ATD 2020 Draft Thread IV

[ImporterExporter]

I disagree here.
The main thing with goalies - you need just one, which means that this position is the deepest in a draft. With 38th goalie you still have a strong starter.
Imagine 5 team draft. 5th team' 1st line C will be Morenz. Does this mean, that you have "crappy" 1st line C? I don't think so. Yes, in 5 teams draft he will be, probably, the weakest #1 C. But you have other picks to make things better. This is the reason, I think, goalies are drafted comparatively later (and rightfully so, to me).

I understand what you're trying to say all together. But it just doesn't make sense to me.

In a 40 team draft, a G ranked 38th all time, means you have a poor starter.

It's no different than saying the 40th ranked D is the last viable #1 D in a 40 team draft. Yep, he may well be passable as a #1 guy but he'll be the worst (or among) in the league.

And again, while there is only 1 starting G (vs say 6 D), that G returns value moreso than most wingers, and non pillar players (#1D or #1C) in a lineup. The G is the only player to play 60 minutes. Almost every touch a goalie makes is critical. Most are saves. Others are puck retrievals where the G is the last line of defense or first outlet pass.

 

[Habsfan18]

I disagree here.
The main thing with goalies - you need just one, which means that this position is the deepest in a draft. With 38th goalie you still have a strong starter.
Imagine 5 team draft. 5th team' 1st line C will be Morenz. Does this mean, that you have "crappy" 1st line C? I don't think so. Yes, in 5 teams draft he will be, probably, the weakest #1 C. But you have other picks to make things better. This is the reason, I think, goalies are drafted comparatively later (and rightfully so, to me).

It’s all relative though. It’s not as if the 38th goaltender is “poor” in a historical sense. It’s that having the 38th ranked goaltender as your starter when there are 40 starters means that your goalie is “poor” relative to the quality of the league.

In a case of 40 starting goaltenders, and you have the 38th best one, that has to be considered “poor” quality in terms of what the best or even average would be.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I honestly never understood the rationale that a goalie like Ed Belfour becomes better, the more teams that are in the draft. His career overlaps Roy's almost entirely; we know the difference in quality between them as well as any 2 goalies who ever lived. Why does a bigger draft make the difference bigger?

I mean, whatever, I have 2 perfectly "average" goalies in this draft, so it's not my fight. But this has always been the way I look at it.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I honestly never understood the rationale that a goalie like Ed Belfour becomes better, the more teams that are in the draft. His career overlaps Roy's almost entirely; we know the difference in quality between them as well as any 2 goalies who ever lived. Why does a bigger draft make the difference bigger?

I mean, whatever, I have 2 perfectly "average" goalies in this draft, so it's not my fight. But this has always been the way I look at it.

Say you rank Ed Belfour 15th all time. Pretty close to where I think he is in all reality.

In a 20 team draft he ends up here in terms of ranking

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15. The Eagle (notice the larger # of spots ABOVE Ed's ranking)
16.
17.
18.
19.
20


Now in a 40 team draft:


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15. The Eagle (notice the larger # of spots BELOW Ed's ranking)
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.

That's the easiest visual way I can make the point.

In a 20 team draft, Ed Belfour is not ranked in the top half of the goalies in the league so why would we consider him average relative to the rest of the goalies playing in the league?

In a 40 team draft, Ed Belfour IS ranked in the top half of the goalies in the leage so why would we NOT consider him above average relative to the rest of the goalies playing in the league.

Ed's resume doesn't change but the overall number of goalies does affect where he falls in the pecking order top to bottom.

 

[Habsfan18]

I honestly never understood the rationale that a goalie like Ed Belfour becomes better, the more teams that are in the draft. His career overlaps Roy's almost entirely; we know the difference in quality between them as well as any 2 goalies who ever lived. Why does a bigger draft make the difference bigger?

I mean, whatever, I have 2 perfectly "average" goalies in this draft, so it's not my fight. But this has always been the way I look at it.

The difference is there’s now 20 other starters he’s considered superior to rather than just 5 or so. Again it’s the whole relative thing. We all know the quality of goaltending that a certain guy will bring, but how big of a difference that quality of goaltending will make absolutely can change based on the amount of teams and the quality of their goaltenders.

I know it’s not exactly the same, but think of a current day goaltender starting the season with everyone healthy as say the 10th best goaltender. You know you’re going to have pretty good quality goaltending on a nightly basis. Fast forward 2 months and 4 guys ahead of him are now injured and they were replaced by 4 guys ranked behind that goaltender. All of a sudden your 10th ranked goaltender is now the 6th ranked goaltender relative to the quality of the rest of the league. That absolutely makes a difference. It’s sort of the same with the ATD, no? Belfour looks a hell of a lot better in a draft where the quality he provides should be superior to 20 guys instead of 5 in a shorter draft.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'll put it this way: a team with Patrick Roy faces a team with Ed Belfour in the playoffs. The advantage for the team with Roy does not depend on the number of teams in the draft. Ed Belfour does not magically get better because there are now more teams.

The gap between the best and worst goalies is greater in a bigger draft. This is true with all positions.

Clearly, I'm not the only one who thinks this, as goalies do tend to go earlier when the draft gets bigger.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Which is the mirage effect when it comes to the narrative a few people pushed 8, 9 10 years ago in the ATD.

In a smaller draft you can ice Billy Smith or Grant Fuhr and claim, well he's the 22nd best goalie all time (across 100+ years of hockey mind you so it looks nice) rather than correctly looking at the he's the 22nd best goalie in a 25 team league.

I.E. you have a crappy goalie relative to the other starters in the league.

No, Grant Fuhr isn't garbage in an all time sense, across a century of hockey, but if you rank him 22nd all time and there are 25 teams in your league, simple math would say that he's poor/below average/average, relative to the other goalies he'd be facing H2H.

It's the same thing for the other positions. However, from what I've seen over the years, only G's have been artificially devalued in the past, borne largely out of false narratives and sneaky mathematical posturing.

 

[VanIslander]

Fitting to see Klukay and Metz go back to back.

Ranking in 100 Great Leafs:

Metz 69th
Kluklay 99th

Teacher and student, together for a couple of years.

Metz retired from the NHL (and hockey) at the top of his game still in his 12th year. Klukay had a slightly shorter NHL career, sent down to the AHL, he playing in minor leagues for another eight seasons.

That difference, along with significantly more playoff scoring and multipositional usefulness, is why it was a no brainer for us to choose Metz over Klukay.

 

[Habsfan18]

I'll put it this way: a team with Patrick Roy faces a team with Ed Belfour in the playoffs. The advantage for the team with Roy does not depend on the number of teams in the draft. Ed Belfour does not magically get better because there are now more teams.

The gap between the best and worst goalies is greater in a bigger draft. This is true with all positions.

Clearly, I'm not the only one who thinks this, as goalies do tend to go earlier when the draft gets bigger.

That’s certainly fair. What I meant is that the quality of goaltending a certain guy gives you relative to the other goaltenders in the draft certainly changes based on the number of teams. Belfour in a 40 team draft will give you better goaltending on the whole compared to other goaltenders then he would in a 20 team draft.

But yeah, that doesn’t really apply to specific goaltender vs goaltender matchups like a Roy vs Belfour series.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I often wonder why these 06/pre consolidation players get a much easier pass on positional flexibility than modern players.

It took Giroux 2+ full seasons and an AS (best season of his career) nod to cement him as a legit LW here. I'm fine with that to be clear.

But then in the same breath we see players who were never an AS, didn't have multiple SEASONS worth of time at a secondary position and we simply give it a pass because 2-3 sources say they could play anywhere in a lineup?

I'd love to know how many games Metz, Klukay or any of the folks in similar situations, played at various spots.

 

[Namba 17]

The main thing to me is depth. The deeper the position, the lesser the difference. It like with C. Yes the defference between Gretzky and some #40 C is big. But the difference between #20 and #40 C is not that much. Dont get me wrong - there is a difference. #20 C IS better, than # 40. Its just not that much. The same with G. I dont see much difference after about #15 G to about 38th. Off course, its my opinion only.

 

[VanIslander]

In a bigger 40-team draft, the QUALITY OF SKATERS ON A TEAM GOES DOWN. A Hasek, Smith and Lesueur face less potent offenses.

This benefits Smith, as he faced and beat loaded Habs and Oilers squads. The weaker the skater attack, the more likely Lesueur could hold his own and backstop a winning team.

Against a loaded 20-draft team, Hasek has a DISTINCT advantage over lesser goalies, as he took on more all-time elite greats in real life. Lesueur becomes a question mark. (Plenty of great minor league goalies just can't handle the level of competition in the NHL, like a 40- vs 20-team draft.)

Hence, it makes sense for goalies to go later in a 40-team draft relative to a 20-team one.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I often wonder why these 06/pre consolidation players get a much easier pass on positional flexibility than modern players.

It took Giroux 2+ full seasons and an AS (best season of his career) nod to cement him as a legit LW here. I'm fine with that to be clear.

But then in the same breath we see players who were never an AS, didn't have multiple SEASONS worth of time at a secondary position and we simply give it a pass because 2-3 sources say they could play anywhere in a lineup?

I'd love to know how many games Metz, Klukay or any of the folks in similar situations, played at various spots.

The pre-consolidation guys are the worst offenders - is Frank Foyston a legit all purpose F? Maybe that's a bad example - I think he probably is. But it does seem the early guys are considered more multi-positional in general. Who is a modern "F" - Demitra?

That said - to your specific example - there' s less difference between RW and LW than wing and center.

And for wingers that are pure checkers, this difference is even less.

That said, I THINK someone once did a pretty detailed analysis on when Klukay and Metz played where.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The main thing to me is depth. The deeper the position, the lesser the difference. It like with C. Yes the defference between Gretzky and some #40 C is big. But the difference between #20 and #40 C is not that much. Dont get me wrong - there is a difference. #20 C IS better, than # 40. Its just not that much. The same with G. I dont see much difference after about #15 G to about 38th. Off course, its my opinion only.

I'll say it - the gap between Belfour and Luongo is quite a bit bigger than the difference between Brodeur and Belfour. I honestly don't see how anyone who experienced their careers would feel differently.

 

[VanIslander]

Both statements can be true:

1. It makes sense for goalies to go later in a big draft (see my argument above); and

2. The gap between the top and bottom goalies becomes more significant in a head-to- head series.

 

[ImporterExporter]

The pre-consolidation guys are the worst offenders - is Frank Foyston a legit all purpose F? Maybe that's a bad example - I think he probably is. But it does seem the early guys are considered more multi-positional in general. Who is a modern "F" - Demitra?

That said - to your specific example - there' s less difference between RW and LW than wing and center.

And for wingers that are pure checkers, this difference is even less.

That said, I THINK someone once did a pretty detailed analysis on when Klukay and Metz played where.

I don't know of anyone I'd say could legitimately play all 3 F positions at the ATD level. Certainly not in a top 6 role.

Agree with you 100% about RW vs LW. C to W is rarer but it does exist, throughout history. The key there is ability to take draws and handle the positional responsibilities of a C vs a W.

I've always thought of Dit Clapper as one of the most unique examples of positional flexibility. Guy was a 2 time AS at W and played the bulk of his career as a W but then transformed the final 5 years or so into a Norris caliber Dman. Nobody ever plays him at W because D is so important and even in a smaller draft he is passable as a #1. But he's someone, in a pinch, that could move up to W and actually be good at it.

 

[ImporterExporter]

@tinyzombies is up.

@The Macho Man is skipped.

 

[tinyzombies]

Feels like a pretty balanced pair of 6'3" dmen with Mike Ramsey on the second pairing. Will look good on my powerplay too. Fantastic playoff output as well, best of his 5 year peak surprisingly.

Sandis Ozolinsh - LD

Height: 6-3 (190 cm)
Weight: 215 lbs. (98 kg)
Shoots: Left

Stanley Cup Champion (1996)

Awards and Achievements
Norris Voting: 3rd (1997), 9th (1994), 16th (2000), 17th (2003)
All Star Voting: 1st (1997), 9th (1994), 10th (2000), 14th (1998), 15th (2002), 20th (2003) (A lot of this voting isn't statistically significant but it suggests he was very relevant over a long period of time)
NHL All-Star: 1994, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003

Offensive Accomplishments among Defensemen
Points: 2nd (1997), 5th (2002), 7th (1998), 7th (2000), 11th (1994), 14th (1996), 15th (2003), 20th (2001)

Play-off Points: 1st (1996), 1st (1997), 3rd (2000), 4th (1999), 6th (2003), 8th (1994)

5-Year Peak: 1996-2000
5th in Points among Defensemen, 87% of 2nd place Brian Leetch
3rd in Power Play Goals among Defensemen, 98% of 2nd place Al MacInnis
1st in Play-off Points among Defensemen, 112% of 2nd place Nicklas Lidstrom

10-Year Peak: 1994-2003
5th in Points among Defensemen, 84% of 2nd place Brian Leetch
6th in Power Play Goals among Defensemen, 85% of 2nd place Rob Blake
3rd in Play-off Point among Defensemen, 91% of 2nd place Sergei Subov

Scoring Percentages
Points among Defensemen: 100, 89, 88, 84, 73, 72, 66, 62, 58, 56

Best 6 Seasons: 506

International Accomplishments
KHL All-Star: 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014
KHL Scoring among Defensemen: 6th (2011), 10th (2010)

Olympic Points among Defensemen: 4th (2002), 4th (2006)
World Championship Points among Defensemen: 5th (2001), 10th (1998)

 

[The Macho King]

Sorry again - timing has not been kind.

Robins select:

Pat Burns, Coach

 

[tinyzombies]

Wait a minute- Ozolinsh doesn't play RD at all. He was LD in SJ and played with Foote in Col.... Actually I see footage of him at RD in Anaheim. Ah well... he'll be awesome on my third pairing I guess?

 

[tony d]

Burns was on my very short list for coaches for the ovie team. Nice pick.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

It’s all relative though. It’s not as if the 38th goaltender is “poor” in a historical sense. It’s that having the 38th ranked goaltender as your starter when there are 40 starters means that your goalie is “poor” relative to the quality of the league.

In a case of 40 starting goaltenders, and you have the 38th best one, that has to be considered “poor” quality in terms of what the best or even average would be.

I’m not a fan of thinking this way. It should be about comparing one player to another, not where they rank in the draft. The difference between the 5th best Dman and the 40th best Dman is a lot bigger than the difference between the 105th and 140th

 

[Namba 17]

I'll say it - the gap between Belfour and Luongo is quite a bit bigger than the difference between Brodeur and Belfour. I honestly don't see how anyone who experienced their careers would feel differently.

I didnt use names for a reason. I dont know who #15 and #38 G are. Probably, you are right here, but Im lower on Brodeur than the most on HF, I guess. My point was not to define precise numbers in the list, but tendency.

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

The pre-consolidation guys are the worst offenders - is Frank Foyston a legit all purpose F? Maybe that's a bad example - I think he probably is. But it does seem the early guys are considered more multi-positional in general. Who is a modern "F" - Demitra?

That said - to your specific example - there' s less difference between RW and LW than wing and center.

And for wingers that are pure checkers, this difference is even less.

That said, I THINK someone once did a pretty detailed analysis on when Klukay and Metz played where.

i researched Foyston in the position rsearch thread. He barely played rw. Hes a legit C/Lw though

 

[RustyRazor]

The Portland Penguins select Dirk Graham, RW.

A third line of Ramsay - Otto - Graham will not be a ton of fun for opponents to play against.

Graham will also add strong support for the Penguins quest to be the ATD team with the strongest mustache game.