HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

A first rounder's odds of making the NHL

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-19-2013, 12:18 PM
  #1
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,512
vCash: 500
A first rounder's odds of making the NHL

I decided to look at the first rounders who did not go in the top 10. For those who had at least 10 years since their draft, I wanted 5 full seasons (400 games). As we got closer, I reduced the number of games played to reflect that some players did not have the time to run up 400 games yet.

CONCLUSION: In only 2 seasons did the majority of the players chose between 11 and 30 made the NHL as long-time regulars. In all, only 84 out of 200 players (42%) became "real" NHLers. In fact, this number might be inflated because some of the later picks may still be dumped out of the NHL and never reach the 400 games plateau. Note that 400 career games isn't some great achievement. Plenty of guys with very average careers played over 1,000 games (e.g. Jay Wells, Todd Marchant), so 400 games is really the bare minimum.


400+ NHL games:

1999: 4
2000: 9
2001: 9
2002: 8


300+ NHL games:

2003: 14 (12 made it, 2 close)
2004: 12

200+ NHL games:

2005: 8 (7 made it, 1 close and still playing)
2006: 7 (6 made it, 1 close and still playing)


100+ NHL games:

2007: 8
2008: 9 (8 made it, one close and still playing)


As I previously showed, a second rounder has a 20% shot to make the NHL, a third rounder has a 10%, and the rounds below are 3-7%. In all, in an average draft, about 23.5 players make the NHL as long term regular NHLers.

This excludes:

- Guys like Lisin, Mitchell and Woywitka who shuttled back and forth from the minors to the NHL and racked up a couple hundred games.

- Guys like Dan Girardi and Matt Read who were never drafted, but became full-time NHLers.

- Top 10 draft picks.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2013, 12:25 PM
  #2
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 17,274
vCash: 500
So basically when someone takes a shot at the Rangers for having to "buy" their top 6 talent it's unwarranted?

SnowblindNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2013, 12:25 PM
  #3
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,512
vCash: 500
This also doesn't take into account the fact that someone who has a top 10 pick has better second rounders too. A guy chosen at #32 is seen as a far superior prospect than a guy chose at #58. In fact, that second rounder is close to the late first than to the late second. This is yet another advantage for teams like the Islanders.

Beacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2013, 12:29 PM
  #4
slipknottin
Registered User
 
slipknottin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 2,999
vCash: 500
So you excluded top 10? This is just 11-30?

Wonder how many of those guys are given chance after chance to make it because they were first round picks. Had they been mid rounds they would have got the boot much sooner

Really to find superstars in the NHL draft, you need to be picking top 10, which the rangers dont do often. Constant mediocrity is really the worst thing to be in the nhl.

slipknottin 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 06:18 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.