The ridiculously premature 2016 draft prospects thread

[Nik]

I wonder if there'd be a way we could use say Pittsburgh's 1st and a couple of 2nds and/or some of our mid range prospects to trade up to get Nylander if he stays in the top 10.

Something along those lines.

That strikes me as possible but I think any such trade would take on a significantly different structure. If you look at the top 10 picks that have been dealt in recent years what you usually see are teams looking for immediate help rather than just an alternate draft strategy. I think that for most teams who are in the top 10 they're coming off a disappointing year and want something to excite their fans. No fanbase will be excited by "Yeah, we gave up #7 but we got #19, 38 and 55!"

So, just as an example, it might be more like Phaneuf(or Gardiner or Kadri or...) + Pittsburgh's 1st to get into the top 10. At least then the team can sell "We want to win now!" to their fans.

[Nik]

Where the macro observations help is that they even out all the variations in the stuff that happens after the draft, where the actual measurable results occur. Just because there is an average result doesn't mean a management team shouldn't try to be on the leading edge of that bell curve wherever possible.

At the risk of saying too much and getting those additional comments picked apart ( 8) ), the macro analysis of the draft is an attempt at the 'advanced stats' of drafting. What elements are under control? Where are the variables outside of that control?

I think we broadly agree, I just have a different take on it. I think the macro-analysis we're talking about is helpful but in a sort of abstract sense. Basically, I think it's useful for when you're talking about picks as picks and not so useful when you're talking about specific prospects.

So if, say, before the draft I had the #27 pick and someone came along and offered me the #35 and #49 for it I think having the data on the average value of those picks would be helpful in telling me whether or not that was a smart trade similar to the "points" system that some NFL teams use.

Where I think it's less useful is when you start talking about actual prospects a scouting staff will have opinions on. If there's a certain player who's available at 27 but wouldn't be at 35 then I think the aggregated data is less relevant to decisions hockey teams actually have to make.

[Potvin29]

This seems like a good thread for this very useful ranking: http://platinumseatghosts.blogspot.ca/2015/12/2016-average-nhl-draft-rankings.html

[Nik]

This seems like a good thread for this very useful ranking: http://platinumseatghosts.blogspot.ca/2015/12/2016-average-nhl-draft-rankings.html

That is a handy chart, thanks for the link. Interesting to see that 5 different guys have been rated as high as #2.

[Potvin29]

Also I believe I may have posted this before, but someone else did up a handy chart in Google Docs of all of the draft picks each team has for the 2016 draft.  Leafs potentially have 11 picks right now.

Link

[herman]

I think we broadly agree, I just have a different take on it. I think the macro-analysis we're talking about is helpful but in a sort of abstract sense. Basically, I think it's useful for when you're talking about picks as picks and not so useful when you're talking about specific prospects.

So if, say, before the draft I had the #27 pick and someone came along and offered me the #35 and #49 for it I think having the data on the average value of those picks would be helpful in telling me whether or not that was a smart trade similar to the "points" system that some NFL teams use.

Where I think it's less useful is when you start talking about actual prospects a scouting staff will have opinions on. If there's a certain player who's available at 27 but wouldn't be at 35 then I think the aggregated data is less relevant to decisions hockey teams actually have to make.

I agree with your assessment on this. The bolded part really helped me understand where you were coming from.

[Potvin29]

This seems like a good thread for this very useful ranking: http://platinumseatghosts.blogspot.ca/2015/12/2016-average-nhl-draft-rankings.html

That is a handy chart, thanks for the link. Interesting to see that 5 different guys have been rated as high as #2.

Just looking through that, I cannot believe how much Sean Day has "fallen" - he was one of the players granted exceptional status to play in the OHL at 15 and his highest ranking is 31 out of those provided. 

[herman]

This seems like a good thread for this very useful ranking: http://platinumseatghosts.blogspot.ca/2015/12/2016-average-nhl-draft-rankings.html

Also I believe I may have posted this before, but someone else did up a handy chart in Google Docs of all of the draft picks each team has for the 2016 draft.  Leafs potentially have 11 picks right now.

Link

These are awesome. Bookmarked!

[CarltonTheBear]

Just looking through that, I cannot believe how much Sean Day has "fallen" - he was one of the players granted exceptional status to play in the OHL at 15 and his highest ranking is 31 out of those provided. 

Speaking of Day, Gare Joyce did a good feature on him and his situation a few days ago: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/juniors/sunday-big-read-chl-shouldnt-have-made-an-exception-for-steelheads-sean-day/

[Potvin29]

Just looking through that, I cannot believe how much Sean Day has "fallen" - he was one of the players granted exceptional status to play in the OHL at 15 and his highest ranking is 31 out of those provided. 

Speaking of Day, Gare Joyce did a good feature on him and his situation a few days ago: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/juniors/sunday-big-read-chl-shouldnt-have-made-an-exception-for-steelheads-sean-day/

I think I would definitely take a flier on him.

[CarltonTheBear]

I think I would definitely take a flier on him.

I really can't think of any player who was pegged as a sure-fire top-5 pick in their draft year at 15/16 who dropped significantly and still had a respectable NHL career. Toni Rajala, John McFarland, Angelo Esposito, Kirill Kabanov. All busts.

[Potvin29]

I think I would definitely take a flier on him.

I really can't think of any player who was pegged as a sure-fire top-5 pick in their draft year at 15/16 who dropped significantly and still had a respectable NHL career. Toni Rajala, John McFarland, Angelo Esposito, Kirill Kabanov. All busts.

Well I can't remember all of the players who once were ranked that highly at that age, but I don't think those experiences would really stop me taking him with a later pick if he's available.  I know in at least one of those cases (Kabanov) there were a series of decisions made which impacted his career negatively.  But I don't think just because some other players were once ranked highly and flamed out means that every player will.  But basically just think he'd be worth a pick outside of the 1st round.

[Arn]

I wonder if there'd be a way we could use say Pittsburgh's 1st and a couple of 2nds and/or some of our mid range prospects to trade up to get Nylander if he stays in the top 10.

Something along those lines.

That strikes me as possible but I think any such trade would take on a significantly different structure. If you look at the top 10 picks that have been dealt in recent years what you usually see are teams looking for immediate help rather than just an alternate draft strategy. I think that for most teams who are in the top 10 they're coming off a disappointing year and want something to excite their fans. No fanbase will be excited by "Yeah, we gave up #7 but we got #19, 38 and 55!"

So, just as an example, it might be more like Phaneuf(or Gardiner or Kadri or...) + Pittsburgh's 1st to get into the top 10. At least then the team can sell "We want to win now!" to their fans.

I think I would do any of those 3. Particularly if we were to take Chychryn with our first pick.

Chychryn plus Nylander for Gardiner and a say 16th pick?

[CarltonTheBear]

Well I can't remember all of the players who once were ranked that highly at that age, but I don't think those experiences would really stop me taking him with a later pick if he's available.  I know in at least one of those cases (Kabanov) there were a series of decisions made which impacted his career negatively.  But I don't think just because some other players were once ranked highly and flamed out means that every player will.  But basically just think he'd be worth a pick outside of the 1st round.

No, but they're just cautionary tales not to put too much stock in a player's performance when he was 14 or 15 when it comes time to draft. I don't really get the feeling that anything Day has done last season or this season has really warranted him being in the discussion for a top-40 selection.

[CarltonTheBear]

This is another good resource for draft rankings:

http://theleafsnation.com/2015/12/4/2016-consensus-draft-rankings-december-4th-2015

It works as a consensus type ranking like the other one but also focuses on tracking how prospects are moving up and down the different draft boards through the season.