30
|
|
Post by nighbor on Jun 13, 2022 12:32:24 GMT -6
Jun 13, 2022 9:42:47 GMT -4 Nikos said: PATHETIC. How Bowman and team survived with this type of track record is stunning. It took a scandal to get him out, he could still be here, think about that.
What I recall listening to Bowman & Kelly was in their mind what good drafts they had and even though in most of these years drafting lower, all the good players that are available later they would go on say or a bunch with the same grades and we are going to get a good player. I suppose all GMs and Director of Scouting say the same thing, the problem they believed it. GOOD RIDDANCE.
The stats are for the second round and higher covering 2012-18 not from 2010 when Stan started drafting. In 2010 (4 of 9) laced them up with 3 playing over 100 games. In 2011 (6 of 9) dressed with 3 over 100 games. Two of the 2011 class played important roles in the 2013 and 2015 cups. Saad 2nd and Shaw in the 5th are too important to ignore. Landing the best player at the 2015 and 2016 TDL showed his commitment to winning and willingness to work with his coach. His body of work allowed him to survive.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 13, 2022 13:34:14 GMT -6
I remember many times we’d have the argument on here or the old boards and I remember arguing that the Hawks drafting was awful. The horrible part is, many thought the Hawks drafting was fine and it’s that the Hawks were picking later than everyone else. The team has suffered due to no new life coming in. I seriously mean this. I don’t know how anyone can honestly stick up for the last guy. When Q was here he told him who to get or what to get. He wanted to do it all himself and the team fell apart like a Chinese motorcycle. I remember showing numbers how the Hawks drafting was awful. Most just thought I was being the usual down on the org. Now that the Hawks have something that resembles more normal. The posts and comments are more normal. Scambo was the worst person in the history of sports. He has no idea how to hockey. His moves always failed because he just didn’t know. Who honestly thinks that drafting mainly NCAA guys is a good idea for a few years? Then smaller USNTDP guys? Then look for anyone who has a brother and try and get brothers or someone who has a family member that played? Hawks gotta start hitting on draft picks more often. I get it, they won’t all be superstars. But you gotta do better than a Kurashev. Hawks really don’t have that much in the pipeline. And considering the Hawks haven’t gone for it in 6 seasons. There should be a plethora of kids in the pipeline. But there’s maybe a handful!!! In the 13 drafts since '09',the Hawks had 13 picks in the first round,two NCAA players,Schmaltz and Hayes were taken and one USNTDP player Hartman.......all three have acquitted themselves quite well in the NHL. The other 10 1st round picks consisted of 6 Canadians and 4 Euros........hardly "mainly NCAA guys" More NCAA/USND players came in the 2nd round but other GM's find very useful players from the college ranks........DUMBASS couldn't find his ass with both hands! That was part of the argument I’d always hear. It was always the Hawks pick late in the first round or trade it. But I’m talking the draft as a whole. At first he was fixated on NCAA players. There were many of them including our good friend Sikura. This is not about nationality……. At all. Even take a gawd dam American that plays in the CHL. But the sunofabitch just went towards the NCAA and the USNTDP for a good chunk of picks. Not just first rounders. The CHL is the biggest provider of talent to the NHL, yet the last guy decided to be the smartest guy in the room again. There’s no excuse for that track record over 12-13 years. Not one. If there was a short sample size, then I’d understand. But he had longer than most GMs ever get. There’s a reason why he didn’t care to rebuild. He knew nothing of the rebuild. And he knew he would a botched it. His goal was to try and ride 19/88 coat tails as long as he could. So upward and onward. There’s nothing to judge the new regime off of yet. So let’s hope we see some good things happening here!!! |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 13, 2022 14:22:50 GMT -6
There is little doubt to my mind that this "fixation on NCAA players" was a deliberate strategy. John McD. believed that the best way to build the game was to market the product with American-born or developed players.
Broadcasters began to reference American kids drafted from the CHL - ie Patrick Kane and Alex Debrincat - from their USA hometowns (Buffalo/ Michigan) as opposed to their CHL clubs. The emphasis was entirely different with the Canadian and European kids who attended US colleges (ie Duncan Keith was from Michigan State as opposed to BC, Jonathan Toews from North Dakota, Victor Stalberg from Vermont - even if the players only played there for a year).
Understandably then, an American-born kid attending a local US college such as Nick Schmaltz or Vinnie Hinostroza was the ultimate sweet spot.
No other team slanted their draft strategy so heavily in this direction. The big problem with drafting college kids is that they do not play anywhere near as many games. They don't travel much, and they have many more distractions. By the time the kids graduate, their prime development years are largely done. They are finished products, for better or worse.
Well over half of the NHL players still come from the three CHL leagues. The Hawks under Bowman basically ignored this source of talent, other than a few high profile picks (Debrincat, Danault, McNeil, Dach) and very few others.
|
|
puckjim
New Member
Posts: 7
Likes: 10
|
Post by puckjim on Jun 13, 2022 14:57:10 GMT -6
The failure of Hobey Baker award winner Bill Watson has unfairly soured me on college hockey prospects.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nikos on Jun 13, 2022 14:59:17 GMT -6
Jun 13, 2022 9:42:47 GMT -4 Nikos said: PATHETIC. How Bowman and team survived with this type of track record is stunning. It took a scandal to get him out, he could still be here, think about that.
What I recall listening to Bowman & Kelly was in their mind what good drafts they had and even though in most of these years drafting lower, all the good players that are available later they would go on say or a bunch with the same grades and we are going to get a good player. I suppose all GMs and Director of Scouting say the same thing, the problem they believed it. GOOD RIDDANCE.
The stats are for the second round and higher covering 2012-18 not from 2010 when Stan started drafting. In 2010 (4 of 9) laced them up with 3 playing over 100 games. In 2011 (6 of 9) dressed with 3 over 100 games. Two of the 2011 class played important roles in the 2013 and 2015 cups. Saad 2nd and Shaw in the 5th are too important to ignore. Landing the best player at the 2015 and 2016 TDL showed his commitment to winning and willingness to work with his coach. His body of work allowed him to survive.
You can spin anyway you like my friend, but the report and article include words like, grim, pale, weak. Part of his job description was not to survive, he had a responsibility to the team, management and fans and other that a few early picks you mention, his body of work after the 2016/2017 seasons with the championship window still open while 19 & 88 still here is Horrific and borderline criminal. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Jun 14, 2022 7:13:35 GMT -6
There is little doubt to my mind that this "fixation on NCAA players" was a deliberate strategy. John McD. believed that the best way to build the game was to market the product with American-born or developed players. Broadcasters began to reference American kids drafted from the CHL - ie Patrick Kane and Alex Debrincat - from their USA hometowns (Buffalo/ Michigan) as opposed to their CHL clubs. The emphasis was entirely different with the Canadian and European kids who attended US colleges (ie Duncan Keith was from Michigan State as opposed to BC, Jonathan Toews from North Dakota, Victor Stalberg from Vermont - even if the players only played there for a year). Understandably then, an American-born kid attending a local US college such as Nick Schmaltz or Vinnie Hinostroza was the ultimate sweet spot. No other team slanted their draft strategy so heavily in this direction. The big problem with drafting college kids is that they do not play anywhere near as many games. They don't travel much, and they have many more distractions. By the time the kids graduate, their prime development years are largely done. They are finished products, for better or worse. Well over half of the NHL players still come from the three CHL leagues. The Hawks under Bowman basically ignored this source of talent, other than a few high profile picks (Debrincat, Danault, McNeil, Dach) and very few others. Did you hear McD make statements to that effect or is your imagination just running wild? JEEZ......I show you guys that just THREE of the last 13 first round picks were either NCAA or USND and one of them (Hartman) played OHL yet you run with this too many college kids bullshit anyway........2 out of 13!!!!!! Nolan Allan(1st round) and Colton Dach(2nd round) came last year.......from the CHL......forget about them? Beaudin (!st round)....CHL.....seems we've all forgotten about him. Graham Knott (2nd round/54th overall).....team's first pick in '15'....OHL......never got a sniff. Dillon Fournier (48th overall),CHL player taken after TT,a Euro player in the first round.........neither has been near a college classroom. The fact is.....only two NCAA have been taken in the first round since '09',Schmaltz and Hayes.....Hartman was USND but went the OHL route. First round Euro Jokiharju was traded for a BUM and first round Euro Boqvist was given away so we could sign what'll be the worst contract in hockey.......not a peep? TT was also a first round Euro given away,nothing against the players,TT's been great,Joker looks like a top pair D-man and even Boqvist can still be a valuable piece.....my point is......nothing to show for those three first round picks.......none of em NCAA kids. At least Schmaltz brought a real good player in return that even we couldn't ruin(and we tried) and Hartman brought a 1st and a 2nd.......those picks didn't hurt the team like the three I mentioned above because they brought a return when traded and are solid NHL players. Too bad the picks we got for Hartman,Beaudin/CHL and Kurashev/Euro weren't used better! A good number of NCAA kids were taken in the later rounds and other GM's have success with NCAA kids........the best young player in the league is a NCAA kid. |
|
|
|
Post by steamer on Jun 14, 2022 9:09:26 GMT -6
The 18 year old draft picks are probably better off developing in the NCAA than in the Hawks system
|
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 14, 2022 10:18:02 GMT -6
There is little doubt to my mind that this "fixation on NCAA players" was a deliberate strategy. John McD. believed that the best way to build the game was to market the product with American-born or developed players. Broadcasters began to reference American kids drafted from the CHL - ie Patrick Kane and Alex Debrincat - from their USA hometowns (Buffalo/ Michigan) as opposed to their CHL clubs. The emphasis was entirely different with the Canadian and European kids who attended US colleges (ie Duncan Keith was from Michigan State as opposed to BC, Jonathan Toews from North Dakota, Victor Stalberg from Vermont - even if the players only played there for a year). Understandably then, an American-born kid attending a local US college such as Nick Schmaltz or Vinnie Hinostroza was the ultimate sweet spot. No other team slanted their draft strategy so heavily in this direction. The big problem with drafting college kids is that they do not play anywhere near as many games. They don't travel much, and they have many more distractions. By the time the kids graduate, their prime development years are largely done. They are finished products, for better or worse. Well over half of the NHL players still come from the three CHL leagues. The Hawks under Bowman basically ignored this source of talent, other than a few high profile picks (Debrincat, Danault, McNeil, Dach) and very few others. Did you hear McD make statements to that effect or is your imagination just running wild? JEEZ......I show you guys that just THREE of the last 13 first round picks were either NCAA or USND and one of them (Hartman) played OHL yet you run with this too many college kids bullshit anyway........2 out of 13!!!!!! Nolan Allan(1st round) and Colton Dach(2nd round) came last year.......from the CHL......forget about them? Beaudin (!st round)....CHL.....seems we've all forgotten about him. Graham Knott (2nd round/54th overall).....team's first pick in '15'....OHL......never got a sniff. Dillon Fournier (48th overall),CHL player taken after TT,a Euro player in the first round.........neither has been near a college classroom. The fact is.....only two NCAA have been taken in the first round since '09',Schmaltz and Hayes.....Hartman was USND but went the OHL route. First round Euro Jokiharju was traded for a BUM and first round Euro Boqvist was given away so we could sign what'll be the worst contract in hockey.......not a peep? TT was also a first round Euro given away,nothing against the players,TT's been great,Joker looks like a top pair D-man and even Boqvist can still be a valuable piece.....my point is......nothing to show for those three first round picks.......none of em NCAA kids. At least Schmaltz brought a real good player in return that even we couldn't ruin(and we tried) and Hartman brought a 1st and a 2nd.......those picks didn't hurt the team like the three I mentioned above because they brought a return when traded and are solid NHL players. Too bad the picks we got for Hartman,Beaudin/CHL and Kurashev/Euro weren't used better! A good number of NCAA kids were taken in the later rounds and other GM's have success with NCAA kids........the best young player in the league is a NCAA kid. You managed to list just about every CHL draft pick. There were a couple more, but not many. In 12 years. Most teams draft 4-5 CHL prospects every year, recognizing that 50 plus percent of NHL players develop there. Bowman and his staff thought they knew better. Obviously, the track record speaks for itself. The other big problem at the draft table was Bowman and his staff's "fixation" with this idea that the "game has changed." Size all of a sudden did not matter. There was "a role" for the little guy. While all other teams factored size in their assessment, the Bowman scouts for the most part, ignored it entirely because they believed they were smarter. Over time, the team's prospect pool and its NHL roster got smaller and way less physical. Sure, Bowman added skilled guys like Debrincat, Hinostroza, and Teravainen, but at the expense of drafting other kinds of prospects. For every small-skilled guy success story, there were many more who stalled in their development - Saarela, Nordgren, Wise, Altybarmakyan, Soderlund, Louis, Sikura etc. to name just a few. There is a reason why other teams pass over the small-skilled guys, and why they are always available later in the draft. Most successful organizations recognize the need for balance. In fairness, the Bowman game plan changed about two-three years ago - to my mind, largely in response to the success of Tampa Bay and St. Louis (with their size on defence and forward). Now size again mattered, and the CHL was a place to find prospects again. To my mind, the change was too little and too late. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 14, 2022 10:39:54 GMT -6
MVR. Another problem was just drafting size. They didn’t target good players with size. They just have size. Look at that Crevier kid. Maybe he develops, he’s got a long way to go. But it seems they were looking for the biggest possible kids. While every other team, like you said drafted not just size, but a balance. They probably passed over the next Goudreau, Fox or Kucherov cuz they went simple minded again. A team should never have that many needs. Especially a team that has the hard work already done in having 19/88/81/2/7/50/4/10/36/29. He didn’t need anything to add much. Just some kids to replace the outgoing guys!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Jun 14, 2022 11:05:54 GMT -6
MVR. Another problem was just drafting size. They didn’t target good players with size. They just have size. Look at that Crevier kid. Maybe he develops, he’s got a long way to go. But it seems they were looking for the biggest possible kids. While every other team, like you said drafted not just size, but a balance. They probably passed over the next Goudreau, Fox or Kucherov cuz they went simple minded again. A team should never have that many needs. Especially a team that has the hard work already done in having 19/88/81/2/7/50/4/10/36/29. He didn’t need anything to add much. Just some kids to replace the outgoing guys!!! Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill. |
|
|
|
Post by BigT on Jun 14, 2022 11:42:58 GMT -6
MVR. Another problem was just drafting size. They didn’t target good players with size. They just have size. Look at that Crevier kid. Maybe he develops, he’s got a long way to go. But it seems they were looking for the biggest possible kids. While every other team, like you said drafted not just size, but a balance. They probably passed over the next Goudreau, Fox or Kucherov cuz they went simple minded again. A team should never have that many needs. Especially a team that has the hard work already done in having 19/88/81/2/7/50/4/10/36/29. He didn’t need anything to add much. Just some kids to replace the outgoing guys!!! Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill. It just sucks that he went for body size wether it be small or large instead of looking at their skill levels, character, toughness etc. Looking at the Rangers team. We may have missed the boat with Gorton. Habs will probably be good very soon. Plus it seems the top picks follow that guy!!! |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Jun 14, 2022 12:44:22 GMT -6
Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill. It just sucks that he went for body size wether it be small or large instead of looking at their skill levels, character, toughness etc. Looking at the Rangers team. We may have missed the boat with Gorton. Habs will probably be good very soon. Plus it seems the top picks follow that guy!!! Yup. Talent and size are both useless unless brought to bear. I think that was ine of many things Stan wasn't good at: he hedged his bets that some prospects with *potential* would put it together under his watch...like Nylander and Svedberg. Time marches on though. We missed the boat on plenty but as long as hockey is a thing, prospects will get churned out. It's up to Davidson now to get the building blocks in place for the future, preferrably guys with tenacity and character who can bring it. |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 14, 2022 13:43:57 GMT -6
Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill. It just sucks that he went for body size wether it be small or large instead of looking at their skill levels, character, toughness etc. Looking at the Rangers team. We may have missed the boat with Gorton. Habs will probably be good very soon. Plus it seems the top picks follow that guy!!! Bowman seemed to perceive physical forwards as players to hide at the bottom of the roster. The physical forwards he inherited - Byfuglien, Ladd, Brouwer, Eager, Burish etc - were traded away for little or no return. The few larger sized players he drafted early were almost universally known for skill and not physicality. He would add slugs like John Scott, Brandon Bollig, Andres Martinsen, Brandon Mashinter, Jordin Tootoo - in my opinion - mostly to ward off potential criticism as opposed to provide value. |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 14, 2022 13:57:35 GMT -6
MVR. Another problem was just drafting size. They didn’t target good players with size. They just have size. Look at that Crevier kid. Maybe he develops, he’s got a long way to go. But it seems they were looking for the biggest possible kids. While every other team, like you said drafted not just size, but a balance. They probably passed over the next Goudreau, Fox or Kucherov cuz they went simple minded again. A team should never have that many needs. Especially a team that has the hard work already done in having 19/88/81/2/7/50/4/10/36/29. He didn’t need anything to add much. Just some kids to replace the outgoing guys!!! Teams need to slot guys properly, not only by salary, but also by role and body type. Coach Quenneville understood this, and he would mix size and skill on every line and on each defensive pairing. This means the first two scoring lines can get by with one or two players being undersized but not more (and never together). The third line - typically a checking unit - might still be effective if one of these players was below average in size, but certainly no more. The fourth "energy" line needs to be physical. None of these guys should be small. All need to play with an edge. On defence, the first unit powerplay quarterback (ie Duncan Keith) could be below average size. Potentially the number four guy (Oduya, Campbell) as well. But that's really it. The rest should be at least average or above average in size. So why continue to draft and sign and trade for small players year after year when all these roles have been filled? |
|
|
|
Post by nighbor on Jun 14, 2022 14:17:39 GMT -6
MVR. Another problem was just drafting size. They didn’t target good players with size. They just have size. Look at that Crevier kid. Maybe he develops, he’s got a long way to go. But it seems they were looking for the biggest possible kids. While every other team, like you said drafted not just size, but a balance. They probably passed over the next Goudreau, Fox or Kucherov cuz they went simple minded again. A team should never have that many needs. Especially a team that has the hard work already done in having 19/88/81/2/7/50/4/10/36/29. He didn’t need anything to add much. Just some kids to replace the outgoing guys!!! Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill He was undrafted therefore it would have been wrong not to have given him a chance. As far as no skill he played 27 NHL games scored four points with a -5. A non-skilled player would have had a much higher minus number. |
|
|
|
Post by OldTimeHawky on Jun 14, 2022 14:54:19 GMT -6
Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill He was undrafted therefore it would have been wrong not to have given him a chance. As far as no skill he played 27 NHL games scored four points with a -5. A non-skilled player would have had a much higher minus number. Yeah guys like Svedberb and Crevier are low risk high reward types of players, one was an undrafted free agent and the other was a 7th rounder. Crevier had 10 goals his first year before being drafted, the highlights of his goals showed a huge agile right handed dman, the last couple rounds is when you take flyers on guys like this, especially 6'8" dmen. |
|
|
|
Post by T-man2010 on Jun 14, 2022 16:37:18 GMT -6
He was undrafted therefore it would have been wrong not to have given him a chance. As far as no skill he played 27 NHL games scored four points with a -5. A non-skilled player would have had a much higher minus number. Yeah guys like Svedberb and Crevier are low risk high reward types of players, one was an undrafted free agent and the other was a 7th rounder. Crevier had 10 goals his first year before being drafted, the highlights of his goals showed a huge agile right handed dman, the last couple rounds is when you take flyers on guys like this, especially 6'8" dmen. Like the Hawks did with Buff. |
|
|
|
Post by 2old4this on Jun 15, 2022 1:06:16 GMT -6
The failure of Hobey Baker award winner Bill Watson has unfairly soured me on college hockey prospects. I've been thinking about "Hobey" Watson lately. Surprised anybody else remembers him. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Jun 15, 2022 7:12:30 GMT -6
Did you hear McD make statements to that effect or is your imagination just running wild? JEEZ......I show you guys that just THREE of the last 13 first round picks were either NCAA or USND and one of them (Hartman) played OHL yet you run with this too many college kids bullshit anyway........2 out of 13!!!!!! Nolan Allan(1st round) and Colton Dach(2nd round) came last year.......from the CHL......forget about them? Beaudin (!st round)....CHL.....seems we've all forgotten about him. Graham Knott (2nd round/54th overall).....team's first pick in '15'....OHL......never got a sniff. Dillon Fournier (48th overall),CHL player taken after TT,a Euro player in the first round.........neither has been near a college classroom. The fact is.....only two NCAA have been taken in the first round since '09',Schmaltz and Hayes.....Hartman was USND but went the OHL route. First round Euro Jokiharju was traded for a BUM and first round Euro Boqvist was given away so we could sign what'll be the worst contract in hockey.......not a peep? TT was also a first round Euro given away,nothing against the players,TT's been great,Joker looks like a top pair D-man and even Boqvist can still be a valuable piece.....my point is......nothing to show for those three first round picks.......none of em NCAA kids. At least Schmaltz brought a real good player in return that even we couldn't ruin(and we tried) and Hartman brought a 1st and a 2nd.......those picks didn't hurt the team like the three I mentioned above because they brought a return when traded and are solid NHL players. Too bad the picks we got for Hartman,Beaudin/CHL and Kurashev/Euro weren't used better! A good number of NCAA kids were taken in the later rounds and other GM's have success with NCAA kids........the best young player in the league is a NCAA kid. You managed to list just about every CHL draft pick. There were a couple more, but not many. In 12 years. Most teams draft 4-5 CHL prospects every year, recognizing that 50 plus percent of NHL players develop there. Bowman and his staff thought they knew better. Obviously, the track record speaks for itself. The other big problem at the draft table was Bowman and his staff's "fixation" with this idea that the "game has changed." Size all of a sudden did not matter. There was "a role" for the little guy. While all other teams factored size in their assessment, the Bowman scouts for the most part, ignored it entirely because they believed they were smarter. Over time, the team's prospect pool and its NHL roster got smaller and way less physical. Sure, Bowman added skilled guys like Debrincat, Hinostroza, and Teravainen, but at the expense of drafting other kinds of prospects. For every small-skilled guy success story, there were many more who stalled in their development - Saarela, Nordgren, Wise, Altybarmakyan, Soderlund, Louis, Sikura etc. to name just a few. There is a reason why other teams pass over the small-skilled guys, and why they are always available later in the draft. Most successful organizations recognize the need for balance. In fairness, the Bowman game plan changed about two-three years ago - to my mind, largely in response to the success of Tampa Bay and St. Louis (with their size on defence and forward). Now size again mattered, and the CHL was a place to find prospects again. To my mind, the change was too little and too late. I don't think I looked past the 2nd round for any example and I admitted we saw NCAA players in the later rounds. You guys know I was lookin' for more big raw-boned Canadian lads myself over the years and said so many times but the team's downfall wasn't taking too many college kids or too many Euros,which he actually took more of and I agree that he took fewer CHL kids for some time but what he really took were a lot of the wrong kids.....regardless of where they were from. I remember the mantra back in '18' after drafting a 172lb D-man with the 8th pick and followed up by drafting 168lb D-man @27 and I almost shit when he traded up to draft a kid who looked like a little girl in the 3rd round........the scripted line coming from everyone in the Org was "we want to be first to the puck". My first thought was 'and then what...get crushed'? I was told many times that we can always add size later and we know what that gets us,either a tougher D-man who isn't good enough to draw in or more often than not,a bigger/tougher forward who wasn't good enough to play over half the games. I don't think DUMBASS ever drafted a big player with skill in the 1st round like most teams do.....all the rime. What really gets me is he did draft a D-man with some size in the 1st round Jokihrju, 6' 200lbs who made the league @19 and has become a REAL top-pair/defensive partner and couldn't stand prosperity........gave him away for a BUM! Potter obviously didn't like him and must have had input because how many GM's deal away their own 1st round,20yro D-man who made the league @19 the following summer? Only a DUMBASS could turn a 1st round winner into a complete bust! Nobody wanted bigger guys than me but that doesn't change the fact that most teams that passed on D-Cat have kicked themselves in the ass every day since and it's a God dammed good thing the Hawks didn't pass on the small framed kid from Buffalo or we'd be going on sixty one years! |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 15, 2022 8:20:20 GMT -6
I don't care - at all - about a player's nationality.
What matters is where and how they develop. At some point, the numbers do speak. The CHL develops talent as does the SHL.
The NCAA's track record is not nearly as strong. The players do not play enough games. The pro game is too different. The best players to emerge from the NCAA play there at most one or two years.
I do understand what Bowman was thinking. You draft a college-bound kid, and you don't have to sign him for four years or pay for his development. The problem is that the few college players who do develop (ie Kevin Hayes) now choose to enter UFA rather than sign with their original teams or use the threat as leverage in negotiations. The end result is there is no salary savings.
If I was a parent of an athlete, I would encourage college. Getting an education (especially with a free ride) broadens a person's overall life experience. The CHL route is tougher, and there are no guarantees.
|
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 15, 2022 8:30:40 GMT -6
I have nothing against college kids and certainly do not mind signing players to contracts as UFAs. Mike Hardman, for example, might still emerge as a solid contributor for the third of fourth line. Many quality NHL goalies (ie Eddy Belfour) emerged from the college game.
I just don't believe in wasting draft picks on players choosing this path. Sign them as UFAs.
|
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Jun 15, 2022 8:56:13 GMT -6
I don't care - at all - about a player's nationality. What matters is where and how they develop. At some point, the numbers do speak. The CHL develops talent as does the SHL. The NCAA's track record is not nearly as strong. The players do not play enough games. The pro game is too different. The best players to emerge from the NCAA play there at most one or two years. I do understand what Bowman was thinking. You draft a college-bound kid, and you don't have to sign him for four years or pay for his development. The problem is that the few college players who do develop (ie Kevin Hayes) now choose to enter UFA rather than sign with their original teams or use the threat as leverage in negotiations. The end result is there is no salary savings. If I was a parent of an athlete, I would encourage college. Getting an education (especially with a free ride) broadens a person's overall life experience. The CHL route is tougher, and there are no guarantees. As far as nationality..... I admire Patrick Kane as much as the next Hawk fan but JT,Big Hoss,Dunks and CC are still my favorites from the cup runs.....not a Yank in the bunch and Bobby and Stan,Tony-O too,were every bit my boyhood heroes that Butkus or Ernie or anyone else was. I won't speak for anyone else but I assume most of us are aware of the differences between the feeder leagues and I've always admitted the top CHL players are preferable to top players from USND or Euro leagues. YES,top NCAA players like Makar do come out after 2 years and staying 4 isn't encoureging but top CHL kids don't always play 4 years either. The last guy DID ignore the best feeder league for a stretch there....facts is facts,but he took as many or more small,useless Euros as he did small,useless NCAA kids.....small and useless being the reccuring theme,while other GM's found bigger,more useful NCAA and Euro players in the draft. As I said earlier,only two of DUMBASS' 13 first round picks were NCAA kids,Hayes returned a complementary 2nd when he refused to sign here and Hatman returned a 1st and a 2nd when traded........could we have done better than Beaudin and Kurashev with those picks? Two HIGH quality Euro players were taken in the 1st round,TT and Jokiharju........then given away........DUMBASS!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by LordKOTL on Jun 15, 2022 9:00:33 GMT -6
Add Svedberg into players with size but no skill He was undrafted therefore it would have been wrong not to have given him a chance. As far as no skill he played 27 NHL games scored four points with a -5. A non-skilled player would have had a much higher minus number. Good point--mea culpa. I thought he was drafted and Stan glommed on him for his size and potential as opposed to his skill on the ice. |
|
|
|
Post by hsbob on Jun 15, 2022 9:02:30 GMT -6
I have nothing against college kids and certainly do not mind signing players to contracts as UFAs. Mike Hardman, for example, might still emerge as a solid contributor for the third of fourth line. Many quality NHL goalies (ie Eddy Belfour) emerged from the college game. I just don't believe in wasting draft picks on players choosing this path. Sign them as UFAs. I don't know how many times I can admit that I too find top CHL kids preferable but you seem to ignore the many good players now coming out of the college ranks.........you just called NCAA picks wasted. Didn't the best,young D-man in the league hone his chops in the NCAA? |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 15, 2022 10:27:18 GMT -6
There are exceptions, of course. Nothing should be absolute.
I always tend to play the odds. That's it. If a team has 7 picks, it makes sense on average to draft 3-4 from the CHL each year (with some years more, and others less). If there is a gem going to US college, I would not hesitate to pick the player.
Jonathan Toews did get drafted out of North Dakota, though I challenge anyone who believes this is where he developed.
My feeling is that Bowman's recruited Mark Kelley from Pittsburgh because of their shared ideas about focussing attention primarily on US college hockey.
They lacked interest in the CHL, and this impacted the scouting and talent evaluation. The few successful picks they selected who played in those leagues disproportionately tended to be former US Development players (ie Ryan Hartman, Alex Debrincat) or European imports (Henri Jokiharju). My guess is that Kelley and staff had reads on these players well before they joined the CHL.
|
|
|
|
Post by 2old4this on Jun 15, 2022 10:51:50 GMT -6
If Davidson tanks the team this year and next, we should be well on our way to competing for the Cup. Combine that with trading a few players and "renting" Toews and Kane and the Force will be with us once again.
|
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 15, 2022 11:17:42 GMT -6
Bob mentions above several of the failed CHL prospects from the Bowman era - ie McNeil, Knott, Beaudin, perhaps even Dach.
Do these failures mean that the CHL is not a place to scout?
Or do these failures represent the fact that the Hawks under Kelley/Bowman did not spend enough resources scouting these leagues? Why did other teams avoid these players and choose others from the same leagues instead?
|
|
|
|
Post by squishy24 on Jun 15, 2022 11:58:04 GMT -6
Bob mentions above several of the failed CHL prospects from the Bowman era - ie McNeil, Knott, Beaudin, perhaps even Dach. Do these failures mean that the CHL is not a place to scout? Or do these failures represent the fact that the Hawks under Kelley/Bowman did not spend enough resources scouting these leagues? Why did other teams avoid these players and choose others from the same leagues instead? lol facts, "in my mind" does not equal facts. when someone disagree or prove your post is wrong, they are "Exceptions" Dcat - should stay away from small scoring wingers - contra example Kane, Stlouis, Fleury - your response "those are exceptions" SB didnt draft in CHL as much as you want - shows sample of CHL drafts - your response "they didnt spend enough resources to scout" thats why those CHL picks are failures (are they exceptions too?) - see how the argument changes? how do you even know how much SB's group spend on resources on scouting different leagues? Let alone claiming other teams' scouting/spending choices? - nothing but pure speculation based nothing on facts maybe they didnt draft CHL kids because they truly believe at the spot of their draft pick, a non-CHL pick is better? this is more a failure on bad scouting, than saying they choose not to draft CHL kids or saying they dont spend enough scouting them. Dcat proves they scouted him enough that they traded up. So it does somewhat prove they do scout CHL and pick CHL kids. not enough to change your "facts" ? |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 15, 2022 13:09:14 GMT -6
Bob mentions above several of the failed CHL prospects from the Bowman era - ie McNeil, Knott, Beaudin, perhaps even Dach. Do these failures mean that the CHL is not a place to scout? Or do these failures represent the fact that the Hawks under Kelley/Bowman did not spend enough resources scouting these leagues? Why did other teams avoid these players and choose others from the same leagues instead? lol facts, "in my mind" does not equal facts. when someone disagree or prove your post is wrong, they are "Exceptions" Dcat - should stay away from small scoring wingers - contra example Kane, Stlouis, Fleury - your response "those are exceptions" SB didnt draft in CHL as much as you want - shows sample of CHL drafts - your response "they didnt spend enough resources to scout" thats why those CHL picks are failures (are they exceptions too?) - see how the argument changes? how do you even know how much SB's group spend on resources on scouting different leagues? Let alone claiming other teams' scouting/spending choices? - nothing but pure speculation based nothing on facts maybe they didnt draft CHL kids because they truly believe at the spot of their draft pick, a non-CHL pick is better? this is more a failure on bad scouting, than saying they choose not to draft CHL kids or saying they dont spend enough scouting them. Dcat proves they scouted him enough that they traded up. So it does somewhat prove they do scout CHL and pick CHL kids. not enough to change your "facts" ? Squishy: If the sample size was smaller, sure, I would agree with you. The Bowman/Kelley draft pattern was established over a decade plus - there have been more than one hundred picks. Every single idea raised here on these boards is "speculation." None of us (that I know of) is in the room or privy to inside information. We observe, and we comment. They are opinions and not facts. As an outside observer, do you think there was no slant towards US college players? Do you believe the Hawks took the best player available each draft and did not avoid the CHL? The high ratio of US college kids drafted over 12 years does not say anything to you? |
|
|
|
Post by mvr on Jun 15, 2022 13:14:57 GMT -6
A better choice of words from Squishy's highlight above would have been as follows.
Instead of "represent the fact". Change to "indicate that."
As Squishy points out, what I wrote is not a "fact." It is conceivable that the team spent great financial resources in scouting the CHL and that the scouts were incompetent. In this sense, the human resources were inadequate.
|
|
