It’s Draft Day! Or as my adorable wife once misheard me,
Giraffe Day!
 |
| Pictured: My future daughter, every Draft Day. |
In celebration of the NHL Giraffe, I have written a
long-neck of a post in which I (using data) rank all of the teams in the NHL
from worst to best on their drafting ability since 2000.
By drafting ability, I mean that I will be answering the
following question:
If a player was drafted by [Team X] between 2000 and 2014,
what is the likelihood that he would eventually become a full-time NHL player?
You may be surprised to find that the ability to draft
future NHL-players doesn’t correlate to team success. Boston and Chicago both
scored surprisingly low, whereas Toronto and Carolina are in the top-10. But
when you consider that Boston drafted Andrew Raycroft and Toronto drafted Tuukka
Rask, you see that a team who drafts well can still sabotage themselves through
an inability to retain good prospects.
Method for Ranking:
Step 1) Add up the total number of man-games played by
draftees of each NHL team, regardless of whether they went on to play for the
team that drafted them.
Step 2) Weight each draft year according to recency.
Obviously, players drafted in the year 2000 have had a larger opportunity to
accumulate man-games. Therefore, if we don’t place weight on more recent years,
then a team who drafted very well from 2000-2002 will have accumulated many
more man-games than a team who drafted very well from 2009-2011. As an example,
a player drafted in the year 2001 who’s played 500 NHL games is equivalent to a
player drafted in 2006 who’s played 257 games. This gives us the team’s
“Weighted Drafted Man-Games”.
Step 3) Find the average number of NHL games played by
draftees in each round of each year, dividing the first round into Top 10,
11-20, and Bottom 10. A second-round pick is usually more likely to produce a
future NHL player than a third-round pick. And nothing is more valuable than a
top-10 pick. Certain rounds in certain years produce hardly any NHL players –
you were lucky if you got anything out of a 5th-round pick in 2006,
for example. This assigns value to each draft pick. The most valuable picks
were: Top-10 in 2003, Top-10 in 2006, and 11-20 in 2003.
Step 4) Add up the number of draft picks in each round in
each year for each team, and multiply each pick by its value calculated in step
3. This gives us the team’s “Expected Drafted Man-Games”.
Step 5) Divide the number calculated in step 2 (Weighted
Drafted Man-Games) by the number calculated in step 4 (Expected Drafted
Man-Games) to get, what I unimaginatively call, the “Drafting Percentage”. This is
the number that unequivocally (not really) rates each team’s drafting performance.
And yes, I am aware that this method is an
oversimplification that disregards extraneous variables such as career-ending
injuries, deaths, whether or not a player is a goaltender, and the difference
between a superstar forward and a depth defenseman. But every team has a few of
those, and over the course of 14 years, it should even-out, right?
You know what, drafting is largely a crap-shoot anyway so
let’s just break out the popcorn, shut-off our critical-thinking lobes, and see
who scored the best and worst in Churkovision’s Drafting Percentage:
Part 1: The Ten Underachievers
30. Arizona Coyotes
2003 produced the most bountiful crop of future NHL players
in league history. And yet, the Coyotes couldn’t squeeze a single NHL game out
of any of their eight draft picks, which if you look at the amount of players available, should be impossible. They traded away their 11th
overall pick, which would be used on Jeff Carter, to acquire Daymond Langkow.
Their best year was easily 2005 with Martin Hanzal and Keith
Yandle, followed by 2004 when they drafted Blake Wheeler and Daniel Winnik. If those are considered your very best years, then you're in trouble. Third-pairing
defensemen Michael Stone and Connor Murphy are the only full-time NHL players
they’ve drafted outside of the top-10 since 2005.
29. Vancouver Canucks
As a Canucks fan, I’m loathe to concede this, but the
numbers don’t lie.
Between 2000 and 2009, they struck-out completely in four
different draft years (2000, 2002, 2007, and 2009). No other team has failed to
draft a single full-time NHLer in so many seasons. And that’s not even
considering 2010, which is highly unlikely to produce anyone either, or 2012 which is
resting squarely on Brendan Gaunce.
To be fair, Vancouver has had a very low number of quality draft positions (only the Red Wings have had worse). But their draft picks
since 2000 have only played a total of roughly 4200 games - the lowest in the
league, by far. Almost 1000 games lower than the 29th-placed Coyotes. When you have the 2nd-lowest number of quality draft picks, you can't afford to have the 2nd-lowest drafting percentage.
28. New Jersey Devils
The good news for the Devils is that they’ve drafted fairly
well considering the bad number of draft picks they’ve carried in recent years.
The bad news is that they’ve been at-best good, but never great. Between 2001
and 2008, they were lucky to ever draft more than one full-time NHL player in a
year, occasionally missing altogether. Their best year was when they drafted
Travis Zajac, if that gives you a hint as to how low their ceiling is.
New Jersey doesn’t miss the playoffs much, so they tend to
draft lower which hurts their opportunities. But after the Canucks and Coyotes,
the Devils have the fewest number of man-games among their draft picks.
27. Winnipeg Jets/Atlanta Thrashers
Similar to the Devils, they’ve made some decent selections
in recent years. Unlike the Devils, they don’t have the playoff appearances to
excuse their sub-par performance.
2002 was the only year that can really be considered “good”,
using their first three selections on Kari Lehtonen, Jim Slater, and Patrick
Dwyer who are all still in the NHL. Since then, they’ve mostly dabbled in
mediocrity, not finding much outside of the top-10.
Unlike the previous teams on this list, this franchise has
managed to find enough future NHL players to maintain a steady stream of in-house talent. But also
unlike the previous teams, they’ve never had a good season, and thus, should
have drafted much better.
26. Chicago Blackhawks
I know. I didn’t think they’d score this low, either. After
all, they drafted THREE future Hall-of-Famers in only six years. But hear me
out.
They had 9 draft picks that were 14th overall or
higher between 2000 and 2008. In addition to Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane,
those picks also include Pavel Vorobiev, Mikhael Yakubov, Cam Barker, Jack
Skille, and Kyle Beach. On the whole, Chicago was more likely to whiff than
score on a high draft pick. The Blackhawks are the Babe Ruth of drafting - a lot of homeruns, but also a lot of strikeouts.
In fact, Chicago has had the highest quality/quantity draft
picks since 2000. Not only did they consistently draft high, but they hoarded draft picks. They drafted 76
players from 2000 to 2005 (the league average is 52). Only 16 of those picks
ever became full-time players, but they included Duncan Keith, Dave Bolland,
Dustin Byfuglien, Corey Crawford, Troy Brouwer, and Bryan Bickell.
And they’re still at it. Since 2009, they’ve drafted 8-11
players each year, despite there being only 7 rounds. That strategy has allowed
them to find Brandon Saad, Andrew Shaw, and Markus Kruger amidst a long list of
also-rans. Let this be a lesson against trading away draft picks like Halloween
candy (*cough* Vancouver). If you can’t draft well, then you can make up for it
by drafting plentifully.
25. Florida Panthers
Remember that lesson that I mentioned in the last paragraph?
The one about hoarding draft picks? Scratch that. It apparently only works for
Chicago.
Florida has hoarded almost as many draft picks as Chicago,
and has drafted almost as many future NHL players, at a slightly-higher success
rate. The problem is that while Chicago wound-up with Toews and Kane, Florida’s
premiere picks were Jay Bouwmeester, Stephen Weiss, and Nathan Horton. Their
later-round picks were Greg Campbell, Tanner Glass, David Booth, Lukas
Krajicek, and several other players who would later be traded to the Canucks.
It’s mostly been a case of bad luck. Bouwmeester, Weiss, and
Horton weren’t significantly worse than any other highly-rated prospects
available at the time. Horton could’ve been Thomas Vanek, and Weiss could’ve
been Mikko Koivu, but would the Panthers have been significantly better?
Probably not.
Their fortunes could still change. They’ve had 42 draft
picks 2010-2014, and another nine this year. Since then, they’ve had four picks
in the top-3 overall. Could one of them develop into a Toews or a Kane? Maybe,
but this is the Panthers that we’re talking about.
24. Boston Bruins
Oh come on! Bergeron! Krejci! Lucic! Marchand! (…Kessel…!)
I’ll admit, I had to double-check my numbers here because it
didn’t seem right. Boston is perceived as a team that drafts very well, so why
don’t the numbers support it?
The answer is that the Bruins drafting success was heavily concentrated
in three seasons that happened 9-12 years ago, which resulted in all those
draft picks simultaneously reaching their prime. Almost all of their good picks
came in 2003, 2004, and 2006. But their success is heavily buoyed by poor
drafting in every other year. They don’t get any points for Tyler Seguin and
Dougie Hamilton who were handed to them on a silver platter (sorry Leaf fans). Outside
of those two, and anything in 2003/04/06, their most notable draft pick has
been either Joe Colbourne or Vladimir Sobotka.
23. New York Rangers
If you give a couple of mulligans to the Rangers, they’ve
actually drafted pretty well. They’re usually good for at least two full-time
NHL players each draft. However, there is one glaring hole in their record that
is dragging them down hard.
When you don’t draft a single good player in the “Everybody
Gets an All-Star Fest” of 2003, you don’t get to be high on this list. Only the
Coyotes drafted worse, and that was because their first pick was 77th
overall.
Outside of 2003, they’ve been a mostly middle-of-the-pack team
with a good mix of hits and misses.
22. Philadelphia Flyers
To their credit, the bar is set pretty low because they don’t
miss the playoffs very often. Since 2000 (actually 1997), they’ve only had 5
draft picks higher than 17th overall and they've been mostly good (Joni Pitkanen, Jeff Carter, JVR, Sean Couturier, and Samuel Morin).
To their detriment, they’re one of only five teams whose
draft picks have totalled less than 7000 man games. To their further detriment,
most of their drafting success is fading into history. Aside from Couturier, they haven’t had a good draft pick in seven years.
They had a strong 2003, even by 2003 standards (drafting Carter and Mike Richards in the first round), but outside of that, it’s
rare for them to draft two good players in one year.
21. Tampa Bay Lightning
It’s funny how tides can change so quickly. If we were
analyzing the best drafting teams from 2000 to 2010, Tampa Bay would be in last
place. But thanks to their huge turnaround since 2007, they’re in…tenth-last
place. Okay, maybe tides don’t change that
quickly.
Still though, the improvement in their selections has been astronomical.
From 1999 until 2006, their only pick that spent any significant time in the
NHL was Paul Ranger. Since then, they’ve found a useful mid-round player almost
every year, including Ondrej Palat and Nikita Kucherov both in 2011.
Oh and by the way, they didn’t get anyone good out of the 2003
draft either. Then they won the 2004 Stanley Cup anyway. Why do teams invest in
scouting again?
Part 2: The Ten Average Teams
20. St. Louis Blues
Average number of opportunities; below average number of
successes.
19. Minnesota Wild
Fairly good number of opportunities; average number of
successes.
18. Pittsburgh Penguins
Average number of opportunities; slightly below average
number of successes.
17. Calgary Flames
Bad habit of trading-away second-round draft picks gives
them below-average number of opportunities. Below average number of successes.
16. Dallas Stars
Low number of opportunities; lower number of successes.
15. Los Angeles Kings
Very high number of opportunities; fairly high number of
successes.
14. New York Islanders
Moderate number of opportunities; slightly lower number of
successes.
13. Edmonton Oilers
High number of opportunities; high number of successes
I’m actually going to comment a little more on the Oilers,
because they have a reputation of drafting poorly. I was fairly surprised that
they scored this highly, but the numbers don’t lie. They actually have a fairly
good record on their early picks, and not only because they tend to be first
overall. Prior to 2004, they drafted a good number of late-round bloomers as
well.
They’re one of the few teams that finds at least one
full-time NHL player every single season. Their worst drafting years were 2001
and 2004, and even then they found Ales Hemsky and Devan Dubnyk, respectively.
They haven’t drafted particularly well, but they haven’t been bad.
12. Washington Capitals
High number of opportunities, high number of successes
11. Nashville Predators
High number of opportunities, high number of successes
Part 3: The Ten Overachievers
10. Detroit Red Wings
The Red Wings are the opposite of the Lightning. If this
were exclusively 2000-2010, Detroit would be in first place. But ever since Steve
Yzerman left, the sands have been shifting, thus confirming that he is, in
fact, a wizard.
Last year the Red Wings drafted Dylan Larkin 15th
overall. He was their first draft pick higher than 19th since
(scrolls for a very long time) 1991. The Red Wings have a huge handicap when it
comes to drafting, is what I’m saying. They don’t get premiere players served
to them on a platter.
If the Red Wings had an average scouting staff, their picks
would have totaled 5500 man-games since 2000, which is a full 1000 games fewer
than the next-lowest team, Vancouver. Instead, their picks have totaled 6300
man-games, which is still really low, but good enough to give them the 10th
best draft quotient.
However, they can’t rest on their laurels. It’s been eight
years since they’ve drafted two useful players in one year. Tomas Holmstrom, Henrik
Zetterberg and Pavel Datsyuk were all drafted in the last century. Detroit can’t
afford to slip much further.
9. Columbus Blue Jackets
The Blue Jackets have only made the playoffs once, and they’ve
been disciplined in retaining their draft picks, so they don’t get any sympathy
points like Detroit or Vancouver. But would you believe that their draft picks
are ranked 2nd in man-games? Columbus drafts a surprisingly large
number of future major leaguers.
Granted, many of them are bottom-six depth players, but they
also have a few stars such as Jakub Voracek, Steve Mason, Ryan Johansen, and of
course, Rick Nash. They’ve never had a particularly bad drafting year, but that’s
their biggest problem – their good picks are too spread out.
Essentially, they’re the anti-Bruins. The Bruins drafted a
few good players all at the same time and won a Stanley Cup. The Blue Jackets
drafted a lot of good players over many years and are stuck in mediocrity.
8. Toronto Maple Leafs
How are the Maple Leafs ranked so high? They don’t have very
many draft picks in the NHL.
You’re correct, but that’s not the fault of their drafting -
that’s the fault of their trading away draft picks before they use them. The
fact that they’ve managed to draft an average number of NHL players anyway puts
them in the top-10.
Their 2006 selections turned out to be some of the best all
year, finding Viktor Stalberg and Leo Komarov in the sixth round after already
drafting Nikolai Kulemin, James Reimer, and Jiri Tlusty. Picking Tuukka Rask
and Anton Stralman the year before that solidifies their status as a relatively
strong-drafting team. Toronto can draft well if they have the opportunity to do
so. That’s a big ‘if’.
7. San Jose Sharks
They almost persistently make the playoffs, and yet they
manage to find an above-average number of NHL players in the draft.
Over the years, they’ve been very hit-or-miss. They whiffed
completely in 2000, 2002, and 2009. However, they’ve done exceptionally well in
2001 (Marcel Goc, Christian Ehrhoff, and Ryane Clowe), and 2003 (Joe Pavelski,
Milan Michalek, Matt Carle, and Steve Bernier). And despite not having a 1st
or 2nd round pick in 2008, they still managed to find Tommy Wingels
and Jason Demers.
They’re not slowing-down either. In this decade, they’ve
drafted Charlie Coyle, Matthew Nieto, and Tomas Hertl.
6. Ottawa Senators
Unlike the past couple of teams, the Senators actually have
had an ample supply of draft picks over the years, mostly via trade. They
usually have at least their share of draft picks, and then some. Still, their ability to select players who
have combined for the fourth-most man-games ranks them highly on this list.
2010 was a weird year in that they only retained four draft
picks, their earliest was 76th overall. They still landed Mark Stone
at 178th. Their other highlights include 2008 (Erik Karlsson,
Patrick Wiercioch, Zack Smith, and Mark Borowiecki), 2001 (Jason Spezza, Brooks
Laich, Ray Emery, and Tim Gleason), and 2006 (Nick Foligno, Eric Gryba, and
Erik Condra at 211th).
5. Carolina Hurricanes
It feels weird to put such a hapless team so high on any
list, but they fall into the Toronto camp. They’ve managed to draft a
respectable number of full-time players despite trading away a huge chunk of
their draft picks.
They don’t have a whole lot of highlight years, though they
have had recent success in Jeff Skinner, Justin Faulk, and Viktor Rask which
pushes their score higher. Also, I’ll bet you didn’t know that they drafted
Andrew Ladd and Jack Johnson. True story.
4. Colorado Avalanche
The Avalanche have performed above-average with
below-average opportunities. It wasn’t that long ago that they were a fixture
in the playoffs, lucky to draft top-15 until 2009. That didn’t stop them from
grabbing Johnny Boychuk and Tom Gilbert in 2002, Brad Richardson and David
Jones in 2003, or Kevin Shattenkirk and TJ Galiardi in 2007.
Even so, 2009 turned out to be their best year yet, picking
up Matt Duchene, Ryan O’Reilly, and Tyson Barrie. So far, their more recent
picks seem to be middle-of-the-road which neither helps nor hurts their score.
3. Montreal Canadiens
Virtually the same as the Avalanche, the Canadiens haven’t
had an enormous plethora of draft picks, but have chosen wisely. They’ve had a
couple of relatively-recent busts in 2008 and 2009, but rebounded nicely with
Brendan Gallagher in the 5th round in 2010.
Their biggest highlights include 2005 (Carey Price, Guillaume
Latendresse, Matt D’Agostini, and Sergei Kostitsyn) and 2007 (Ryan McDonagh,
Max Pacioretty, PK Subban, and Yannik Weber).
2. Anaheim Ducks
They’ve had an average number of draft picks this century,
but have a remarkable list of names to go under it.
Their drafting accomplishments include drafting at least one
full-time NHL player every year that they’ve ever existed (not counting the
past two seasons), being one of only five teams to have amassed 10,000
man-games between their draft picks since 2000, and most amazingly, winning the
2003 draft with both Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry in the late 1st
round, plus Drew Miller and Shane O’Brien in the 6th and 8th
rounds later on.
Other highlights include Ilya Brygalov in the 2nd
round, PA Parenteau in the 9th, Matt Beleskey in the 4th,
Bobby Ryan, Cam Fowler, Joffrey Lupul, and a few good-looking prospects in just
the past few years.
1. Buffalo Sabres
Huh. This isn’t where I’d thought we’d end either. What’s
the logic here?
According to my data, they’re ranked 23rd in “Expected
Drafted Man-Games” but 1st (by a lot) in “Weighted Drafted Man-Games”.
The Blue Jackets are 2nd with 10,879 but the Sabres have 11,519. How
did they draft so many NHL players, and yet be so terrible?
Between 2001 and 2005, they drafted 14 players who would go
on to play at least four full NHL seasons, plus another two who would play at
least four part-time NHL seasons.
Those players are Jason Pominville, Thomas Vanek, Derek Roy,
Drew Stafford, Chris Thorburn, Dennis Wideman, Keith Ballard, Daniel Paille,
Clarke MacArthur, Jan Hejda, Andrej Sekera, Patrik Kaleta, Chris Butler, Nathan
Gerbe, Jiri Novotny, and Nathan Paetsch. Yup, that’s almost a whole NHL team
right there, almost none of whom are still on the Sabres.
Conclusion
I don’t have much to say since the draft is starting soon
and I’ve already written close to 3500 words. But if you want to see who’s
likely to be a future NHL player, watch who the Sabres draft. I bet it’s going
to be Jack Eichel.
If you want to see who’s not going to make the NHL, watch
who the Coyotes draft. I bet it’s going to be Noah Hanifin.
No comments:
Post a Comment