ATD 2013 - Draft Thread I

[EagleBelfour]

To get the discussion starting: Bobby Orr is always taken #1, because he's considered by the majority the most talented player of All-Time & also on how much we put a premium of defenceman. However, what do you guys think about the fact that he only played 8 complete seasons at the highest level? The usual suspect for the next two picks played 20 and almost 30 years of mostly injured free hockey at the highest level. Is Bobby Orr THAT good over them that he fills the gap in term of longevity? How do you guys threat a case like Orr in the ATD, how many games would he play? Is it important for someone who owns him to have proper replacement on defence?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To get the discussion starting: Bobby Orr is always taken #1, because he's considered by the majority the most talented player of All-Time & also on how much we put a premium of defenceman. However, what do you guys think about the fact that he only played 8 complete seasons at the highest level? The usual suspect for the next two picks played 20 and almost 30 years of mostly injured free hockey at the highest level. Is Bobby Orr THAT good over them that he fills the gap in term of longevity? How do you guys threat a case like Orr in the ATD, how many games would he play? Is it important for someone who owns him to have proper replacement on defence?

I thought I had the type of team to wear Orr out and possibly injure him (unintentionally of course ) in the playoffs last year, but it doesn't seem like anyone bought it.

 

[jkrx]

To get the discussion starting: Bobby Orr is always taken #1, because he's considered by the majority the most talented player of All-Time & also on how much we put a premium of defenceman. However, what do you guys think about the fact that he only played 8 complete seasons at the highest level? The usual suspect for the next two picks played 20 and almost 30 years of mostly injured free hockey at the highest level. Is Bobby Orr THAT good over them that he fills the gap in term of longevity? How do you guys threat a case like Orr in the ATD, how many games would he play? Is it important for someone who owns him to have proper replacement on defence?

If I had 1st overall I wouldnt pick Orr.

 

[ck26]

To get the discussion starting: Bobby Orr is always taken #1, because he's considered by the majority the most talented player of All-Time & also on how much we put a premium of defenceman. However, what do you guys think about the fact that he only played 8 complete seasons at the highest level? The usual suspect for the next two picks played 20 and almost 30 years of mostly injured free hockey at the highest level. Is Bobby Orr THAT good over them that he fills the gap in term of longevity? How do you guys threat a case like Orr in the ATD, how many games would he play? Is it important for someone who owns him to have proper replacement on defence?

I've never understood it. Mr 30 Years was just as dominant on the ice and spent a lot more time on it.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

To get the discussion starting: Bobby Orr is always taken #1, because he's considered by the majority the most talented player of All-Time & also on how much we put a premium of defenceman. However, what do you guys think about the fact that he only played 8 complete seasons at the highest level? The usual suspect for the next two picks played 20 and almost 30 years of mostly injured free hockey at the highest level. Is Bobby Orr THAT good over them that he fills the gap in term of longevity? How do you guys threat a case like Orr in the ATD, how many games would he play? Is it important for someone who owns him to have proper replacement on defence?

I've had a pretty serious obsession with longevity in the goalie project, but it's just so hard to get away from Orr. Even if it was just 8 years, no other defender has been able to match him.

Tough to say about how to handle his games played though. I think his injuries were more once he was done he was done, than constantly missing time like some other guys. He didn't miss that many games during his 8 mostly complete years, which should be a point in his favor I think.

Maybe you make it a point to get a strong guy on the second pair who can bump up, but if you lose the guy you picked 1st overall for a series you're pretty much SOL with the serpentine nature of the draft.

I thought I had the type of team to wear Orr out and possibly injure him (unintentionally of course ) in the playoffs last year, but it doesn't seem like anyone bought it.

You're forgetting my wonderful argument reliant on youtube clips. Which apparently was powerful enough to swing the series in my favor???!?!? (I'm so sorry)

Actually I do still think that was the way to play it against your wingers or whoever you had forechecking, because I think that's exactly how you have to play Orr. Knock him out and his team is screwed.

 

[BraveCanadian]

To get the discussion starting: Bobby Orr is always taken #1, because he's considered by the majority the most talented player of All-Time & also on how much we put a premium of defenceman. However, what do you guys think about the fact that he only played 8 complete seasons at the highest level? The usual suspect for the next two picks played 20 and almost 30 years of mostly injured free hockey at the highest level. Is Bobby Orr THAT good over them that he fills the gap in term of longevity? How do you guys threat a case like Orr in the ATD, how many games would he play? Is it important for someone who owns him to have proper replacement on defence?

I go either way on Orr as a #1 pick here.

He was a unique player and mind bogglingly good for those full seasons he did play.

However, 1) he posted those big seasons in what has to be the worst era for parity since the war years, and 2) in an ATD sense there is no way 8 years can overcome the value of the longevity at a high level that Gretzky and Howe had (as examples and please don't yak about unnamed for those two)

I thought I had the type of team to wear Orr out and possibly injure him (unintentionally of course ) in the playoffs last year, but it doesn't seem like anyone bought it.

He has practically superhero status here.

If I had 1st overall I wouldnt pick Orr.

I think a good argument could be made that you would be correct picking someone else based on their career value.

The problem is that the voters here place such a premium on defensemen for a reason I can't fathom. So in essence with the voting trends you're shooting yourself in the foot by not choosing Orr.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I think a good argument could be made that you would be correct picking someone else based on their career value.

The problem is that the voters here place such a premium on defensemen for a reason I can't fathom. So in essence with the voting trends you're shooting yourself in the foot by not choosing Orr.

Absolutely.

But I don't buy for a second voters like defensemen more than forwards (we can talk about goalies being underrated). Everyone drafts defensemen high because they don't want to worry about finding a #1 defensemen after the first few rounds, which makes sense. How often do you hear the debates about how many true #1 defensemen there are in the league?

Those things just don't mean voters have a love affair with defenders to me. Rather there's reasons they get overdrafted.

 

[BraveCanadian]

So what though? Do we think the draft list is the same as an all-time ranking? This is a team-building exercise.

None of the checking players rank as high as they're drafted, but I certainly hope to snag some of them.

I agree with you the reason why it doesn't match an all time ranking is because players are drafted to build teams.

However, the fact that defensemen are skewed up compared to everyone else obviously indicates that they are valued more in the draft.

ie. a general love in on defense, including the checkers you mentioned.

I've only done one draft so maybe there is a bias towards teams with strong defense that I'm unaware of.

But, it's a good thing his team finally won it all last year then right? I just don't think that point could be timed worse.

I plead the fifth on that one.

Good that an offensive oriented team did win, though.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I agree with you the reason why it doesn't match an all time ranking is because players are drafted to build teams.

However, the fact that defensemen are skewed up compared to everyone else obviously indicates that they are valued more in the draft.

ie. a general love in on defense, including the checkers you mentioned.


I plead the fifth on that one.

Good that an offensive oriented team did win, though.

I'm sympathetic to the axe you grind about how rigid we are as a group of voters (see my first round MLD flameout), I just think the #1 defensemen and elite checker lust makes sense in this arena.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't particularly have a problem with mentioning obvious names in passing, but the more strictly rule-abiding GMs might.

But either way, let's not have a conversation about who should be drafted where before those guys are drafted, okay?

Now why it's taken vet GMs so long to figure out what to do with the #2 pick is beyond me.

 

[Sturminator]

I'm sympathetic to the axe you grind about how rigid we are as a group of voters (see my first round MLD flameout), I just think the #1 defensemen and elite checker lust makes sense in this arena.

The seemingly unavoidable run on #1 defensemen happens because there are never quite enough to go around, and because the #1 defenseman typically gets the most icetime of all the skaters on the team. I actually don't think that #1 defensemen are as overdrafted as #2s at this point.

Elite checkers...meh. Teams going all-in for super checkinglines don't actually have the best track record in the ATD. I think the real bias here is in favor of teams that are balanced between offense and defense, but because great defenders are fewer and harder to identify through research (due to a lack of relevant statistics), the known ones tend to get taken earlier.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Speaking of pick #4...did anyone call Leaf Lander to tell him the draft started like he asked?

 

[overpass]

No, but we really don't see an issue with naming the definite top three selections in the draft.

I don't think they should be compared before they are picked.

The reason the rule was relaxed was not to allow discussion on upcoming picks and players.

 

[Velociraptor]

I'd rather not hear any player name right now besides Bobby Orr, I don't care that it's canonized and pretty much "set in stone" who goes from picks 1-10, I do not like seeing the names of players who are not drafted.

 

[vecens24]

I'd rather not hear any player name right now besides Bobby Orr, I don't care that it's canonized and pretty much "set in stone" who goes from picks 1-10, I do not like seeing the names of players who are not drafted.

OOOOOOkay then. I'll go through and delete the posts.

 

[Dreakmur]

OOOOOOkay then. I'll go through and delete the posts.

We're still allowed to name Wade Belak and Aki Berg, right?

 

[Johnny Engine]

We're still allowed to name Wade Belak and Aki Berg, right?

Dude, Wade played both forward and defense, he's a priceless asset!

PS: If any NHL GMs are reading this, I play forward and defense equally well too, am still only 27, and am willing to play for league minimum if that's what it comes to.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

The seemingly unavoidable run on #1 defensemen happens because there are never quite enough to go around, and because the #1 defenseman typically gets the most icetime of all the skaters on the team. I actually don't think that #1 defensemen are as overdrafted as #2s at this point.

Yep, that's one of the biggest changes that happens in a smaller draft, the value of defencemen goes down quite quickly.

 

[BenchBrawl]

so any progress VanI?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't think they should be compared before they are picked.

The reason the rule was relaxed was not to allow discussion on upcoming picks and players.

Discussion of the value of upcoming picks is and should never be allowed. I don't blame the guy sitting in third overall for not wanting a full board discussion on who second overall should pick before he picks him.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yep, that's one of the biggest changes that happens in a smaller draft, the value of defencemen goes down quite quickly.

A major reason I think it would be fun to try a smaller draft again, even if it means 2 drafts in a year.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

so any progress VanI?

Well, they've gotten people so excited about his pick that they were openly breaking the "no undrafteds" rule not too long ago since there is nothing else to talk about.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Well, they've gotten people so excited about his pick that they were openly breaking the "no undrafteds" rule not too long ago since there is nothing else to talk about.

this is what I don't like about co-gming , when there's a consensus that has to be reached everytime.

 

[Sturminator]

this is what I don't like about co-gming , when there's a consensus that has to be reached everytime.

Although in this case, the consensus is probably being worked out between VanI, Zamboni Mania and TheSabre.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

this is what I don't like about co-gming , when there's a consensus that has to be reached everytime.

That's what makes co-gming great. Every pick requires due diligence and has accountability.