giving an organization a pass when looking at a given year, or even a 5 year window. But an 18 year window? 18 years is a damn long time to go without drafting/developing a few legit 1st/2nd pairing NHL defensive defensemen.

Or a legit starting goaltender.


Last edited by ABasin: 12-13-2012 at 08:22 AM.
ABasin is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 08:00 AM
  #534
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
This has definitely always been a weak point with the Avs system, but isn't the biggest factor for a defenseman's development at the point where Gaunce and Boychuk were, the AHL coaching staff? Billington and others may have some input and advice, but I would think the coaching staff is by far the biggest development tool, and that changes fairly often, especially with the Avs.
I have no idea whether it's the drafting or the development. But when the Avs have gone as long as they have without once successfully combining the two at that position, something's wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
I definitely think the Avs need to improve their track record for defensive prospects, but I think that has more to do with the fact they like to pick more defenseman in the smaller offensive mold like Cumiskey and hope they can eventually grow their all around game not to be a liability and it hasn't really worked out so far. The other guys haven't worked out just by the sheer smaller sample of defensive prospects in a different mold from the Cumiskey/Barrie/Elliott mold.

To me Boychuk is a guy that just didn't work out because there were guys ahead of him that were better or further along in their development, and more importantly he fit into Boston's system and the Eastern conference style of play better, so his defensive weaknesses weren't as big of a deterrent. He still has big holes in his defensive game, isn't the best skater, and despite a few big shots he isn't exactly an offensive dynamo.
I don't agree with that assessment. Boychuk simply blossomed when he got into Boston's system. We'll never know whether that's simply timing, but credit should go where it's due.

And also, I don't believe there is really much difference in 'style of play' between the EC and WC anymore. That is a thing of the past, IMO. A few individual teams notwithstanding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
I think the main factor in all of this is the scouting and philosophy on which defenseman to pick. That may be the area that needs to be changed, or perhaps already has been since it's still too early to really evaluate the newer guys.
I agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
This isn't to say they won't every get there, but up until they do, Pracey hasn't really gotten the results that would warrant a successful draft strategy. It looked good at first based on junior success, but we need to temper our praise a bit, and reserve judgment until some of these guys really establish themselves as NHL players, because that's the end goal for why you draft a player. Just my opinion.
Well said, though Pracey hasn't really had that many drafts. The oldest players that he's drafted are at most what - 23 years old? Need more time for sure.


Last edited by ABasin: 12-13-2012 at 08:23 AM.
ABasin is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 08:14 AM
  #535
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Look at the last ten years as an example going back to the 03 draft. Obviously, once again the young guys from the last few years clearly still can establish themselves as NHL regulars..

Siemens, Duncan
Beaupre, Gabriel
Donnelly, Dillon
Silas, Stephen
Rutkowski, Troy
Elliott, Stefan
Barrie, Tyson
Young, Gus
Gaunce, Cameron
Chouinard, Joel
Holos, Jonas
Shattenkirk, Kevin
Cohen, Colby
Hellgren, Jens
Williams, Nigel
Montgomery, Kevin
Macias, Raymond
Lynch, Jason
Cumiskey, Kyle
Demen-Willaume, Richard
Peltier, Derek
McClellan, Stephen
Liffiton, David

In the last ten drafts, they've only drafted one defenseman that was able to establish himself as an NHLer, and that's Shattenkirk. A pretty good one no doubt, and it would be a decent track record if it was just him, and maybe one or two other guys that made it as 2nd or 3rd pairing guys, but that's it.

The years before that going back to 95 (as far back as wiki goes) wasn't like Nashville's or LA's track record with top end guys, but it was clearly more successful than the last ten years.

Boychuk, Johnny
Lundberg, Eric
Kalteva, Mikko
Gilbert, Tom
Christie, Taylor
Viitanen, Mikko
Saviels, Agris
Sauer, Kurt
Fahey, Brian
Liles, John-Michael
Bahen, Chris
Grenier, Martin
Lindstrom, Sanny
Magnuson, William
Finger, Jeff
Skoula, Martin
Regehr, Robyn
Riazantsev, Alex
Grimes, Kevin
Berry, Rick
Schmidt, Doug
Lafleur, Stephen
Ratchuk, Peter
Storey, Ben
Scorsune, Matthew
Smith, Dan

I will certainly agree that proven players are more important to draft picks, but that doesn't negate the fact that the Avs as a whole have not done well in this regard and it has forced them to go outside the organization, and it is currently the biggest weakness on the big club's roster.
Here's the problem that I see with that list: Of all of the bold font names on that list, which ones did the Avs develop into good defensive players?

-Shattenkirk most certainly didn't play good NHL defense until he got to St. Louis under Ken Hitchcock.
-Boychuk didn't play NHL caliber hockey until he got into Boston's system.
-Gilbert didn't play NHL caliber hockey until he was moved to Edmonton.
-Sauer didn't play NHL quality defense until he played for Mike Babcock in Anaheim.
-Jeff Finger was a flash in the pan.
-Skoula was decent-to-marginal, but carved out a better defensive defenseman career after he played Jacques Lemaire in Minnesota.
-Regehr developed in Calgary.
-Liles developed in Colorado for sure, but I've never been impressed with his defense at any level.

Now, some of these guys (Gilbert/Regehr) were traded before the Avs could have a chance at developing them. But just looking at the overall list here, over the course of 18 years, the best examples of drafted-and-developed quality defensive play on the blueline......equals Skoula and Liles?

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 08:20 AM
  #536
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
Hahaha, we're judging him after four drafts? Besides the logical decisions of our front office staff, I think our scouting department is the strongest of our management. Maybe not the best or top 3, but I say we are definitely in the top 10. Let's take a look at Pracey's record of his four drafts and see how bad he did. Also forgive me about 2008 because I don't know if he took over at that time or not.

2009
003 - Matt Duchene: Great pick when he had other options, only player I would potentially take over Matt is OEL.
033 - Ryan O'Reilly: Fantastic pick.
049 - Stefan Elliott: Great pick.
064 - Tyson Barrie: Looking like an outstanding selection.
124 - Kieran Millan: Too early to tell, but is starting to turn heads so far in his brief pro career.
154 - Brandon Maxwell: Definitely was picked to improve our goaler pool, can't make every player into a starting goaler I guess.
184 - Gus Young: Like all 7th round picks, they're projects and he simply didn't improve since his solid high school year.

2010
017 - Joey Hishon: Controversial pick at first, but Pracey saw something that none of his did. If it wasn't for **** McNabb he would be alongside Sgarbossa putting up good numbers.
049 - Calvin Pickard: So far is looking like a solid pick.I
071 - Michael Bournival [MTL]: I don't know if you've ever seen him play, but he is fantastic. Picture a 3rd line version of O'Reilly.
095 - Stephen Silas: Terrible pick, especially considering we traded picks to get him, but did have a great draft year statistically.
107 - Sami Aittokallio: Fantastic pick for a 5th rounder.
137 - Troy Rutkowsk: Not a bad pick at all, saw this more of the management not wanting to sign him than Percy's own opinion.
139 - Luke Walker: Too early to tell, but looking like he could become a solid bottom 6 forward.
197 - Luke Moffatt: Another example of a 7th round project, they drafted him because he potentially had raw top 6 potential. No biggie that he didn't improve, like I said can't win all of them.

2011
002 - Gabriel Landeskog: Fantastic pick when "draft experts" were calling him a 3rd line grinder and how they couldn't pick franchise Larsson.
011 - Duncan Siemens: I personally wanted Bartischi, but you must think that Siemens brings something our team has lacked since Adam Foote. Plus we took a forward already with the Viking.
093 - Joachim Nermark: Too early to tell, but should get a good look at for the WJC and is showing he's too good for their junior team.
123 - Garrett Meurs: Personal favourite and project pick, but has good potential to be consider as a top 9 forward. Needs to gain a lot of strength, but talent is there.
153 - Gabriel Beaupre: Too early to tell, but is looking like a very nice player for a 6th round pick.
183 - Dillon Donnelly: Too early to tell what the Avs will do with him, but he is another defenseman you HATE to play against and heart/soul player.

2012
041 - Mitchell Heard: Not a big fan of this pick as I believe we could've gotten someone with the same skill with much higher offensive potential. But I think the player the Avs wanted was drafted before their position.
072 - Troy Bourke: Fantastic pick for a 3rd rounder, considering he could've been a second. Too early to tell, but I have liked what I've seen so far.
132 - Michael Clarke: Project player as he is still raw and is suffering from inconsistent streaks. All tools are there though to be a solid top 12 forward.
162 - Joseph Blandisi: Too early to tell for all these players in the 2012 draft, but I must say that this kid has improve since last season and is looking like a keeper.
192 - Colin Smith: Definitely a top 6 or bust player, Smith is looking like a fantastic darkhorse 7th rounder.

You can say that Pracey is actually suffering from a lack of picks through trades and I think the Silas pick was probably the worst out of the bunch. Though I think you should out of all people that draft picks are very overrated compared to proven players which we've traded majority of our picks for.
I guess I shouldn't comment too strongly on this, as I don't get to see these guys play all that much, so I come at this particular post with a fair amount of ignorance. But I believe 2118's point - and one I support - is that when we talk about "great pick", "fantastic pick", etc - how can we really tell, if the player(s) in question have never stepped onto NHL ice? I mean, it's nice that the Avs can pick players and develop them into solid OHL/AHL contributors, but is that really the benchmark we should have?

I completely agree that not enough time has passed for us to correctly come to conclusions on Pracey's drafts.

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:43 AM
  #537
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,946
vCash: 7658
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
Here's the problem that I see with that list: Of all of the bold font names on that list, which ones did the Avs develop into good defensive players?

-Shattenkirk most certainly didn't play good NHL defense until he got to St. Louis under Ken Hitchcock.
-Boychuk didn't play NHL caliber hockey until he got into Boston's system.
-Gilbert didn't play NHL caliber hockey until he was moved to Edmonton.
-Sauer didn't play NHL quality defense until he played for Mike Babcock in Anaheim.
-Jeff Finger was a flash in the pan.
-Skoula was decent-to-marginal, but carved out a better defensive defenseman career after he played Jacques Lemaire in Minnesota.
-Regehr developed in Calgary.
-Liles developed in Colorado for sure, but I've never been impressed with his defense at any level.


Now, some of these guys (Gilbert/Regehr) were traded before the Avs could have a chance at developing them. But just looking at the overall list here, over the course of 18 years, the best examples of drafted-and-developed quality defensive play on the blueline......equals Skoula and Liles?
Wouldn't that list suggest that coaching is more of a problem than drafting?? If these guys are becoming better defensive players outside of our organization, it's time to ask the question 'why is that'?

My opinion has always been that coaching has been this organization's achilles heel.

Also, it's also nice to be able to say, "this organization doesn't develop defensive d-men" very well at all. You also need to go through and take into consideration exactly HOW MANY defensive d-men have been drafted by the club (with THAT purpose) over the years??? I don't have time to go through it right now, maybe some of you guys have the time to check what kind of d-men Agris Saviels and Richard Demen-Willaume were 'supposed' to be but I do know that quite a few of the defencemen that the Avs draft have at the very least, good offensive upside.

I also believe that is done by design and not by accident as part of their drafting philosophy. I believe it relates to the fact that even the very best, shutdown defensive d-man is very RARELY, if EVER a guy that will earn over $5M per year. While offensive d-men and guys who play more of a 2-way game often make that kind of $$$. Therefore, the Avs are drafting d-men, trying to hit home runs and then using their value to make significant trades to acquire what they need. [Shattenkirk is a good example here and I wouldn't be shocked if either Barrie or Elliott would be next]

Anyways, that's my theory.

Also, to say Regehr developed in Calgary is a bit of a stretch. We drafted him, traded his rights to Calgary the next season while he was still in Kamloops and then the very next season, he was playing well for the Flames unless you count those 5 games in the AHL as 'development'. He was pretty good right away, I don't know that I could say with any certainty whatsoever that if the Flames had picked Skoula instead of him, that he wouldn't have done as well playing with Bourque, Foote, Ozolinsh, de Vries, Klemm and Gusarov/Miller.

Bender is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:44 AM
  #538
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,946
vCash: 7658
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
I completely agree that not enough time has passed for us to correctly come to conclusions on Pracey's drafts.
This by 4 million light years.

Bender is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 10:44 AM
  #539
Zandar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Look at the last ten years as an example going back to the 03 draft. Obviously, once again the young guys from the last few years clearly still can establish themselves as NHL regulars..

Siemens, Duncan
Beaupre, Gabriel
Donnelly, Dillon
Silas, Stephen
Rutkowski, Troy
Elliott, Stefan
Barrie, Tyson
Young, Gus
Gaunce, Cameron
Chouinard, Joel
Holos, Jonas
Shattenkirk, Kevin
Cohen, Colby
Hellgren, Jens
Williams, Nigel
Montgomery, Kevin
Macias, Raymond
Lynch, Jason
Cumiskey, Kyle
Demen-Willaume, Richard
Peltier, Derek
McClellan, Stephen
Liffiton, David

In the last ten drafts, they've only drafted one defenseman that was able to establish himself as an NHLer, and that's Shattenkirk. A pretty good one no doubt, and it would be a decent track record if it was just him, and maybe one or two other guys that made it as 2nd or 3rd pairing guys, but that's it.

The years before that going back to 95 (as far back as wiki goes) wasn't like Nashville's or LA's track record with top end guys, but it was clearly more successful than the last ten years.

Boychuk, Johnny
Lundberg, Eric
Kalteva, Mikko
Gilbert, Tom
Christie, Taylor
Viitanen, Mikko
Saviels, Agris
Sauer, Kurt
Fahey, Brian
Liles, John-Michael
Bahen, Chris
Grenier, Martin
Lindstrom, Sanny
Magnuson, William
Finger, Jeff
Skoula, Martin
Regehr, Robyn
Riazantsev, Alex
Grimes, Kevin
Berry, Rick
Schmidt, Doug
Lafleur, Stephen
Ratchuk, Peter
Storey, Ben
Scorsune, Matthew
Smith, Dan

I will certainly agree that proven players are more important to draft picks, but that doesn't negate the fact that the Avs as a whole have not done well in this regard and it has forced them to go outside the organization, and it is currently the biggest weakness on the big club's roster.
You do realize that the Avs have drafted only 2 D's in the first round over the past 10 drafts and 4 the prior 8. I think most would take the 2 recent over the prior 4. If Siemens, Elliott and Barrie develop somewhat to their potential, most teams wouldn't trade ALL the Ds from those 8 years for the group of Shattenkirk, Siemens, Barrie and Elliott. Not even including whatever Gaunce and the others may turn into or the fact Cumiskey is completely overlooked while Finger is not.

Zandar is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 12:14 PM
  #540
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 18,674
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewolfe2015 View Post
The problem with judging an organization's ability to draft/develop a particular position is that typically organization's do not maintain enough consistency in management to really make it a credible argument.

The Avs for instance only have Lacroix as far as I can tell, from the past '20 years' of our existence.

So I'd speculate it is more a combination of drafting for need, post-lockout drafting philosophy of speed > size (I'd be willing to bet the bigger you are the higher % success ratio in reaching the NHL at least briefly) and dumb luck.
That depends on what argument you think I'm making. I'm just pointing out the long streak of problems drafting d men for the Avs. You can break it into chunks if you want to evaluate each philosophy or guy in charge that way, and Pracey is the most recent guy in charge. He needs another couple years to see how his picks are truly progressing, but my point with him was that as of yet, the results haven't necessarily changed, and the most promising guys in Elliott and Barrie still need a lot of work on their decision making and defensive coverage.

I think Lacroix lets his scouting run the draft, but also think he has always emphasized, and put in place a system revolved around up tempo offensive players, and that trickles down into the draft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
I don't agree with that assessment. Boychuk simply blossomed when he got into Boston's system. We'll never know whether that's simply timing, but credit should go where it's due.

And also, I don't believe there is really much difference in 'style of play' between the EC and WC anymore. That is a thing of the past, IMO. A few individual teams notwithstanding.
Well, one could look at it like he blossomed in Boston, another could look at it like he was a better fit or more comfortable in Boston. It's too hard to tell, and somewhat semantic, but I think the credit should go to Boychuk for taking advantage of an opportunity.

I think that may be a sub theme in the point I'm trying to make. Player development, and coaches have a certain amount of impact, and help with direction and focus for a players development, but I think even both of them put together are responsible for less than half the reason why a player makes it. The biggest factor by far is the player himself, and in that sense the scouting of that player and what they think he will develop into are what to blame or give praise to IMO.

I will disagree on the EC vs WC thing. Even up until last year, the East played a more wide open style than the West where they had to put a strong emphasis on D, and clogging things up more. That's why I think Boychuk did better, he played in a system that focuses more on offensive play than defensive play. They are less concerned with letting in goals out east than the West, because as of last year, the top four highest scoring teams were all out East.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
Here's the problem that I see with that list: Of all of the bold font names on that list, which ones did the Avs develop into good defensive players?

-Shattenkirk most certainly didn't play good NHL defense until he got to St. Louis under Ken Hitchcock.
-Boychuk didn't play NHL caliber hockey until he got into Boston's system.
-Gilbert didn't play NHL caliber hockey until he was moved to Edmonton.
-Sauer didn't play NHL quality defense until he played for Mike Babcock in Anaheim.
-Jeff Finger was a flash in the pan.
-Skoula was decent-to-marginal, but carved out a better defensive defenseman career after he played Jacques Lemaire in Minnesota.
-Regehr developed in Calgary.
-Liles developed in Colorado for sure, but I've never been impressed with his defense at any level.

Now, some of these guys (Gilbert/Regehr) were traded before the Avs could have a chance at developing them. But just looking at the overall list here, over the course of 18 years, the best examples of drafted-and-developed quality defensive play on the blueline......equals Skoula and Liles?
Well, I agree, and maybe I wasn't too clear in my point. I'm not necessarily saying the early list was gangbusters, or comparing the two beyond saying that the end results were better early (though still not that great) and have gotten worse in the last decade.

I disagree on the notion that their development outside the organization was responsible for them. Like I said with the last comment, I think it helps, but it pales in comparison to what the player is responsible for himself. They steer their own ship for the most part.

If anything, I think it was Colorado's style of play that hurt the defensive game of a few guys. The Avs have always been a hard place to play defense at, because except for a year or two under Hartley with HOF d men, and brief spurts of focus on defense due to losing streaks or injuries, the Avs have always played an up tempo, hard forechecking, offensively focused system that puts a lot of pressure on the D.

I also disagree on Shattenkirk. I think he benefitted a lot from Hitchcock, more than the impact most coaches would have, but I don't think he was the sieve defensively that you are implying in Colorado. He really was growing his defensive game more and more every game. It's hypothetical, and I agree that he is better in St. Louis than he ever would be in Colorado, but I think he would have turned out pretty decent here too, and I credit the difference to the difference in styles of play once again.

I'll make the similar points for the other guys, but in regards to Finger, I don't consider him a flash in the pan. I think he was a good 3rd pairing guy that was overpaid by Toronto, and subsequently forced to be sent down to the minors to escape the cap hit, which tarnishes him since he's basically off the map now. I would take Finger over all the Avs D except EJ, OB and possibly Hejda. Not sure on Zanon because he hasn't played yet, but I"m a bit worried on how effective he's gonna be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Wouldn't that list suggest that coaching is more of a problem than drafting?? If these guys are becoming better defensive players outside of our organization, it's time to ask the question 'why is that'?

My opinion has always been that coaching has been this organization's achilles heel.

Also, it's also nice to be able to say, "this organization doesn't develop defensive d-men" very well at all. You also need to go through and take into consideration exactly HOW MANY defensive d-men have been drafted by the club (with THAT purpose) over the years??? I don't have time to go through it right now, maybe some of you guys have the time to check what kind of d-men Agris Saviels and Richard Demen-Willaume were 'supposed' to be but I do know that quite a few of the defencemen that the Avs draft have at the very least, good offensive upside.

I also believe that is done by design and not by accident as part of their drafting philosophy. I believe it relates to the fact that even the very best, shutdown defensive d-man is very RARELY, if EVER a guy that will earn over $5M per year. While offensive d-men and guys who play more of a 2-way game often make that kind of $$$. Therefore, the Avs are drafting d-men, trying to hit home runs and then using their value to make significant trades to acquire what they need. [Shattenkirk is a good example here and I wouldn't be shocked if either Barrie or Elliott would be next]

Anyways, that's my theory.

Also, to say Regehr developed in Calgary is a bit of a stretch. We drafted him, traded his rights to Calgary the next season while he was still in Kamloops and then the very next season, he was playing well for the Flames unless you count those 5 games in the AHL as 'development'. He was pretty good right away, I don't know that I could say with any certainty whatsoever that if the Flames had picked Skoula instead of him, that he wouldn't have done as well playing with Bourque, Foote, Ozolinsh, de Vries, Klemm and Gusarov/Miller.
Absolutely, on all points. It has been the Avs achilles heel over the long term, and I agree the drafting is by design probably for very similar, if not the exact reasons as you mentioned.

The Avs have only had one good coach while in Colorado IMO that wasn't reined in, and that was Hartley. I think Crawford was decent for the era that was coming to an end, where his system could still work, but mostly benefitted from the team in front of him, and most importantly the play of Roy.

Q was pushed into a style of play that PL always wants to play, and I think has hurt them for a long time up until recently, where I think he has finally backed away from putting his stamp on all aspects of the franchise. That's why Q and the team mutually parted ways, and I remember reading there were philosophical differences on how to deal with the struggling team, that really when it came down to it, wasn't that great of a roster to begin with,

Under Cloutier's rein over the defense, which seemed to last a decade, they always had problems defensively. Both in part to personnel, and the passive style which sucked up until Lefebvre came in and instilled a more agressive and physical style. This weak and passive era, where they also played a more wide open style that couldn't always score at the level needed to justify it, had a lot to do with prospects struggling, and players not playing as well as they did on other teams. I'm convinced of that.

As for the draft strategy, I agree, but that brings the larger point in that is that necessarily a good strategy if you're not really getting the results. Like I listed, only Shattenkirk made it out of a decade of D men selected.

I personally think there's too much emphasis on the highly talented defenseman projects, because they never really seem to round out their overall game enough to help the team offensively more than they hurt it. I think they definitely need to keep picking guys like that, but be more selective, and try to look for D that are more sound in other areas, but don't score as much. They are still a project and have things they need to work on, but if they never improve their offensive game, or foot speed, they can still fill in defensively and be an asset.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zandar View Post
You do realize that the Avs have drafted only 2 D's in the first round over the past 10 drafts and 4 the prior 8. I think most would take the 2 recent over the prior 4. If Siemens, Elliott and Barrie develop somewhat to their potential, most teams wouldn't trade ALL the Ds from those 8 years for the group of Shattenkirk, Siemens, Barrie and Elliott. Not even including whatever Gaunce and the others may turn into or the fact Cumiskey is completely overlooked while Finger is not.
You're missing the point. They're both not very good lists, but the early one is over a shorter period of time and has better results. The other one is over a decade, and you're including guys that may or may not make it to the NHL as regulars. They still can, but the bottom line is the trend is still hovering in the gutter and waiting for somebody to deliver on the promise, that previous top prospects never did.

Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 02:00 PM
  #541
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,946
vCash: 7658
I really don't think it matters THAT much that the Avs haven't developed any significant defensive d-men over a long period. If they hadn't developed any NHL PLAYERS, I'd be more worried but that's clearly not the case.

The Avs have been and are still a team that drafts very well. Regardless of position, they are able to find players that eventually become NHLers and more importantly assets.

The reason why I say it doesn't matter is because of this:

1) Avs draft Deadmarsh,RW and Aaron Miller,RD -> Trade those guys for BLAKE,RD

2) Avs draft Nolan,RW -> Trade him for OZOLINSH,LD

3) Avs draft Sundin,C (-> Clark -> Lemieux -> Rolston) and Pahlsson,C -> Trade them for Lefebvre and what eventually becomes Ray Bourque,LD

4) Avs draft Tanguay,LW -> Trade him for Leopold,LD who in turn becomes Ryan Wilson,LD and Galiardi,LW who gives us McGinn,LW

5) Avs draft Liles,LD who becomes part of the package to acquire Varlamov,G (iirc)

6) Avs draft Stewart and Shattenkirk who become part of the package to acquire E. Johnson

-> 1) if the Avs/Nords drafted Denis Pederson (#13) instead of Deader at #14, I don't think that trade gets done.

-> 2) Alright, you have to go all the way to #6 to actually MISS in this draft but still, if they had prefered Scott Scissons, we wouldn't have gotten Ozo.

-> 3) If the Avs/Nords had taken Dave Chyzowski (#2) or Scott Thornton (#3) instead of Sundin, quite certain we don't Clark->Lemieux. If we had preferred Clint Cabana (#175 in 1996) over Pahlsson #176, we don't get Bourque.

-> 4) Jeff Hereema (#11 in '98) was picked right before Tanguay. A grand total of 32 NHL games. Ouch.

-> 5) The Avs could have preferred Sean Connolly who was SWIPED right from underneath their noses by the Senators and they had to settle for Liles at #159. 589 NHL games to ZERO.

-> 6) Maybe it was a toss up between Stewart and Mark Mitera in '06 and a toss up between Shattenkirk and Alex Plante in '07?? Who knows?

The point is this, the Avs have done an very, VERY good job at drafting AND asset management for the past 12 years and if anyone is seriously unhappy with what they've done, they are just not being realistic and comparing with what other teams have done in the rest of the league.

I remember being on HFBoards in April or May of 2009 and...man, things looked pretty bleak.

- We had a coach who believed "we think he can help us" when talking about Tyler Arnason. [has NOT played a single NHL game since then]
- We had a legend on the brink of retirement
- a young up and coming player (Stastny)
- a failed UFA project (Smyth-Hannan)
- a talented but inegmatic player in Wolski [who would be trained in the dark arts of laziness by Arnason]
- absolutely ZERO goaltending DEPTH or HOPE
- a depleted and thin prospects pool (bare cubboards )

Only 3 years later, look at our roster compared to what we had back then. What more could you possibly want??

That turnaround in only 3 short years is absolutely ASTOUNDING and there are fans of many teams in the league who I'm sure are absolutely JEALOUS.

Bender is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 03:01 PM
  #542
WarriorOfGandhi
Was saying Boo-urns
 
WarriorOfGandhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,506
vCash: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zandar View Post
You do realize that the Avs have drafted only 2 D's in the first round over the past 10 drafts and 4 the prior 8.
this needs to be emphasized w/r/t the question of impact defensemen. The most effective way to get top-pairing D through the draft is to use the highest picks possible on them. Colorado, for whatever reason, rarely does that.

WarriorOfGandhi is online now  
Old
12-13-2012, 03:35 PM
  #543
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 18,674
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
I really don't think it matters THAT much that the Avs haven't developed any significant defensive d-men over a long period. If they hadn't developed any NHL PLAYERS, I'd be more worried but that's clearly not the case.

The Avs have been and are still a team that drafts very well. Regardless of position, they are able to find players that eventually become NHLers and more importantly assets.

The reason why I say it doesn't matter is because of this:

1) Avs draft Deadmarsh,RW and Aaron Miller,RD -> Trade those guys for BLAKE,RD

2) Avs draft Nolan,RW -> Trade him for OZOLINSH,LD

3) Avs draft Sundin,C (-> Clark -> Lemieux -> Rolston) and Pahlsson,C -> Trade them for Lefebvre and what eventually becomes Ray Bourque,LD

4) Avs draft Tanguay,LW -> Trade him for Leopold,LD who in turn becomes Ryan Wilson,LD and Galiardi,LW who gives us McGinn,LW

5) Avs draft Liles,LD who becomes part of the package to acquire Varlamov,G (iirc)

6) Avs draft Stewart and Shattenkirk who become part of the package to acquire E. Johnson

-> 1) if the Avs/Nords drafted Denis Pederson (#13) instead of Deader at #14, I don't think that trade gets done.

-> 2) Alright, you have to go all the way to #6 to actually MISS in this draft but still, if they had prefered Scott Scissons, we wouldn't have gotten Ozo.

-> 3) If the Avs/Nords had taken Dave Chyzowski (#2) or Scott Thornton (#3) instead of Sundin, quite certain we don't Clark->Lemieux. If we had preferred Clint Cabana (#175 in 1996) over Pahlsson #176, we don't get Bourque.

-> 4) Jeff Hereema (#11 in '98) was picked right before Tanguay. A grand total of 32 NHL games. Ouch.

-> 5) The Avs could have preferred Sean Connolly who was SWIPED right from underneath their noses by the Senators and they had to settle for Liles at #159. 589 NHL games to ZERO.

-> 6) Maybe it was a toss up between Stewart and Mark Mitera in '06 and a toss up between Shattenkirk and Alex Plante in '07?? Who knows?

The point is this, the Avs have done an very, VERY good job at drafting AND asset management for the past 12 years and if anyone is seriously unhappy with what they've done, they are just not being realistic and comparing with what other teams have done in the rest of the league.

I remember being on HFBoards in April or May of 2009 and...man, things looked pretty bleak.

- We had a coach who believed "we think he can help us" when talking about Tyler Arnason. [has NOT played a single NHL game since then]
- We had a legend on the brink of retirement
- a young up and coming player (Stastny)
- a failed UFA project (Smyth-Hannan)
- a talented but inegmatic player in Wolski [who would be trained in the dark arts of laziness by Arnason]
- absolutely ZERO goaltending DEPTH or HOPE
- a depleted and thin prospects pool (bare cubboards )

Only 3 years later, look at our roster compared to what we had back then. What more could you possibly want??

That turnaround in only 3 short years is absolutely ASTOUNDING and there are fans of many teams in the league who I'm sure are absolutely JEALOUS.
Eh, I don't know. You're going back 15-20 years for most those guys. I don't think that can justify the cold streak with defenseman.

I haven't crunched the numbers but I think there's a slight advantage to the number of forwards than D taken. So you are correct that as long as they're bringing someone to the NHL it's good but I still they they needed a better record with D.

Otherwise they should only be picking forwards and relying 100% on D from outside the organization. They needed one or two other guys to make the NHL in some sort of sustained role to justify all those picks. They just haven't had any success recently outside of Shatty.

It's tough to build a balanced team if you have to keep making trades to strengthen an area like the D. They made one big trade for EJ and brought in some good secondary players but they still need more top end D. If one if the prospects like Elliott or Barrie can take a couple big steps in development and bring their two way game up to at least Liles or Shattenkirk's level that could really balance things out, but from the sounds of their season this year with the Monsters, it seems as though they still are a ways off.


Last edited by Foppa2118: 12-13-2012 at 03:44 PM.
Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:01 PM
  #544
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Eh, I don't know. You're going back 15-20 years for most those guys. I don't think that can justify the cold streak with defenseman.

I haven't crunched the numbers but I think there's a slight advantage to the number of forwards than D taken. So you are correct that as long as they're bringing someone to the NHL it's good but I still they they needed a better record with D.

Otherwise they should only be picking forwards and relying 100% on D from outside the organization. They needed one or two other guys to make the NHL in some sort of sustained role to justify all those picks. They just haven't had any success recently outside of Shatty.

It's tough to build a balanced team if you have to keep making trades to strengthen an area like the D. They made one big trade for EJ and brought in some good secondary players but they still need more top end D. If one if the prospects like Elliott or Barrie can take a couple big steps in development and bring their two way game up to at least Liles or Shattenkirk's level that could really balance things out, but from the sounds of their season this year with the Monsters, it seems as though they still are a ways off.
I think it's a mistake to focus on the defensemen, rather than the defensemen being able to play good defense. The Avs have drafted and developed a number of good offensive defensemen (as they have with offensive forwards). But, they seem to have difficulty drafting and developing dmen who are adept in their own half of the ice.

In truth, it's my belief that the Avs can't successfully navigate the combination of drafting/developing defensive play at any position on the ice. I've already made the point that the best they've done on the blueline is Skoula/Liles; and that they haven't really drafted/developed a good starting goaltender in those same 18 years. If we're honest about it, they haven't had much success with defensively-adept forwards either - until recent years. Stastny, O'R, and Landeskog are a nice breath of fresh air. Aside from those 3, the list isn't very large (Pahlsson and Richardson are certainly good defensive forwards, but they didn't play much until they left the Avs). Just about every other forward drafted by Colorado who had a decent NHL career was/has been average at best defensively.

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:33 PM
  #545
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 18,674
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
I think it's a mistake to focus on the defensemen, rather than the defensemen being able to play good defense. The Avs have drafted and developed a number of good offensive defensemen (as they have with offensive forwards). But, they seem to have difficulty drafting and developing dmen who are adept in their own half of the ice.

In truth, it's my belief that the Avs can't successfully navigate the combination of drafting/developing defensive play at any position on the ice. I've already made the point that the best they've done on the blueline is Skoula/Liles; and that they haven't really drafted/developed a good starting goaltender in those same 18 years. If we're honest about it, they haven't had much success with defensively-adept forwards either - until recent years. Stastny, O'R, and Landeskog are a nice breath of fresh air. Aside from those 3, the list isn't very large (Pahlsson and Richardson are certainly good defensive forwards, but they didn't play much until they left the Avs). Just about every other forward drafted by Colorado who had a decent NHL career was/has been average at best defensively.
I'm not quite getting your meaning on this one. Are you saying the weakness lies in their ability to draft defenseman that can play well defensively? If so, I would agree, but I think that also is a result of picking a lot of under to average sized defenseman that are more talented and offensive than they are well rounded. That brings it back to the general draft philosophy and scouting on who they think will improve on their weaknesses enough to make the NHL.

I would disagree they've drafted and developed a number of offensive defenseman. They really only have two in the recent history going back to the 95 draft. Liles 13 years ago, and Shattenkirk 6 years ago. We're still waiting on the recent ones, but they still have a lot to work on.

They definitely have better success with forwards, but I would think they are split in terms of offensive or defensive/role player types.

Here's another list going back to 95 of the forwards taken. I think we should discount slam dunk #2 and #3 overall picks like Landeskog and Duchene. They're major success are Tanguay in the 1st round, Stastny and O'Reilly in the 2nd, and a bit of a lucky one with Jones in the 9th. Vrbata seems to have rebounded from being almost out of the NHL so that's a success. Wolski and Svatos looked promising as high end players but Wojtek has taken a nose dive out of the NHL, and Marek had too many injuries with his size and style of play. Stewart like Wolski went from a questionable risky pick, to a really good one, and then back to a possibly bad one though they did trade him when his value was at it's highest and get EJ. He's got about one more year before he's in Wolski territory career wise though. Mark Parrish was also a success but that was almost 20 years ago. The rest of the guys are 3rd or 4th line checkers.

That's pretty much what you'd expect though after the 1st and 2nd rounds

C

Steeves, Ryan
Heard, Mitchell
Clarke, Michael
Blandisi, Joseph
Smith, Colin
Nermark, Joachim
Meurs, Garrett
Hishon, Joey
Bournival, Michael
Moffat, Luke
Duchene, Matt
O'Reilly, Ryan
Tessier, Kelsey
Olver, Mark (on the fence between being an NHL regular and AHL jouneyman)
Condon, Nathan
Malone, Brad
Carey, Paul
Burki, Codey
Carman, Michael
Stoa, Ryan
Stastny, Paul
Durand, Chris
Hensick, T. J.
Mercier, Justin
McCutcheon, Mark
Richardson, Brad
McCormick, Cody
Emond, Pierre-Luc
Stephens, Charlie
Nedorost, Vaclav
Aulin, Jared
Soin, Sergei
Kotary, Sean
Lovdahl, Anders
Hahl, Riku ( I still consider him an NHL caliber player)
Tanguay, Alex
Moore, Steve
Babenko, Yuri
Pahlsson, Samuel
Pylner, Roman
Hirvonen, Tomi

W

Alcen, Johan
Parshin, Denis
Videll, Linus
Lazarev, Yevgeny
Miskovich, Aaron
Walker, Luke
Stewart, Chris
Oreskovich, Victor
Yip, Brandon
Svagrovsky, David
Jones, David
Johansson, Jonas
Bois, Danny
Horvath, Scott
Svatos, Marek
Bootland, Darryl
Radivojevic, Branko
Kovac, Kristian
Vrbata, Radim
Parker, Scott
Willsie, Brian
Hinote, Dan
Clark, Justin
Tripp, John
Cirjak, John
George, Chris
Bourke, Troy
Landeskog, Gabriel
Galiardi, T. J.
Fritsche, Tom
Wolski, Wojtek
Corbin, J. D.
King, Colt
Skladany, Frantisek
Kliazmine, Sergei
Kuleshov, Mikhail
Krestanovich, Jordan
Abid, Ramzi
Timmons, K. C.
Nieminen, Ville
Larsen, Brad
Kidney, Kyle
Parrish, Mark
Curtin, Luke
Beaudoin, Nic
Kallio, Tomi


Last edited by Foppa2118: 12-13-2012 at 06:41 PM.
Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:50 PM
  #546
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 4,315
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
I guess I shouldn't comment too strongly on this, as I don't get to see these guys play all that much, so I come at this particular post with a fair amount of ignorance. But I believe 2118's point - and one I support - is that when we talk about "great pick", "fantastic pick", etc - how can we really tell, if the player(s) in question have never stepped onto NHL ice? I mean, it's nice that the Avs can pick players and develop them into solid OHL/AHL contributors, but is that really the benchmark we should have?

I completely agree that not enough time has passed for us to correctly come to conclusions on Pracey's drafts.
I totally agree that we cannot justify a player as great picks when they haven't touched the NHL ice and majority of them are 3rd and later. But if someone is able to watch a certain player play like Hishon more than ten times or so. Then that person should have the knowledge of what to expected in that player. Things can change like Sgarbossa not getting drafted to him becoming a top 6 forward in the AHL, but I don't think it's wrong to have "hype" for our 1st and 2nd round picks, IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Wouldn't that list suggest that coaching is more of a problem than drafting?? If these guys are becoming better defensive players outside of our organization, it's time to ask the question 'why is that'?

My opinion has always been that coaching has been this organization's achilles heel.

Also, it's also nice to be able to say, "this organization doesn't develop defensive d-men" very well at all. You also need to go through and take into consideration exactly HOW MANY defensive d-men have been drafted by the club (with THAT purpose) over the years??? I don't have time to go through it right now, maybe some of you guys have the time to check what kind of d-men Agris Saviels and Richard Demen-Willaume were 'supposed' to be but I do know that quite a few of the defencemen that the Avs draft have at the very least, good offensive upside.

I also believe that is done by design and not by accident as part of their drafting philosophy. I believe it relates to the fact that even the very best, shutdown defensive d-man is very RARELY, if EVER a guy that will earn over $5M per year. While offensive d-men and guys who play more of a 2-way game often make that kind of $$$. Therefore, the Avs are drafting d-men, trying to hit home runs and then using their value to make significant trades to acquire what they need. [Shattenkirk is a good example here and I wouldn't be shocked if either Barrie or Elliott would be next]

Anyways, that's my theory.

Also, to say Regehr developed in Calgary is a bit of a stretch. We drafted him, traded his rights to Calgary the next season while he was still in Kamloops and then the very next season, he was playing well for the Flames unless you count those 5 games in the AHL as 'development'. He was pretty good right away, I don't know that I could say with any certainty whatsoever that if the Flames had picked Skoula instead of him, that he wouldn't have done as well playing with Bourque, Foote, Ozolinsh, de Vries, Klemm and Gusarov/Miller.
Great post Bender, agree with all of it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
I remember being on HFBoards in April or May of 2009 and...man, things looked pretty bleak.

- We had a coach who believed "we think he can help us" when talking about Tyler Arnason. [has NOT played a single NHL game since then]
- We had a legend on the brink of retirement
- a young up and coming player (Stastny)
- a failed UFA project (Smyth-Hannan)
- a talented but inegmatic player in Wolski [who would be trained in the dark arts of laziness by Arnason]
- absolutely ZERO goaltending DEPTH or HOPE
- a depleted and thin prospects pool (bare cubboards )

Only 3 years later, look at our roster compared to what we had back then. What more could you possibly want??

That turnaround in only 3 short years is absolutely ASTOUNDING and there are fans of many teams in the league who I'm sure are absolutely JEALOUS.
Yup and I believe that Pracey is a big part of it, including our high picks. Like I said in my post before, both the '09 and '11 drafts had a solid top 10, where every player was very close to each other (except the first pick) and majority of people on this board had different players they preferred. I was on the main Avs board for the 2009 draft, but the player I wanted was Kane, others wanted Schenn, a large portion wanted Duchene or Hedman/Tavares to fall, while the rest were on the OEL boat. I remember I few even wanted Paajarvi-Svensson. I bet you that Pracey had a long hard meetings between his scouting staff on this same subject. In 2011, on HF the board was split between Landeskog and Larrson. A decent base wanted Huberdeau like I did (tho I did change my mind around the draft), and some posters wanted Zibanejad and Couturier. Probably doesn't seem that way since how well Landeskog played, but I'm very sure that Pracey and staff had a very long conversation between Larrson vs Landeskog vs Others that we didn't get to see in those behind the scene videos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
I'm not quite getting your meaning on this one. Are you saying the weakness lies in their ability to draft defenseman that can play well defensively? If so, I would agree, but I think that also is a result of picking a lot of under to average sized defenseman that are more talented and offensive than they are well rounded. That brings it back to the general draft philosophy and scouting on who they think will improve on their weaknesses enough to make the NHL.

I would disagree they've drafted and developed a number of offensive defenseman. They really only have two in the recent history going back to the 95 draft. Liles 13 years ago, and Shattenkirk 6 years ago. We're still waiting on the recent ones, but they still have a lot to work on.
There is a golden rule that some teams follow, that rule is never drafted a defensive-defenseman in the first round(s). Besides Siemens and Gaunce I can't remember the last time we drafted a DFD in the top 2 rounds! Each draft does vary from one another, but one reason the Avs sucked at developing a solid shutdown-defenseman is because we kept drafting them in the later rounds (4+). You know this, but as the later rounds occur, the draft talent gets weaker and weaker. Yes there are darkhorses in all of them, but majority of those players do not become anything special. Another reason could be that other teams draft them higher than they should go. EX: I am a big fan of Tyler Wotherspoon of Calgary. If we didn't draft Siemens he would've been an amazing replacement, as he has really good shutdown talent and has developed nicely. I swear I thought he would've gone in 3rd to 4th round, but Calgary drafted him much higher at 57th spot in the second round.


Last edited by S E P H: 12-13-2012 at 07:08 PM.
S E P H is online now  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:19 PM
  #547
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,946
vCash: 7658
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
There is a golden rule that some teams follow, that rule is never drafted a defensive-defenseman in the first round(s). Besides Siemens and Gaunce I can't remember the last time we drafted a DFD in the top 2 rounds! Each draft does vary from one another, but one reason the Avs sucked at developing a solid shutdown-defenseman is because we kept drafting them in the later rounds (4+). You know this, but as the later rounds occur, the draft talent gets weaker and weaker. Yes there are darkhorses in all of them, but majority of those players do not become anything special. Another reason could be that other teams draft them higher than they should go. EX: I am a big fan of Tyler Wotherspoon of Calgary. If we didn't draft Siemens he would've been an amazing replacement, as he has really good shutdown talent and has developed nicely. I swear I thought he would've gone in 3rd to 4th round, but Calgary drafted him much higher at 57th spot in the second round.
Seph is right.

Here is the list going back 12 years of drafting:

2012 Entry NHL Totals
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From

- NO D-men in 2012.

2011 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2011 Entry 11 1 Duncan Siemens D Saskatoon Blades [WHL]
2011 Entry 153 6 Gabriel Beaupre D Val d'Or Foreurs [QMJHL]
2011 Entry 183 7 Dillon Donnelly D Shawinigan Cataractes [QMJHL]

- The jury is still out on all 3 of these guys.

2010 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2010 Entry 95 4 Stephen Silas D Belleville Bulls [OHL]
2010 Entry 137 5 Troy Rutkowski D Portland Winterhawks [WHL]

- Both these guys were considered offensive or 2-way.

2009 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2009 Entry 49 2 Stefan Elliott D Saskatoon Blades [WHL]
2009 Entry 64 3 Tyson Barrie D Kelowna Rockets [WHL]
2009 Entry 184 7 Gus Young D Nobles [Mass. H.S.]

- All offensive guys...don't know much about Gus.

2008 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2008 Entry 50 2 Cameron Gaunce D Mississauga St. Michael's Majors [OHL]
2008 Entry 167 6 Joel Chouinard D Victoriaville Tigres [QMJHL]
2008 Entry 170 6 Jonas Holos D Sarpsborg [Norway]

- Gaunce was drafted as a 2-way guy, Holos was considered a puck mover and Chouinard was drafted as an offensive d-man.

2007 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2007 Entry 14 1 Kevin Shattenkirk D US National Under 18 Team
2007 Entry 45 2 Colby Cohen D Lincoln Stars [USHL]
2007 Entry 155 6 Jens Hellgren D Frolunda Jrs (Sweden)

- Both Shattenkirk and Cohen were drafted as offensive/2-way guys. Don't know much about Hellgren.

2006 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2006 Entry 51 2 Nigel Williams D US National Under 18 Team
2006 Entry 110 4 Kevin Montgomery D US National Under 18 Team

- Williams was supposed to be a 2-way guy, not a shutdown guy. Always liked Montgomery but he was 2-way as well.

2005 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2005 Entry 124 4 Raymond Macias D Kamloops Blazers [WHL]
2005 Entry 166 6 Jason Lynch D Spokane Chiefs [WHL]
2005 Entry 222 7 Kyle Cumiskey D Kelowna Rockets [WHL]

- Macias was a 2-way guy, don't know much about Lynch and we all know Cumiskey.

2004 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2004 Entry 154 5 Richard Demen-Willaume D Frolunda Jrs (Sweden)
2004 Entry 184 6 Derek Peltier D Cedar Rapids RoughRiders [USHL]
2004 Entry 281 9 Steve McClellen D Catholic Memorial H.S. (Mass.)

- Don't know much about Willaume, I remember Peltier was a point producer in the USHL and have no clue about the 9th rounder McClellen.

2003 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2003 Entry 63 2 Dave Liffiton D Plymouth Whalers [OHL]

- Here is one. They didn't draft Liffiton for his offensive skills. Mix of defense and toughness.

2002 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From GP G A Pts PIM
2002 Entry 61 2 Johnny Boychuk D Calgary Hitmen [WHL] 2002 Entry 94 3 Eric Lundberg D Providence College [H-East]
2002 Entry 107 4 Mikko Kalteva D Jokerit Jrs (Finland)
2002 Entry 129 4 Tom Gilbert D Chicago Steel [USHL]
2002 Entry 195 6 Taylor Christie D Bowling Green State University [CCHA]

- Boychuk had an offensive component to his game when he was drafted. Don't really remember too much about Lundberg or Kalteva. Gilbert was also supposed to be offensive minded.

2001 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2001 Entry 149 5 Mikko Viitanen D Ahmat (Finland)

- Don't remember much about this player.

2000 Entry
Draft Num. Round Player Pos Drafted From
2000 Entry 63 2 Agris Saviels D Owen Sound Platers [OHL]
2000 Entry 88 3 Kurt Sauer D Spokane Chiefs [WHL]
2000 Entry 119 4 Brian Fahey D U. of Wisconsin [WCHA] 2000 Entry 159 5 John-Michael Liles D Michigan State University [CCHA]
2000 Entry 189 6 Chris Bahen D Clarkson University [ECAC]

- Sauer was another one but a 3rd round pick and he actually turned out to be a decent player at one point in his career. Saviels was a point producer in junior.

So correct me if I'm wrong but in order to suck at something, don't you have to TRY first?

It's not like the Avs have been drafting these reputable defensive d-men with their 1st and 2nd round picks and aren't able to develop them or aren't having them pan out. They just aren't drafting those types of players that high. So to say they've been unable to produce that kind of d-man IS accurate but you need to look further and see why.

Not a huge fan of Wotherspoon. Not sure his game translates but we'll see.


Last edited by Bender: 12-13-2012 at 09:27 PM.
Bender is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:30 PM
  #548
Nzap
Insert clever phrase
 
Nzap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Middle of Noux
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Don't really remember too much about Kalteva.
Kalteva was more of an offensive one when younger (i.e. when drafted), but is now more defensively orientated.

Nzap is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 09:53 PM
  #549
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,946
vCash: 7658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Hahl, Riku ( I still consider him an NHL caliber player)
I miss Riku Hahl.

Bender is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 10:34 PM
  #550
WarriorOfGandhi
Was saying Boo-urns
 
WarriorOfGandhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,506
vCash: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
I miss Riku Hahl.
lol, why

WarriorOfGandhi is online now  
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 06:28 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.