Maple Leafs 2016 Draft Recap

[herman]

This management team hasn't been deliberately stupid before so I'm willing to wait and see. Hard to pass up on Dineen and Girard though. 

I think if you're inclined to put everything this management team does in the best possible light it's probably misleading to then use those reads as support for continuing to do so. They have done stupid things before.

I apologize if that was misleading; I'm still not sure what to think of all this yet, and I see fans feeling compelled to seek silver linings or interpretations that cast this draft into a positive light (myself included).

[Nik Bethune]

More to munch on: https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/06/26/what-the-numbers-say-overage-players-vs-first-time-eligibles/

After Round 1 - Draft Year vs. Overage

Forwards   Selected   Successful   Success Rate
Draft Year   667   92   13.79%
Overage   311   52   16.72%

Defense   Selected   Successful   Success Rate
Draft Year   392   50   12.76%
Overage   204   35   17.16%

Here we see that there is a higher success rate for overage players selected after the first round for both forwards and defenders. It’s not an incredible difference, but it definitely seems that looking to overage players after the first round will yield NHL players more often than targeting draft-year players will.

Still a pretty raw look at the overage advantages, if there even is any. The Success criteria is 200 games played.

I think that the critique is less about the chances of producing a marginal or contributing NHLer and more about having lower ceilings in general. You and I have talked before about the problems with all of these sort of macro-draft evaluations but one of the things I noted when I was looking through the teams that had drafted 3 or so NHL regulars outside of the first round in a year is that for the most part the players taken weren't guys who'd blow you away. The Hawks, for instance, took Bickell, Bolland and Brouwer in the same year.

[Nik Bethune]

This management team hasn't been deliberately stupid before so I'm willing to wait and see. Hard to pass up on Dineen and Girard though. 

I think if you're inclined to put everything this management team does in the best possible light it's probably misleading to then use those reads as support for continuing to do so. They have done stupid things before.

I apologize if that was misleading; I'm still not sure what to think of all this yet, and I see fans feeling compelled to seek silver linings or interpretations that cast this draft into a positive light (myself included).

If it makes you feel better, I don't think anyone is ever deliberately stupid.

[herman]

I think that the critique is less about the chances of producing a marginal or contributing NHLer and more about having lower ceilings in general. You and I have talked before about the problems with all of these sort of macro-draft evaluations but one of the things I noted when I was looking through the teams that had drafted 3 or so NHL regulars outside of the first round in a year is that for the most part the players taken weren't guys who'd blow you away. The Hawks, for instance, took Bickell, Bolland and Brouwer in the same year.

Agreed. Busta and I sort of bandied this about during the actual draft; this class appears to have nothing that enticed the Leafs in the high ceiling range outside the top 15-20, even the names the blogosphere were touting as steals or high potential picks. They went with 'safe' higher floor, but lower ceilinged picks (Komarovs, Soshnikovs, and Marincins). Some argued that they might be pulling a Yzerman and drafting for cheap filler knowing they'd be top-heavy on the cap.

If it makes you feel better, I don't think anyone is ever deliberately stupid.

Haha, of that I'm well aware.

[Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate]

This management team hasn't been deliberately stupid before so I'm willing to wait and see. Hard to pass up on Dineen and Girard though. 

I think if you're inclined to put everything this management team does in the best possible light it's probably misleading to then use those reads as support for continuing to do so. They have done stupid things before.

I apologize if that was misleading; I'm still not sure what to think of all this yet, and I see fans feeling compelled to seek silver linings or interpretations that cast this draft into a positive light (myself included).

Someone mentioned how Burkish this draft seemed.  I think there's a lot to that.  Especially the #31 ... I hope it's not Biggs, The Sequel.

[Nik Bethune]

Agreed. Busta and I sort of bandied this about during the actual draft; this class appears to have nothing that enticed the Leafs in the high ceiling range outside the top 15-20, even the names the blogosphere were touting as steals or high potential picks. They went with 'safe' higher floor, but lower ceilinged picks (Komarovs, Soshnikovs, and Marincins). Some argued that they might be pulling a Yzerman and drafting for cheap filler knowing they'd be top-heavy on the cap.

And I think as a strategy it's an interesting one that probably should be explored if the team thinks there's something there. I just don't think that's something to do with the #31 pick when there's some high potential guys out there at positions of need. Even if they didn't grow as attached to Girard as I did, I think those shots sometimes need to be taken(and my faith in Girard has been somewhat validated by who did end up taking him, 9 spots after where they took Josi and 1 spot ahead of where they took Weber).

Biggs, Gauthier, Ross...we've heard the "safe, lower ceiling" thing before.

[herman]

1. Matthews
31. Abramov
57. Bitten
62. Dineen
72. Allard
92. Mete
101. Foriter
122. Sokolov
152. Bernhardt
179. Somppi
182. Boucher

— Scott Wheeler (@scottcwheeler) June 27, 2016

Scott Wheeler's picks in Toronto's spots:
1. Matthews
31. Abramov
57. Bitten
62. Dineen
72. Allard
92. Mete
101. Foriter
122. Sokolov
152. Bernhardt
179. Somppi
182. Boucher

He admits the exposure of players he is privy to is far less than the Leafs, but from his work at Future Considerations and covering the team on PPP, these were the high-ceilinged players he would've chosen.

I wish we did take some shots at players like Girard and Dineen; granted I really didn't know much of anything outside the top 10. Scouting reports of our guys, other than their size, were somewhat inconsistent (naturally).

[Nik Bethune]

I would have been very, very happy with those first 6 picks.

[CarltonTheBear]

I would have been very, very happy with those first 6 picks.

Agreed. I can't believe that Dineen fell that far.

Sokolov too.

[herman]

If it makes you feel better, I don't think anyone is ever deliberately stupid.

Case in point?

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/06/27/bruins-draft-trent-frederic-first-round-admit-third-line-grinder

The Bruins’ unhealthy obsession with the bottom-half of the roster became a parody of itself over the weekend. Stories like this only make those Stamkos rumors sound that much sillier.

The Bruins essentially admitted that to their fans on Friday at the NHL Draft after they selected center Trent Frederic with the 29th overall pick. Frederic, who is committed to the University of Wisconsin, was ranked outside the top 50 by many scouts and draft experts. The pick was almost universally regarded as a major reach.

The problem with the pick, however, isn’t that the Bruins drafted a guy that the “experts” said was only a third-line player. It’s that they agree with them. They took a first-round pick, which should net you a player with big upside 100 percent of the time, and admitted they used it on a player destined to be a bottom-six forward. They did that, on purpose.

“[Frederic] is not going to be a top-two-line guy, we know that,” Bruins director of amateur scouting Keith Gretzky told reporters at the draft, according to Steve Conroy of the Boston Herald. “But he has some jam. He plays hard with the penalty minutes. We were fortunate to get him.

“We believed he was our next guy and we really liked the projection of him as a staff. Everybody raved about him, his character is outstanding. He’s an athlete.”

Don Sweeney, man. It's always one great step forward quickly followed by two big steps back with this guy.

[bustaheims]

Case in point?

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/06/27/bruins-draft-trent-frederic-first-round-admit-third-line-grinder

The Bruins’ unhealthy obsession with the bottom-half of the roster became a parody of itself over the weekend. Stories like this only make those Stamkos rumors sound that much sillier.

The Bruins essentially admitted that to their fans on Friday at the NHL Draft after they selected center Trent Frederic with the 29th overall pick. Frederic, who is committed to the University of Wisconsin, was ranked outside the top 50 by many scouts and draft experts. The pick was almost universally regarded as a major reach.

The problem with the pick, however, isn’t that the Bruins drafted a guy that the “experts” said was only a third-line player. It’s that they agree with them. They took a first-round pick, which should net you a player with big upside 100 percent of the time, and admitted they used it on a player destined to be a bottom-six forward. They did that, on purpose.

“[Frederic] is not going to be a top-two-line guy, we know that,” Bruins director of amateur scouting Keith Gretzky told reporters at the draft, according to Steve Conroy of the Boston Herald. “But he has some jam. He plays hard with the penalty minutes. We were fortunate to get him.

“We believed he was our next guy and we really liked the projection of him as a staff. Everybody raved about him, his character is outstanding. He’s an athlete.”

Don Sweeney, man. It's always one great step forward quickly followed by two big steps back with this guy.

While I agree the Bruins made a strange choice, I disagree with the bolded line. It's a little too hyperbolic for me.

[herman]

Case in point?

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/06/27/bruins-draft-trent-frederic-first-round-admit-third-line-grinder

The Bruins’ unhealthy obsession with the bottom-half of the roster became a parody of itself over the weekend. Stories like this only make those Stamkos rumors sound that much sillier.

The Bruins essentially admitted that to their fans on Friday at the NHL Draft after they selected center Trent Frederic with the 29th overall pick. Frederic, who is committed to the University of Wisconsin, was ranked outside the top 50 by many scouts and draft experts. The pick was almost universally regarded as a major reach.

The problem with the pick, however, isn’t that the Bruins drafted a guy that the “experts” said was only a third-line player. It’s that they agree with them. They took a first-round pick, which should net you a player with big upside 100 percent of the time, and admitted they used it on a player destined to be a bottom-six forward. They did that, on purpose.

“[Frederic] is not going to be a top-two-line guy, we know that,” Bruins director of amateur scouting Keith Gretzky told reporters at the draft, according to Steve Conroy of the Boston Herald. “But he has some jam. He plays hard with the penalty minutes. We were fortunate to get him.

“We believed he was our next guy and we really liked the projection of him as a staff. Everybody raved about him, his character is outstanding. He’s an athlete.”

Don Sweeney, man. It's always one great step forward quickly followed by two big steps back with this guy.

While I agree the Bruins made a strange choice, I disagree with the bolded line. It's a little too hyperbolic for me.

Yeah. This was a 29th pick, their extra first-rounder.

Still, he did not even aim for upside, or use a heretofore unexploited 'market inefficiency', and exactly my knee-jerk reaction to what the Leafs were doing with their post-1st rd picks.

[herman]

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/06/28/j-d-greenway-joseph-woll-auston-matthews-danton-cole/

[Highlander]

This is an extremely positive revue. 

Could you describe J.D. Greenway’s game in a little detail for us?

Danton Cole: He’s a big, physical defenceman. His game has come along way. I think certain things about him are pretty underrated. He ended up with 27 or 28 points for us, which is pretty good for a defenceman. I know Adam Fox had the 59 points this year so that kind of skews things, but if you look at Trouba or Jones in their last years, they were right around there or a little bit north of it. He’s a big, physical guy. I think he keeps it pretty simple. He played with Clayton Keller’s line quite a bit, and I think he understood his job was to get the puck moving forward.

Good first pass?

Cole: Outstanding, and it got better and better over the two years. It was smart and it was quick. He found out, like a lot of defencemen, that he could hold it a little longer. He started to figure out that if he got it and moved it that a lot of good things happen offensively. At the Under-18 World Championships, he was +16 in our seven games there. He wasn’t on the ice for one goal against. He had probably the top assignments every game and was killing a ton of penalties as well. That was outstanding. Plus, he had seven points in seven games. I look at where guys end up in the draft, and value wise I think that was a great pick. I think, in a couple of years, as he keeps developing at Wisconsin with the coaches there – Mark Osiecki has done a great job with a lot of young D – you’ll look at him and think it’s a first-round draft pick. I think, with his mental progress – which sometimes comes quick, sometimes takes a while and sometimes doesn’t happen until guys leave – a lot of things kicked in for J.D. in the last half of the season. It really accelerated his learning and also his efficiency and understanding of the game. When you see that kick in, and you see guys start to move down that line in understanding how things connect, it’s a wonderful thing. He kicked into that and his game just took off from there. It was a lot of fun to see that happen.

[No.92]

Case in point?

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/06/27/bruins-draft-trent-frederic-first-round-admit-third-line-grinder

The Bruins’ unhealthy obsession with the bottom-half of the roster became a parody of itself over the weekend. Stories like this only make those Stamkos rumors sound that much sillier.

The Bruins essentially admitted that to their fans on Friday at the NHL Draft after they selected center Trent Frederic with the 29th overall pick. Frederic, who is committed to the University of Wisconsin, was ranked outside the top 50 by many scouts and draft experts. The pick was almost universally regarded as a major reach.

The problem with the pick, however, isn’t that the Bruins drafted a guy that the “experts” said was only a third-line player. It’s that they agree with them. They took a first-round pick, which should net you a player with big upside 100 percent of the time, and admitted they used it on a player destined to be a bottom-six forward. They did that, on purpose.

“[Frederic] is not going to be a top-two-line guy, we know that,” Bruins director of amateur scouting Keith Gretzky told reporters at the draft, according to Steve Conroy of the Boston Herald. “But he has some jam. He plays hard with the penalty minutes. We were fortunate to get him.

“We believed he was our next guy and we really liked the projection of him as a staff. Everybody raved about him, his character is outstanding. He’s an athlete.”

Don Sweeney, man. It's always one great step forward quickly followed by two big steps back with this guy.

While I agree the Bruins made a strange choice, I disagree with the bolded line. It's a little too hyperbolic for me.

It's a fantastic pick for the Bruins.  Any way to make them worse as a team.