I was just going off of hockeydb, which only listed his games in one league. Guess I was wrong. I should have looked into it further, since I don't remember him being injured his draft year. I'll take him off the list then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jro
Chris DiDomenico is still very young, but was very injury prone. For a while he showed pretty good promise for the Leafs. Probably the poster child of what you're trying to prove.
I'm actually not trying to prove anything yet. I do have the suspicion that these guys don't turn out, but I'll go wherever the data leads me. Right now I'm just collecting examples.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rise from the Ashes
I support this thread.
To be honest, while you are seeking statistics, I believe that as long as one's state of mind and confidence does not shatter, that person could fully recover and fulfill his potential. Now, I fully believe Mr. Galchenyuk is a very confident young man with a great supporting cast AND has fully recovered from his injury. I would argue that while his confidence is likely not at its all time high, if he had played a little longer he would have been dominating to the degree Yakupov was before his concussion. Kid has a great disposition and as long as he does not re-injure the knee, he should flourish.
To clarify, I'm not actually worried about Glachenyuk's physical recovery. I think the injury will heal to near-normal.
My concern is more about the lost development in what are some of the biggest years of physical development for men. An analogy is learning a new language. People learn language best before a certain age (some debate on what that exact age is). If you start to learn after that, it's certainly possible. But it's much, much harder. You will likely have an accent. And it's rare to become fluent. I liken that to not meeting your full potential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayzinSmith
Not an injury, but Brendan Witt sat out all of 1994-95 in a contract dispute w/ Washington when he was 19.
That's also a perfect example. The injury isn't the important part, just that they missed time for whatever reason. So I'll add it to the list when I get time to go look up the stats and stuff.
Keep the examples coming guys. But just a reminder, it would help if you could offer an opinion on how the person turned out relative to the expectations at the time. For example Witt became a pretty good player, but how was he viewed before the injury? That's too long ago that I really have no idea.
Curtis Crombeen, now with Plymouth, lost a full year due to a knee injury. Cost him his chance at getting drafted, had a lot of promise despite his size.
Joey Hishon has now missed a full season of hockey, what would have been his first year of pro. Obviously still early to tell, but a concussion like that could really hinder his NHL potential.
Isn't there speculation that his career is over? I can't remember where I read it but I thought I heard whispers about it.
What about young pitchers in baseball who get Tommy John Surgery examples? There are plenty.
Aside from major surgery for the arm, there are some people who believe time off (year or more) for a pitcher is a good thing. There are examples of pitchers moving to a positional spot for a year or more and then when going back to pitching, there is an improvement. Some feel that the time off allows the arm to come back stronger and able to handle more velocity. Obviously these players are still playing the game and involved.
Tom Wilhelmsen main problem was maturity when he gave up on baseball but there are quite a few people who believe that the years off helped his arm strength/pitching velocity. Some young arms are so abused, there are late bloomers who weren't rode hard, who come out of no where to be the one that wins the race at the end.
different sport but Antonio Cromartie and Willis McGahee suffered similar injuries. Both were highly touted football players. Easily projected to go the top 5 picks of their respective draft class.
Cromartie was a great player for FSU until he tore his ACL ... same injury as Galchenyuk ... missed his draft year. Still went on to be drafted 19th overall. He later made the Pro Bowl as an all-star and set a franchise record for INTs with San Diego.
McGahee had an even worse injury tearing his ACL, PCL, and MCL. One of the worst sports related injuries I've ever seen. He would be drafted 23rd overall. Missed a full year of football with Buffalo. Then came back only to become the n'1 back for the team. He also went on to make the Pro Bowl. Still playing today despite playing one of the toughest position in sports and being a tough runner himself.
Cromartie is a good CB although never in the top 10 echelon.
McGahee has had a solid career but he is definitely not the player people were expecting before the injury. He was supposed to be kind of what Adrian Peterson is now.
Keith Tkachuk broke leg in Jr year of high school. Missed part of that season and entire senior year.
Do you have any idea how many games he played and how many games the team played those years? HS stats are hard to come by. I see him as playing 21 games his junior year, but the HS team says they only played 20. So he didn't seem to miss then. And his senior year he is listed as having played 6 games, but again I have no idea what part of the season he missed because I don't know how many games the team played.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redarmynative
I don't think injuries have that much of an effect in player development. A player will learn all of the things necessary to become an NHLer at some point and what matters is if they can translate what they learn to an actual game. That is why I expect to see Taylor Fedun and Jon Merrill in the NHL in a few years.
Merrill would be a good test case in the future. Since the premise is based on injury not having long term effects, a case like his where he's not out because of injury is ideal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jro
Chris DiDomenico is still very young, but was very injury prone. For a while he showed pretty good promise for the Leafs. Probably the poster child of what you're trying to prove.
I didn't include him yet since I don't really recall there being hype over him. Other than from some of the more enthusiastic Maple Leaf fans. Do you really he's highly regarded enough that he should be included?
To the people listing baseball, basketball, football players etc. Those examples are nice to get an idea of other sports. From those examples it seems like the players are mostly succeeding. Although perhaps not as expected. I know McGahee, for example, was going to be some kind of super back. He's done well, but not to expectations. The problem with other sports guys is they don't really fit into my table of examples.
Anyways the table is updated. I added an extra column of "met expectations." No* means not met expectations, but that it was more due to a lingering injury than the lost development. inc means incomplete, they were not counted because I think the jury's still out. A few guys I wasn't so sure of so I put a question mark. Feel free to suggest corrections.
Right now there are two "met expectations" out of 7 players (didn't count the No* guys). That sample size is too small to make any conclusions out of.
If I do get more examples, I plan on trying some pseudo-statistics. I think it should be a t-test comparing the success rate to 50% (which would be the overall 1st rounder success rate). Or maybe someone has a better suggestion?
I think we are overstating the results of the lost time/injury. Michalek is still very fast, he made the All-Star team this year and was leading the NHL in goals earlier in the season. He plays 19-20 mins a night and got 35 goals. He had bad years the last couple in Ottawa because he had other injuries.
Saying he didn't meet expectations? What were those expectations? He was an early draft pick at 6th, he is a very effective player. Have injuries hurt his career? Probably some but he lacks hockey sense to go to that next level of an actual superstar and not just a very good top 6 winger. The argument basically is in this thread that missing some developmental years is why he doesn't have better hockey sense, but I don't buy it. If he is not as good as he would have become I would argue it is due to lingering effects of his injuries not from lack of development time.
It might actually be beneficial to not train too hard until you are a "man" at 20 or 21. Getting time off could help players. We don't know. You can compare NA junior players who play 60-80 games depending on the playoffs with Europeans that play less or NCAA who play a ton less. Is it better to just grind it out and play 16-20 year olds 3 games a week for more than half the year or play a lot less?
Galchenyuk is over-rated, IMHO. He wasn't an elite skater to begin with and, IMO, injured his knee because of it. Defensively, his skills are average and he isn't the most physical player. Doesn't have 3 step acceleration to speak of either. Great shot and vision, but he did play an entire season with the #1 ranked player--and saw a ton of PP minutes. So he misses his entire draft season. Tough break but it doesn't make him a hero. There is no real data on this guy after the end of last season. What's he like without Yakupov? What happens if say, a guy like Halmo, hits him with his head down? Lot of concussed top 20 players this year. What's he look like next to the rest of his peers if he plays an entire season? Again, NO DATA.
People think this kid could go #1? I seriously doubt that.
Mark Mitera missed almost all of his senior year with a knee injury.
Brendan Mikkelson almost all of 2005-06 with a knee injury.
That was Mitera's 20 year old season, but sure why not. Mikkelson added too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc the Habs Fan
Can Sbisa be used as an example?
His age 19 season:
8 games with Anaheim.
12 with Portland and 17 with Lethbridge (WHL)
So 37 games played in regular season. Had to be because of an injury, right?
He did play 5 at the Olympics, 3 at the WC and 13 WHL playoff games.
Yes he was injured at the WJC and missed some WHL time because of it. I don't want to include him, however, because he still played like half a season. (37/72 = 0.49 of season lost, or if you don't count NHL games it's 0.60 of WHL season lost). If he was included, though, I would say he seems to be meeting expectations. Not my expectations, but probably meeting most reasonable expectations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens Rule
I think we are overstating the results of the lost time/injury. Michalek is still very fast, he made the All-Star team this year and was leading the NHL in goals earlier in the season. He plays 19-20 mins a night and got 35 goals. He had bad years the last couple in Ottawa because he had other injuries.
Saying he didn't meet expectations? What were those expectations? He was an early draft pick at 6th, he is a very effective player. Have injuries hurt his career? Probably some but he lacks hockey sense to go to that next level of an actual superstar and not just a very good top 6 winger. The argument basically is in this thread that missing some developmental years is why he doesn't have better hockey sense, but I don't buy it. If he is not as good as he would have become I would argue it is due to lingering effects of his injuries not from lack of development time.
It might actually be beneficial to not train too hard until you are a "man" at 20 or 21. Getting time off could help players. We don't know. You can compare NA junior players who play 60-80 games depending on the playoffs with Europeans that play less or NCAA who play a ton less. Is it better to just grind it out and play 16-20 year olds 3 games a week for more than half the year or play a lot less?
I don't think Michalek met expectations. He's only been in the top-60 of the league in scoring twice. This is the first year he's broken 30 goals. To meet expectations I think he'd have to be in that top-60 range more often than not.
As to whether the missed time caused him to fail to meet expectations or not, the method used doesn't really care. The goal is to collect all guys and classify them as meeting expectations or not, no matter what the exact reason. Then it is compared to the theoretical success rate of 50% to see if it is appreciably less.
About your last topic. It's true that the best way to develop may not be known. But don't mistake fewer games for less work. Leagues like NCAA may play far fewer games, but the kids work out more with that extra time. So if a player misses a season, they'll very likely be missing out on game time, workout time, practice time, and skill development time.
Galchenyuk is over-rated, IMHO. He wasn't an elite skater to begin with and, IMO, injured his knee because of it. Defensively, his skills are average and he isn't the most physical player. Doesn't have 3 step acceleration to speak of either. Great shot and vision, but he did play an entire season with the #1 ranked player--and saw a ton of PP minutes. So he misses his entire draft season. Tough break but it doesn't make him a hero. There is no real data on this guy after the end of last season. What's he like without Yakupov? What happens if say, a guy like Halmo, hits him with his head down? Lot of concussed top 20 players this year. What's he look like next to the rest of his peers if he plays an entire season? Again, NO DATA.
People think this kid could go #1? I seriously doubt that.
Small sample, but in the playoffs, Yakupov was invisible (post-concussion everyone says) while Galchenyuk was buzzing everywhere. All scouts are saying that they benefit from each other equally. Both can set up and both can finish.
Small sample, but in the playoffs, Yakupov was invisible (post-concussion everyone says) while Galchenyuk was buzzing everywhere. All scouts are saying that they benefit from each other equally. Both can set up and both can finish.
It kinda sounds like you've got an agenda...
It sounds like you weren't watching the games. Couple gimme goals and an assist or two. -6 to boot. Yakupov's head wasn't right, that was obvious. Agenda? Yeah, pointing out the obvious,
missed entire draft year season + knee injury + NO DATA outside of that skating with Yakupov translates into a #1 pick??? Uh.....no
