[Discussion] *Updated* Is It Really All That Bad?

[Warhippy]

Disclaimer:  I know this has been done to death, Oldnews made a similar thread back in March about a similar topic.  If you don't want to read about it don't come in here whining about how it's been done to death

 

I continue hearing about our "DRAFTING BLACK HOLE"  Like somehow we're the absolute worst most godawful team for drafting on the planet.

 

It got me thinking, but what about draft position?  What about when we were trading picks/prospects for cup runs because we were "an elite" team?

 

How do we fair against our closest divisional rivals?

 

So I looked.  And it turns out really.  It isn't that bad.  For our lack of picks, for our high draft position under Gillis and mediocre years under Nonis it really isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.  I honestly think people like to complain just to complain, they listen to guys like Botchford and TMZ 1040 and they start to believe their bs.

 

So here's the drafting for the last 10 ish years for Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary.  Just take a peak

 

Edmonton:

2005:  Cogliano (25)  Chorney (36) Syvret (81)

2006:  Petry (45) Peckham (75)

2007:  Sam Gagner (6) Linus Omark (97) 

2008:  Eberle (22)

2009:  Paajarvi-Svensson (10)  Lander (40)

2010:  Hall (1)  Pitlick (31)  Marincin (46)

2011:  Nugent-Hopkins (1)  Klefbom (19) Musil (31)

2012:  Yakupov (1)

2013:  Nurse (7)

2014:  Leon Draisaitl (3)

2015:  Connor McJesus (1)

2016:  Puljujarvi (4)

 

A total of 10 NHL Players.  All picked in the 1st round, all but 2 picked in the top 10.  Only 3 unknown or on the bubble

 

Calgary:

2005:  Pelech (26)

2006:  Irving (26)

2007:  Backlund (24)  

2008:  Nemisz (25)  Bouma (78)  Brodie (114) 

2009:  Erixon (23)  Ortio (171)

2010:  Ferland (133)

2011:  Baertschi (13)  Granlund (45)  Gaudreau (104)

2012:  Jankowski (21) Da Bestst playa in the draft yo 

2013:  Monahan (6) Poirier (22) Klimchuk (28)

2014:  Bennett (4)  Smith (54)

2015:  Andersson (53) Kylington (60)

2016:  Tkachuk (6)

 

A total of 10 NHL players.  5 picked in the 1st round.  Only 7 unknown or on the bubble

 

Vancouver:

2005:  Bourdon (10) Raymond (51)

2006:  Grabner (14)

2007:  White (25)

2008:  Hodgson (10)

2009:  Schroeder (22) Rodin (53) Connauton (83)

2010:  Friesen (172)

2011:  Jensen (29)  Grenier (90)  Corrado (150)

2012:  Gaunce (26) Hutton (147)

2013:  Horvat (9) Shinkaruk (24) Cassels (85) Subban (115) 

2014:  Virtanen (6)  McCaan (24)  Demko (36)  Tryamkin (66)

2015:  Boeser (23) 

2016:  Juoleiv (5) 

 

A total of 12 NHL players, 7 picked in the first round with 9 unknown or on the bubble

 

Why does this matter?  I mean surely this won't sway the minds of those who need to feel down about something right?

 

Well it actually DOES matter.  If you look at each teams' perspective draft years, who is still in their org, who was cut free early or who went on to success after they were drafted it is stark.  

 

Case in point is Edmonton who with multiple high picks over the last decade only has 2 maybe 3 guys in their entire decade of drafting top 10 or better drafted outside of the 1st round who MIGHT be NHL players.

 

Case in point is Calgary who over the last decade managed to be mediocre, squander numerous chances to do something meaningful with moderate draft positioning and still managed to do very little with it.  In fact we have 2/3rds of their 2011 draft class on our roster right now (dammit)

 

And now vancouver.  We won the lottery with Bourdon (rip) who never got a chance to pan out, but was still a top 10 pick and then barring bias and futures drafted fairly high or without picks in the first few rounds numerous times and still have come out with a better possible deth of players/prospects than the other two teams with more picks and better draft positioning.

 

I know this will be panned for lack of accuracy, a lack of fact basis or intrinsic knowledge of corsi/rel ANALytics and crap like that.  but it isn't supposed to be in depth.

 

It is supposed to be eye opening.  We bemoan our drafting over the last decade, but even with Burke and Nonis and Gillis and now Benning coughing up picks/prospects like there's no tomorrow over the last decade (in Bennings case apparently trying to fill a 21-25 age gap) we still somehow managed to come out ahead of the other 2 teams in the division.

 

So really, it could be so much worse.  In fact; while it is downright mediocre it isn't as bad as the Albrutal drafting record over the same period barring a gem here and there.

 

So ask yourself looking at this list, is it really as bad as people make it out to be?

 

Updated:  I am adding some teams, since sooo many people already seem to be missing the point and just saying.  Yup, Canucks drafting was/is terrible without even looking at the comparison.

 

Bruins:

2005:  Lashoff (22)  Sobotka (106)

2006:  Kessel (5) Lucic (50) Marchand (71) 

2007:  Hamill (8)

2008:  Colborne (16)

2009:  Caron (25)

2010:  Seguin (2) Knight (32) Spooner (45)

2011:  Hamilton (9) Khokhlachev (40)

2012:  Subban (24) Griffith (131)

2013:  Arnesson (60) Celarik (90) Fitzgerald (120)

2014:  Pastrnak (25) 

2015:  Zboril (13) DeBrusk (14) Senyshyn (15) 

2016:  McAvoy (14)  Frederic (29)

 

10 NHL players, 5 picked in the first round, 9 unknown or on the bubble for the big bad bruins

 

Blackhawks:

2005:  Skille (7) Hjalmarsson (108)

2006:  Toews (3)

2007:  Kane (1)

2008:  Beach (11)

2009:  Pirri (59) Kruger (149)

2010:  Hayes (24) Nordstrom (90)

2011:  McNeil (18) Danault (26)  Clendenning (36) Saad (43)  Shaw (139)

2012:  Taravainen (18)

2013:  Hartman (30) 

2014:  Schmaltz (20)

2015:  Knott (54) Gilbert (91)

2016:  DeBrincat (39) 

 

11 NHL Players, 5 picked in the 1st round, 8 on the bubble or unknown

 

Kings:

2005:  Kopitar (11)  Quick (72)

2006:  Bernier (11) Lewis (17)

2007:  Hickey (4) Simmonds (61)

2008:  Doughty (2) Teubert (13) Voynov (32)

2009:  Schenn (5) Clifford (35) Vey (96)

2010:  Forbort (15)  Toffoli (47)  

2011:  Gibson (49) Shore (82)

2012:  Pearson (30) 

2013:  Zykov (37) Auger (103)

2014:  Kempe (29)  McKeown (50)

2015:  Cernak (43)

2016:  Clague (51)

 

13 NHL Players, 6 picked in the first round and 9 unknown or on the bubble

 

Islanders:

2005:  O`Marra (15)

2006:  Okposo (7) MacDonald (160)

2007:  Katic (62)

2008:  Bailey (9)  Hamonic (53)

2009:  Tavares (1)  DeHaan (12) Nilsson (62) Czikas (92)

2010:  Neidereitter (5) Nelson (30)

2011:  Strome (5) Pedan (63)

2012:  Reinhart (4)  Pokaa (34) Pelech (65)

2013:  Pulock (15) 

2014:  Dal Colle (5) Ho-Sang (28

2015:  Barzal (16) Beauvillier (28) 

2016:  Bellows (19)

 

14 NHL Players, 10 picked in the first round with 8 unknown or on the bubble

 

Blue Jackets:

2005:  Brule (6) McQuaid (55) Russel (67) Boll (101) 

2006:  Brassard (6)  Mason (69) Sestito (85)

2007:  Voracek (7)  

2008:  Filatov (6) Calvert (127) Atkinson (157) 

2009:  Moore (21) Savard (94)

2010:  Johansen (4)

2011:  Jenner (37)

2012:  Murray (2) Dansk (31) 

2013:  Wennberg (14) Rychel (19) Dano (27) Bjorkstrand (89)

2014:  Milano (16) 

2015:  Werenski (8) Carlsson (29) Bittner (38)

2016:  Dubois (3)

 

15 NHL Players with 5 taken in the 1st round and 9 unknown or on the bubble.

 

I included the "BEST TEAMS" and some of the worst teams in this newest update with the best and worst records respectively for cup wins drafting etc by perception and virtue of stats.  If we look closely we see these teams have an absolute wealth of picks in regards to extra picks as well as choice draft positioning.

 

And if we pay VERY close attention we see a lot of these players either didn't pan out, were top 10 picks or are not even on their draft teams any more.  Talk about horrible asset management.

 

And if we weigh these teams against the canucks we can absolutely see that with the canucks lack of extra picks, low draft positioning that we are a literal middle of the pack team in terms of drafting.  The Kings/Hawks found their gems top 10 or outside of the 1st round.  Jackets and Isles found theirs by and large top 10 or with extra picks.

 

So again, I ask.  Is it REALLY that bad??

[Dral]

Who's saying we have a drafting black hole? I feel like I read more about people over rating our prospects rather then under rating our drafting... especially recently

[Dixon Ward]

Great post, I never would have guessed these numbers. Half of Canucks fans forget that the word fan derives from the word fanatic.  They think it means critical, cynical or pessimistic.   It's an easy job to be a cynic when all teams have a 1 in 30 chance of winning a cup.  They seem to want to be right much more than be a fan. I am more excited about this year's team than most years in my 34 years as a fan.  

[chon derry]

i'm happy that we still retain 5 roster ready picks the WE PICKED , happier that we have 2 of calgarys!!

[Warhippy]

8 minutes ago, Dral said:

Who's saying we have a drafting black hole? I feel like I read more about people over rating our prospects rather then under rating our drafting... especially recently

Uhmm...everybody?

 

All we keep hearing is how Gillis was terrible at drafting yet we never hear about Burke/Nonis in the same breath.  Strip away the twins and 2003 and Burke was terrible, Nonis didn't do much either.

 

Everyone speaks about how we have no depth because Gillis traded it all away, yet never consider that we were drafting in the bottom 7 his entire tenure and running for cups basically from the year he started.  He was trying to augment and supplement a core that was a contender.  Much like we are watching Chicago and LA do right now, trading depth/picks for cup runs over the last 5 years.

 

Check around my man, everyone has this opinion of how we're terrible for drafting from 2005 on to benning.  But in comparison is it REALLY that bad?

[HC20.0]

11 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Uhmm...everybody?

 

All we keep hearing is how Gillis was terrible at drafting yet we never hear about Burke/Nonis in the same breath.  Strip away the twins and 2003 and Burke was terrible, Nonis didn't do much either.

 

Everyone speaks about how we have no depth because Gillis traded it all away, yet never consider that we were drafting in the bottom 7 his entire tenure and running for cups basically from the year he started.  He was trying to augment and supplement a core that was a contender.  Much like we are watching Chicago and LA do right now, trading depth/picks for cup runs over the last 5 years.

 

Check around my man, everyone has this opinion of how we're terrible for drafting from 2005 on to benning.  But in comparison is it REALLY that bad?

Compared to Calgary and Edmonton, it's not that bad. Compared to the rest of the league, yeah our drafting was horrible. Grabner, White, Hodgson, Schroeder, Jensen... The only okay name out of that is Grabner. Our second round picks have been pretty awful too. Mallet and Ellington just sum it up.

[Warhippy]

17 minutes ago, HC20.0 said:

Compared to Calgary and Edmonton, it's not that bad. Compared to the rest of the league, yeah our drafting was horrible. Grabner, White, Hodgson, Schroeder, Jensen... The only okay name out of that is Grabner. Our second round picks have been pretty awful too. Mallet and Ellington just sum it up.

Man I wish I had time to go through everyone's drafting.  The fact is, this is easily said but hard to prove because the factors include extra picks and draft positioning.  It's kind of one of those situations where you're just looking at the surface without actually doing any research.

 

yesterday we had the worst drafting, today i just showed we don't compared to two teams, weigh that against 27 other teams and I am sure we're about the 20 ish spot give or take for poor drafting.

 

Case in point look at a team like Columbus, ALL of those high picks...who do they really have to show for it?  Arizona?  Toronto?  Boston?  Minnesota? Islanders?

 

Do the research on those teams since 2005 and then come back and tell me out of those teams, and the Albrutal teams.  Who of all of us has the worst drafting.  I can almost assure you when weighed against number of and quality of picks; we're far from being the worst.

[HerrDrFunk]

4 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

[Neko]

Yup Vancouver's drafting before 2012 was horrible, and thankfully most of those before 2012 aren't with the Canucks anymore.  I do kind of wish we had kept Corrado though.

[Salacious Crumb]

I'd be curious to know if Monty has this info for the Jets drafting the last 10ish years. Just for fun.

 

Thanks to OP for the time spent on the post. I see it as you do in that a lot of people follow the easily accessible sports info and parrot it as fact.  So sad.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Disclaimer:  I know this has been done to death, Oldnews made a similar thread back in March about a similar topic.  If you don't want to read about it don't come in here whining about how it's been done to death

 

I continue hearing about our "DRAFTING BLACK HOLE"  Like somehow we're the absolute worst most godawful team for drafting on the planet.

 

It got me thinking, but what about draft position?  What about when we were trading picks/prospects for cup runs because we were "an elite" team?

 

How do we fair against our closest divisional rivals?

 

So I looked.  And it turns out really.  It isn't that bad.  For our lack of picks, for our high draft position under Gillis and mediocre years under Nonis it really isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.  I honestly think people like to complain just to complain, they listen to guys like Botchford and TMZ 1040 and they start to believe their bs.

 

So here's the drafting for the last 10 ish years for Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary.  Just take a peak

 

Edmonton:

2005:  Cogliano (25)  Chorney (36) Syvret (81)

2006:  Petry (45) Peckham (75)

2007:  Sam Gagner (6) Linus Omark (97) 

2008:  Eberle (22)

2009:  Paajarvi-Svensson (10)  Lander (40)

2010:  Hall (1)  Pitlick (31)  Marincin (46)

2011:  Nugent-Hopkins (1)  Klefbom (19) Musil (31)

2012:  Yakupov (1)

2013:  Nurse (7)

2014:  Leon Draisaitl (3)

2015:  Connor McJesus (1)

2016:  Puljujarvi (4)

 

A total of 10 NHL Players.  All picked in the 1st round, all but 2 picked in the top 10.  Only 3 unknown or on the bubble

 

Calgary:

2005:  Pelech (26)

2006:  Irving (26)

2007:  Backlund (24)  

2008:  Nemisz (25)  Bouma (78)  Brodie (114) 

2009:  Erixon (23)  Ortio (171)

2010:  Ferland (133)

2011:  Baertschi (13)  Granlund (45)  Gaudreau (104)

2012:  Jankowski (21) Da Bestst playa in the draft yo 

2013:  Monahan (6) Poirier (22) Klimchuk (28)

2014:  Bennett (4)  Smith (54)

2015:  Andersson (53) Kylington (60)

2016:  Tkachuk (6)

 

A total of 10 NHL players.  5 picked in the 1st round.  Only 7 unknown or on the bubble

 

Vancouver:

2005:  Bourdon (10) Raymond (51)

2006:  Grabner (14)

2007:  White (25)

2008:  Hodgson (10)

2009:  Schroeder (22) Rodin (53) Connauton (83)

2010:  Friesen (172)

2011:  Jensen (29)  Grenier (90)  Corrado (150)

2012:  Gaunce (26) Hutton (147)

2013:  Horvat (9) Shinkaruk (24) Cassels (85) Subban (115) 

2014:  Virtanen (6)  McCaan (24)  Demko (36)  Tryamkin (66)

2015:  Boeser (23) 

2016:  Juoleiv (5) 

 

A total of 12 NHL players, 7 picked in the first round with 9 unknown or on the bubble

 

Why does this matter?  I mean surely this won't sway the minds of those who need to feel down about something right?

 

Well it actually DOES matter.  If you look at each teams' perspective draft years, who is still in their org, who was cut free early or who went on to success after they were drafted it is stark.  

 

Case in point is Edmonton who with multiple high picks over the last decade only has 2 maybe 3 guys in their entire decade of drafting top 10 or better drafted outside of the 1st round who MIGHT be NHL players.

 

Case in point is Calgary who over the last decade managed to be mediocre, squander numerous chances to do something meaningful with moderate draft positioning and still managed to do very little with it.  In fact we have 2/3rds of their 2011 draft class on our roster right now (dammit)

 

And now vancouver.  We won the lottery with Bourdon (rip) who never got a chance to pan out, but was still a top 10 pick and then barring bias and futures drafted fairly high or without picks in the first few rounds numerous times and still have come out with a better possible deth of players/prospects than the other two teams with more picks and better draft positioning.

 

I know this will be panned for lack of accuracy, a lack of fact basis or intrinsic knowledge of corsi/rel ANALytics and crap like that.  but it isn't supposed to be in depth.

 

It is supposed to be eye opening.  We bemoan our drafting over the last decade, but even with Burke and Nonis and Gillis and now Benning coughing up picks/prospects like there's no tomorrow over the last decade (in Bennings case apparently trying to fill a 21-25 age gap) we still somehow managed to come out ahead of the other 2 teams in the division.

 

So really, it could be so much worse.  In fact; while it is downright mediocre it isn't as bad as the Albrutal drafting record over the same period barring a gem here and there.

 

So ask yourself looking at this list, is it really as bad as people make it out to be?

Great job.  I'm glad you pointed out Bourdon, and the Gillis era (and drafting higher due to all the winning).  Nice comparisons.  Also it validates that every team entering the draft is looking to lock down ONE roster player, TWO is a bonus and in many cases overachieving.  Draft picks are lottery tickets, and most outside of the first round never pan out (and 50% of those players go one to play 100 NHL games).  We should remember this when Benning makes a trade for an actual roster player and trust that his panel of experts have done their due diligence to match whatever strategy they are following. 

[Toews]

This was from an article written in 2014. Obviously things have changed since then but the perception probably stems from the fact that Gillis did draft rather poorly. Hutton and Horvat are Gillis' only impact picks.

 

http://thecommittedindian.com/nhl-team-drafting-development-2005-2014/

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

I think we are in the average in regards to drafting over time, some teams get lucky, some have better scouts.  I think JB is the type of GM/Scout that has the chance to draft safe and get lucky.  As long as he doesn't trade away more pics for help now....but I feel like Aquilini has a megaphone next to JB's (or TL's) ear, so I expect another trade before next season giving up a pic and something for aging 2nd line scoring

[nux_win]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Disclaimer:  I know this has been done to death, Oldnews made a similar thread back in March about a similar topic.  If you don't want to read about it don't come in here whining about how it's been done to death

 

I continue hearing about our "DRAFTING BLACK HOLE"  Like somehow we're the absolute worst most godawful team for drafting on the planet.

 

It got me thinking, but what about draft position?  What about when we were trading picks/prospects for cup runs because we were "an elite" team?

 

How do we fair against our closest divisional rivals?

 

So I looked.  And it turns out really.  It isn't that bad.  For our lack of picks, for our high draft position under Gillis and mediocre years under Nonis it really isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be.  I honestly think people like to complain just to complain, they listen to guys like Botchford and TMZ 1040 and they start to believe their bs.

 

So here's the drafting for the last 10 ish years for Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary.  Just take a peak

 

Edmonton:

2005:  Cogliano (25)  Chorney (36) Syvret (81)

2006:  Petry (45) Peckham (75)

2007:  Sam Gagner (6) Linus Omark (97) 

2008:  Eberle (22)

2009:  Paajarvi-Svensson (10)  Lander (40)

2010:  Hall (1)  Pitlick (31)  Marincin (46)

2011:  Nugent-Hopkins (1)  Klefbom (19) Musil (31)

2012:  Yakupov (1)

2013:  Nurse (7)

2014:  Leon Draisaitl (3)

2015:  Connor McJesus (1)

2016:  Puljujarvi (4)

 

A total of 10 NHL Players.  All picked in the 1st round, all but 2 picked in the top 10.  Only 3 unknown or on the bubble

 

Calgary:

2005:  Pelech (26)

2006:  Irving (26)

2007:  Backlund (24)  

2008:  Nemisz (25)  Bouma (78)  Brodie (114) 

2009:  Erixon (23)  Ortio (171)

2010:  Ferland (133)

2011:  Baertschi (13)  Granlund (45)  Gaudreau (104)

2012:  Jankowski (21) Da Bestst playa in the draft yo 

2013:  Monahan (6) Poirier (22) Klimchuk (28)

2014:  Bennett (4)  Smith (54)

2015:  Andersson (53) Kylington (60)

2016:  Tkachuk (6)

 

A total of 10 NHL players.  5 picked in the 1st round.  Only 7 unknown or on the bubble

 

Vancouver:

2005:  Bourdon (10) Raymond (51)

2006:  Grabner (14)

2007:  White (25)

2008:  Hodgson (10)

2009:  Schroeder (22) Rodin (53) Connauton (83)

2010:  Friesen (172)

2011:  Jensen (29)  Grenier (90)  Corrado (150)

2012:  Gaunce (26) Hutton (147)

2013:  Horvat (9) Shinkaruk (24) Cassels (85) Subban (115) 

2014:  Virtanen (6)  McCaan (24)  Demko (36)  Tryamkin (66)

2015:  Boeser (23) 

2016:  Juoleiv (5) 

 

A total of 12 NHL players, 7 picked in the first round with 9 unknown or on the bubble

 

Why does this matter?  I mean surely this won't sway the minds of those who need to feel down about something right?

 

Well it actually DOES matter.  If you look at each teams' perspective draft years, who is still in their org, who was cut free early or who went on to success after they were drafted it is stark.  

 

Case in point is Edmonton who with multiple high picks over the last decade only has 2 maybe 3 guys in their entire decade of drafting top 10 or better drafted outside of the 1st round who MIGHT be NHL players.

 

Case in point is Calgary who over the last decade managed to be mediocre, squander numerous chances to do something meaningful with moderate draft positioning and still managed to do very little with it.  In fact we have 2/3rds of their 2011 draft class on our roster right now (dammit)

 

And now vancouver.  We won the lottery with Bourdon (rip) who never got a chance to pan out, but was still a top 10 pick and then barring bias and futures drafted fairly high or without picks in the first few rounds numerous times and still have come out with a better possible deth of players/prospects than the other two teams with more picks and better draft positioning.

 

I know this will be panned for lack of accuracy, a lack of fact basis or intrinsic knowledge of corsi/rel ANALytics and crap like that.  but it isn't supposed to be in depth.

 

It is supposed to be eye opening.  We bemoan our drafting over the last decade, but even with Burke and Nonis and Gillis and now Benning coughing up picks/prospects like there's no tomorrow over the last decade (in Bennings case apparently trying to fill a 21-25 age gap) we still somehow managed to come out ahead of the other 2 teams in the division.

 

So really, it could be so much worse.  In fact; while it is downright mediocre it isn't as bad as the Albrutal drafting record over the same period barring a gem here and there.

 

So ask yourself looking at this list, is it really as bad as people make it out to be?

I think you're onto something here.   People, especially when it comes to the Canucks for some reason, be it "fans" or otherwise, just looove to complain (not exactly a revelation but it is true and annoying).  People aren't going to like it that you are presenting facts that may get in the way of that.  Of course I like complaining too (mostly about people's negativity), but you did well here, very little to complain about.  There is a subtle but important difference between pointing out what you don't like and being negative all the time (not that CDC is into subtlety). It may be easier to complain about what we don't have (and safer for those who are emotionally fragile) than to get behind what we do have but that isn't the way to build a winning culture.    GCG!

 

"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams." - Eleanor Roosevelt

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

27 minutes ago, Creepy Crawler said:

Yup Vancouver's drafting before 2012 was horrible, and thankfully most of those before 2012 aren't with the Canucks anymore.  I do kind of wish we had kept Corrado though.

Someone will have to explain this to me.

 

We won back-to-back President's trophies and nearly won a cup with a team that included 7 of our own draft picks:  Sedins, Edler, Bieksa, Kesler, Raymond, Schnieder.  How is that bad?

 

I saw that National Post article headlined, "Drafting: Toronto gets a pass, Canucks fail".  They cherry-picked the period that is always discussed here; you know, that period where we had a great team that didn't have room for raw rookies?  So that's fair, considering that we added a bunch of players from the period before that.  And then of course, the article concluded that the best measure of success is the number of players that have played a small number of games with your team, or another team I guess.  So, having five guys that can't cut it in the bigs for more than 100 games is considered to be "more successful" drafting than adding a guy like Hansen that plays for a decade plus on dominant teams.

 

I cannot stand the discussions around this - quoting percentages and what-not.  The number of guys that make it has more to do with the number of NHL spots available than the abilities of the draftees.  You can't compare draft success across teams by comparing the number of guys that play.  Perhaps you could by comparing the quality of the drafted players, but maybe that says more about development than drafting.  Besides which, it depends a lot on how competitive the NHL club is.  Some dominant teams are drafting role players to fill out the roster, whereas weaker teams might be looking for core players.  One team may have a garbage budget and rely on ELC's; for example, I'm sure that Carolina has great "draft success" if you merely count the players, but if you measure the quality, it's hard to justify that evaluation.  But, even still, it was easy for them to add players, good or not, because the team is no good.  So if a team is generally unsuccessful at being a team, does it really matter that they played a lot of their own draft picks?  A good team may add one prospect in a year, even though 6 of their prospects could have made a crap team.  Maybe there's a team with so many bad contracts that their own well-drafted prospects never get an opportunity.  Then you have pick-trading on so on.  Maybe a team would have drafted that great player, but got a better one by trading the pick.  That won't show up in the draft record.  The draft record itself does not provide a reliable measure of drafting ability. 

[appleboy]

If you open your eyes you will see that from 2005 to 2011 we drafted no one of note.

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

6 minutes ago, appleboy said:

If you open your eyes you will see that from 2005 to 2011 we drafted no one of note.

But there are several reasons for that.  I'm not saying they were good at it, but it's not totally black and white.  Why are those years so important?  The five years previous to that were fairly strong, which meant that we had young players on the team during the period you're talking about.  Combine that with the fact that we got pretty good and you can see that those draftees had an uphill battle.  I am certain that in general, bad teams will look like they are more successful at drafting.  We could have sold off the roster and played our prospects, like many teams have.  Then we would have a tonne of draftees hit the 100 game mark.  Would that impress us, if it was Grenier, Friesen, and Corrado?  Cause that's a lot of what we're talking about when other teams impress us.

[shazzam]

2006 to 2011 drafts were absolutely terrible. We do not have 1 impact player. That is why this team had such a decline. We did not have the next wave of young players and I feel bad for the twins as they still have to carry the load.

[Neko]

1 hour ago, Salacious Crumb said:

I'd be curious to know if Monty has this info for the Jets drafting the last 10ish years. Just for fun.

 

Thanks to OP for the time spent on the post. I see it as you do in that a lot of people follow the easily accessible sports info and parrot it as fact.  So sad.

Jets? You mean formally known as the Atlanta Crashers? Kovy is their only real gem, well maybe Kane too but his criminal accusations aren't helping.  Sure they had a decent lineup with players like Ladd, Wheeler, and Little when heading into Winnipeg.

[Warhippy]

OK, so looking at 2005 to 2011.  Look at ALL of the other teams, look at our pick placement vs theirs, look at the amount of our picks vs theirs.  Now.  Tell me again we have terrible drafting.  We may not have drafted an "impact player" or traded our picks/prospects while we were an elite team, but weighed against these current powerhouse teams or teams with seemingly yearly top 10 picks.  It is not as bad as you make it out to be