HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

JDD our starter in 3 years??? An objective analysis...(very long)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-13-2004, 01:21 PM
  #26
IceDragoon
Registered User
 
IceDragoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South of Sanity
Posts: 3,874
vCash: 500
Excellent thread Boondock.
Great perspectives from you and others.
Thanx.

IceDragoon is offline  
Old
04-13-2004, 02:55 PM
  #27
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
I wonder...

....about Edmonton's ability to draft goaltenders to some extent. For the record, they HAVE drafted a fair number of goaltenders over a large range of draft positions (1st round through 9th). However, successful drafts are as follows:

1980 - 132 - Andy Moog
1981 - 008 - Grant Fuhr
2001 - 133 - Jussi Markannen
2002 - 031 - JDD (maybe)

Not exactly a stellar record. Also, Jussi Markannen was 26 when he was drafted so he kind of falls outside the norm in that, as an overager with substantial high-level experience, he was a finished product.

One could put Joaquin Gage on that list but I prefer to stick with a stricter interpretation of the word - "successful".

Just a little more info for the thread,


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
04-13-2004, 03:58 PM
  #28
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
....about Edmonton's ability to draft goaltenders to some extent. For the record, they HAVE drafted a fair number of goaltenders over a large range of draft positions (1st round through 9th). However, successful drafts are as follows:

1980 - 132 - Andy Moog
1981 - 008 - Grant Fuhr
2001 - 133 - Jussi Markannen
2002 - 031 - JDD (maybe)

Not exactly a stellar record. Also, Jussi Markannen was 26 when he was drafted so he kind of falls outside the norm in that, as an overager with substantial high-level experience, he was a finished product.

One could put Joaquin Gage on that list but I prefer to stick with a stricter interpretation of the word - "successful".

Just a little more info for the thread,


YKOil
As an example, compare that record with that of New Jersey:

'83: Terreri (85th)
'84: Billington (23rd), McLean (107th)
'85: Burke (24th)
'90: Brodeur (20th), Dunham (53rd), Schwab (200th)

...and that basically has been it for anyone of any consequence since '90.

Interesting point: In the last 6 entry drafts, they have selected 61 players. Only 2 of them (Ari Ahonen and Matus Kostur) were goalies.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
04-13-2004, 05:42 PM
  #29
Asiaoil
Registered User
 
Asiaoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Thailand
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
Well perhaps you need to look at things situationally. Two years ago we had basically no goalie depth at all and JDD was still available with the first pick of the second round. That obviously represented great value to Lowe and the scouts - so they pulled the Hecht deal in order to draft him.

I don’t know how the Oilers have Schwarz, Montoya and Dubnyk ranked – but when it comes time to select at #14 and #25 – they will evaluate who is still there. I'm not all that keen on taking a goalie at #14 unless he is rated top 5 overall by our scouts. However, if Schwarz or Montoya is rated that high by our scouts and is still available at #14 – then you take him and who cares about the number. That’s what happened with JDD – the guy was great value in the 2nd round and I expect we are all pretty happy to have him in the system.

Aside from being opportunistic - the Oilers also really need to scout prospect goalies better and try select guys in the later rounds who have the potential to emerge. We have drafted goalies very very poorly in the past (and that’s being polite) and this needs to change.

Asiaoil is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 01:03 AM
  #30
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,112
vCash: 500
It is worth noting that the trade winds have changed lately, and there not quite as many big deals as their used to be. No longer are guys like Roy, Belfour, and such changing hands in their primes. It's usually young goaltenders that are traded for and blossom in that area.

Just looking in the Northwest, only Aebischer and Conklin are guys who have been drafted by their own team that played any decent amount of games last year.

That said, look at the way things are going now. Guys like Raycroft, Turco, and DiPietro are propping up, and I'd suggest that this will be much more common in a few years. Teams are no longer interested in trading goaltenders for big-time assets, nor are they interested in giving away good goaltending either. Which means that relying on your system to churn out goaltenders is becoming more and more of an importance.

Mizral is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:29 AM
  #31
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
just wanted to add a link to the other thread, mainly to say that I like Vlad's take on it, it captures the esance of what I was trying to say but more eloquently (although I might disagree on Lehtonen personally- then again, I might not, - just the general essence of his statement):

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=70129

speeds is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:31 AM
  #32
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Just to...

...chime in again, and actually add to something Mizral just said:

- Goalie trades ARE becoming less common.

MOST movement, from recent history, that we recall happened due to one of three reasons:

- expansion and protected goalie lists (Turek, Fernandez, etc)
- oversupply in the pipeline (Kiprusoff)
- play-off contenders (Oullette)
-- well... okay... Mad Mike Milbury may be reason #4 (a category all his own - the guy traded Luongo! - freakin' idiot)
-- sigh... I also have to mention Clarke (best GM to never solve his core problem - lack of good goaltending)

The expansion dust is long settled, Milbury is no longer quite as insane, Clarke may finally have a decent goaltender and we have no idea how a new CBA will affect certain teams (i.e. Clarke).

That leaves relying on a team to have oversupply and the only team I see having a major problem with that right now is Buffalo, with Montreal (Garon), Ottawa (Prusek) and Anaheim (Gerber) being maybe's.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:44 AM
  #33
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quick note...

...I think Vlad is taking an idiot's stance on the issue.

He is applying a general rule of observation and calling it wisdom.

According to him we never would have drafted Fuhr...

FACT - if a goalie is the BPA on your list then you draft him where you can. While there is something to be said for manuevering to maximize return on a pick (which, to his credit, is a point that he does address favorably later on) in terms of drafting that goalie as late as possible (trading down, etc) the simple fact is that in the new NHL, GREAT goalies are almost always drafted.

The position has become THAT important.

Quick Fact - Vancouver has NEVER drafted a good goaltender - and it shows.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:47 AM
  #34
oil slick
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
Quick Fact - Vancouver has NEVER drafted a good goaltender - and it shows.
Toronto, and Calgary are useless at drafting goalies too, and I don't think it shows with them too much.

oil slick is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 09:28 AM
  #35
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick
Toronto, and Calgary are useless at drafting goalies too, and I don't think it shows with them too much.
You're kidding me right?

Last Cup either team won was Calgary - and the guy in net was Vernon - drafted by Calgary #56 overall (equivalent to a mid-2nd rounder today) - at a time when drafting goalies was almost an afterthought.

Of course, having broke a 7 year feast of non-play-off hockeyKiprosoff becomes the new poster boy for NOT drafting netminders? :lol

How many Cups has Toronto won lately because they are so good at trading for netminders or signing them as UFA's?

Oh wait....

None in 30+ years.

Sure gonna look to them as to the best way to develop a team.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 09:46 AM
  #36
oil slick
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
You're kidding me right?

Last Cup either team won was Calgary - and the guy in net was Vernon - drafted by Calgary #56 overall (equivalent to a mid-2nd rounder today) - at a time when drafting goalies was almost an afterthought.

Of course, having broke a 7 year feast of non-play-off hockeyKiprosoff becomes the new poster boy for NOT drafting netminders? :lol

How many Cups has Toronto won lately because they are so good at trading for netminders or signing them as UFA's?

Oh wait....

None in 30+ years.

Sure gonna look to them as to the best way to develop a team.


YKOil
Easy. The argument is whether to draft and develop a lot of goaltenders. You then pointed out Vancouver as an example of why we should. I then pointed out there are teams out there that didn't develope their own, and are doing fine. I'm not too sure what you are disputting? The fact that the Leafs have a good goaltender? The fact that they didn't develop him? Or are you implying that your point about Vancouver having Cloutier is somehow MORE relevent than my point that the leafs have Belfour?!?

As for not wanting to emulate the Leafs goaltending situation, I would be more than happy to have a player the quality of Belfour in net.


Last edited by oil slick: 04-14-2004 at 10:17 AM.
oil slick is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 11:08 AM
  #37
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,822
vCash: 500
It's kinda funny...

I keep re-reading these threads, and now find myself flipflopping on positions somewhat.

Not quite sure anymore that when I read YK's posts that I'm really disagreeing.

Good stuff to read, anyways.

As this all relates to the Oilers, it will be interesting to see.

I suppose if a skater and a goalie are "tied", I'm gonna take the skater every time. And if I have a goalie marginally ahead of a skater I would probably still take the skater, though in the Oilers situation, as barren as they are (I know, don't draft by need ) I might be inclined to switch gears and pick the goalie even if he's marginally the BPA. Especially as others have pointed out, in a draft like this where it appears the upside of Montoya or Schwartz might exceed, or at least rival, the upside of the "best available skater".

Once the BPA as a goalie starts to become fairly clear-cut though I can't really disagree with the idea of drafting a goalie, especially as you get out of the first round.

speeds is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 11:15 AM
  #38
barto
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
It is worth noting that the trade winds have changed lately, and there not quite as many big deals as their used to be. No longer are guys like Roy, Belfour, and such changing hands in their primes. It's usually young goaltenders that are traded for and blossom in that area.
Depends on what you mean by "in their primes". But it's reasonable to speculate that the Roy trade was more of an anomaly due to a fairly specific circumstance. I'm not sure it's happening THAT much less than in the past, at least to be statistically significant.
Quote:

Just looking in the Northwest, only Aebischer and Conklin are guys who have been drafted by their own team that played any decent amount of games last year.

That said, look at the way things are going now. Guys like Raycroft, Turco, and DiPietro are propping up, and I'd suggest that this will be much more common in a few years. Teams are no longer interested in trading goaltenders for big-time assets, nor are they interested in giving away good goaltending either. Which means that relying on your system to churn out goaltenders is becoming more and more of an importance.
I'm not sure about that, either. I'd say that teams are VERY interested in trading goalies for big-time assets, but CAN'T. We've all seen the value of goalies (in trades and salaries) drop recently, and by quite a bit. Cechmanek could be had for a 2nd-rounder, and this after a *tremendous* regular season. Is that "good goaltending"? Not *proven* goaltending, I guess you could say.

Giving away good goaltending? When has that happened in the past? I think you still get the occasional guy who wasn't doing so well for his team, gets traded (or signs somewhere else) and does very well. Giguere's one example, Theodore, even Burke to a certain extent. Hell, Salo played quite well for the Oilers after coming from the Islanders.

But is that really so different from any other position? Martin St. Louis springs to mind as well, along with many others.

I'd say the importance of a team developing its own goalies from within is directly related to how *other* teams are faring. If there are a number of teams overloaded with goaltending talent, then it's easier to trade for. If there are very few teams with extra goaltending, it's harder to trade for, thus more important to have done some developing internally.

Bart

barto is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 12:25 PM
  #39
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Well

Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick
As for not wanting to emulate the Leafs goaltending situation, I would be more than happy to have a player the quality of Belfour in net.
I simply disagree with the concept of spending 30 or so years waiting to get elite goaltending and when I finally do I only have him around for 3 or 4 years at most - hardly enough time to develop a championship team.

It Toronto doesn't win it this year they will:

- STILL have NOT won a Cup
- STILL have to rebuild their entire team (most of their best contributors are older than old)
- STILL NOT have anyone in their system to tend the twine for them

The Leafs goaltending situation is the LAST thing I would ever want to emulate.

New Jersey, however, is a different story.

A prime year to study is 1995. In that year:

- the top draft picks, by general consensus, were: Berard, Redden & Berg
- d-men prospects were abundant that year
- Goalies drafted were Giguere (13), Biron (15), Boucher (22) & Denis (25)
- Toronto picked at 15 and took Jeff Ware

Jeff Ware's ONLY claim to fame was that he was 6'4", 220lbs and had a rep as a nasty d-man. His stats in the OHL were LESS than stellar - Sean Brown, who went at pick #21, was of the same mold and has had a much better career. Toronto decided that the 6th best d-man was a better choice than:

a. the 2nd best goalie OR
b. trading up a few spots and taking the highest ranked goalie

Makes you wonder as to the capabilities of their scouting when it comes to goalies.

The Oilers are facing the same dilemma this year really. Given:

- the dearth of sure-fire prospects after the first two picks, and
- the fact that all the forwards have noticable strengths and weaknesses

It is debateable as to whether or not the 10th best forward available is as good a bet as one of the two best goalies or the two best d-men.

Think about - it isn't hard to see where Schwarz (G) and Barker (D) may be the ONLY non-forwards picked by the time the Oilers pick at #14. At that point the Oilers would be taking the 12th best forward? Crazy.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 12:50 PM
  #40
igor*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
...
It is debateable as to whether or not the 10th best forward available is as good a bet as one of the two best goalies or the two best d-men.

Think about - it isn't hard to see where Schwarz (G) and Barker (D) may be the ONLY non-forwards picked by the time the Oilers pick at #14. At that point the Oilers would be taking the 12th best forward? Crazy.
It may or may not be wise to take the (arguably) 12th best forward at their spot, impossible to say.

One thing I am sure of; NHL scouting staffs have historically drafted the correct ratio of goalies/forwards/defensemen at their draft position. (see chart below, the goalie and defenseman lines are a little faint, but they are near enough the same as the forward curve).


Personally, I think you take the player you have valued as the best player available ... and factor in development costs vs return, and the timeline of your current team and the draftee. They should maybe be leaning a bit towards forwards ... who seem a bit more likely to have higher trade value in a couple of years.


Last edited by igor*: 04-14-2004 at 01:39 PM.
igor* is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 12:57 PM
  #41
oil slick
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
Think about - it isn't hard to see where Schwarz (G) and Barker (D) may be the ONLY non-forwards picked by the time the Oilers pick at #14. At that point the Oilers would be taking the 12th best forward? Crazy.


YKOil
I think my main objection to the idea of using our top drafts to get goaltending is two fold.

1)I think that we should be using our picks to move up into a top 7 position and get a skilled forward.

2)I think that instead of using a mid level first rounder to draft a goalie, we should instead try to trade immediately for a Garon, Biron, Noronen type player. I just think that spending a second, or a low first on one of these guys is a better return than spending a mid level pick on a Montoya. Both are not assured of being a legitimate starter, but I have more faith in these guys (particularly Garon) making it than I do in the Goalies in this draft beyond Schwarz.

In addition, I am still not sold on Markkannen and Conlin; particularly Conklin as our starters for the next 3-4 years, which is likely how long it will take to get JDD-Montoya into the NHL even if they do pan out.

oil slick is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 01:29 PM
  #42
Ryno
BEHOLD!!
 
Ryno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: G.P
Country: Canada
Posts: 529
vCash: 500
It would be interesting to see...

...how many scouts/GM's are having these very same arguments amongst themselves.

This could mean that some very good goaltenders slip into the late first/early second round of the draft, or that Schwarz, Montoya, and Dubnyk are all gone by the 20th pick.

The biggest travesty, however, is that we still have to wait 2 months to see how it all plays out.

Ryno is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 09:32 PM
  #43
kraigus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Waterloo, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to kraigus Send a message via MSN to kraigus
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
I simply disagree with the concept of spending 30 or so years waiting to get elite goaltending and when I finally do I only have him around for 3 or 4 years at most - hardly enough time to develop a championship team.
Not that I'm disagreeing, but Potvin was elite enough in Toronto, and Fuhr didn't play overly well there but did very well in Edmonton (duh) and Saint Louis.

kraigus is offline  
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 11:43 AM.

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

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