OT: Blue Jackets Behind the Draft

[I am the Liquor]

Did you just say "where is the risk?" about taking a goalie in the second round?

This is about players, not numbers and names on a database. And no, that isnt what I said. That's you manipulating context to support your own weak ass argument.

They didn't pass on Fucale. Either way, goalies are no less "magic beans" than anyone else.

You arent following the line of conversation. And yes, Russians who may or may not ever come to NA are more of a risk than highly ranked goalies who are playing in NA already. As if that even needs to be pointed out.

 

[Mr Sakich]

So pick #37 is cursed then and we should trade it again if we ever get it again? No offense to you but I despise this type of thinking. Just because pick #31, 40, 23 or whatever has historically bad results, it doesn't mean squat to the value of that particular pick in the draft because picks #33, 41, 24 or whatever have had better historical success. With a good scouting staff you get better players than with a poor or even average scouting staff. I personally think that Asher's response is more likely, watching Pitlick, Hamilton, Martindale, etc. coming along as slowly as they have been, management would have to be fools to have complete confidence in our scouting staff. The only reasons to trade down that makes much sense to me are:

1) We suspected that no one would take the Russians and we saw them as much better than where we could land them.

2) We felt that our prospect depth was putrid (again this falls solely on our scouting).

3) We felt that there was little difference between the caliber of players between the 2nd and 5th rounds.

I could buy 1 and 2. If MacT was doing this strictly from a statistical ideology then perhaps it would help that ideology if we had scouts worth a damn who have had much better success beyond the 1st round. Give a good scouting staff 2 picks in the 2nd round and I'd take those picks over a poor scouting staff having 5 picks in the 3rd round and beyond all day every day.

I looked at pick 37 because that is what we had. The point i was trying to make is that we did not give up a for sure NHL player for some magic beans. staples looked at the last 10 years and the odds of a 2nd round pick becoming an nhl player were less than 25%. the odds of a 3rd round pick were about 16%. Five tries with 16% are much better than one shot at 25%

 

[harpoon]

Yeah, but MacT got a lot of darts by trading down. Darts, baby, darts!

I know you say that jokingly, but its not unlike darts at that stage of the draft.

 

[Roof Daddy]

I dont really give much of a **** about any of that. You can hindsight cherry pick all you like. Fact is we dont have much in the system, or even on the big team for that matter. Jarry is much more than just a backup goaltender. Anyone who has seen him play over the last couple years will tell you that. Fact is if he wasnt stuck behind Brossoit he would have been a starter. I think he was better than Brossoit last year anyway.

Slim to no chance he would be available at 56. If that's what they were counting on theyre even dumber than I thought. Not too many people in the know would have Comrie over Jarry. If he is better when healthy is debatable and he isnt/wasnt, so not much chance he goes before Jarry. Fact of the matter is he was available at 56 anyway and we passed on him so the point is mute. Pretty solid evidence they werent event thinking about taking a goaltender at all. Their "big" move was to trade down for a couple of Russian long shots.

This draft was pissed away from the get go when they traded picks for Fistric and Smithson and then just tossed those players in the garbage anyway. So we traded our second best pick in the draft to get picks back in the range we wasted for nothing.

That's piss poor asset management right there. Par for the course with these clowns.

I don't see how it's cherry picking facts when it's the last 4 Vezina winners that were drafted 5th rd or later AND in each of those years the guys taken in the first rd were complete flops (except for DiPietro maybe, but one of the worst 1st overalls). I didn't list Bobrovsky's year because he wasn't drafted, but he would have been 2007, where no goalies went in the first round, but several in the second - all flops.

You want further evidence? Quick - mid 3rd, Anderson - mid 3rd (twice, re-entered draft), Rinne - 7th. Of the top goalies in the game today, there are as many - if not more - "darts" than high pedigree picks. IMO, any team using a 1st or 2nd on a goalie is exhibiting poor management. Throw darts in the later rounds, scour Europe for over age undrafted UFA's or pay big money in UFA.

But I suppose if MacT built a time machine and undid the Gretzky trade, you'd find fault in that

 

[Ruok]

This is about players, not numbers and names on a database. And no, that isnt what I said. That's you manipulating context to support your own weak ass argument.



You arent following the line of conversation. And yes, Russians who may or may not ever come to NA are more of a risk than highly ranked goalies who are playing in NA already. As if that even needs to be pointed out.

Since you so kindly pointed out how crappy the oilers were at drafting in the later rounds I think it would be only fair to point out how crappy they have been with drafting goalies as well. It's also stupid assume that management would not of talked to the 'Russians' about playing in Edmonton.

 

[Halibut]

So pick #37 is cursed then and we should trade it again if we ever get it again? No offense to you but I despise this type of thinking. Just because pick #31, 40, 23 or whatever has historically bad results, it doesn't mean squat to the value of that particular pick in the draft because picks #33, 41, 24 or whatever have had better historical success. With a good scouting staff you get better players than with a poor or even average scouting staff. I personally think that Asher's response is more likely, watching Pitlick, Hamilton, Martindale, etc. coming along as slowly as they have been, management would have to be fools to have complete confidence in our scouting staff. The only reasons to trade down that makes much sense to me are:

How is it on the scouting staff that these three havent developed?

The facts are that any players taken that late in the draft will have to progress from where they are at on draft day to make it into the NHL and yes even the end of the first round start of the the 2nd is far back in the draft. It's only the top 10 or so on any given year that you can expect to make the NHL after that it's throwing darts and not at a dart board but one of those carny games where you are trying to pop a balloon and get a prize inside.

These players are playing in different leagues in different situations, as backups as 2nd line players, with players as much as 3 or 4 years older than them. It's amazing scouts have as good a record as they do. At that point they really are just darts and teams that find those good players late in the draft probably arent any better at scouting just luckier.

 

[Draiskull]

Happy with what MacT did..
Dont want Riley Nash 2.0 with 2x2nd rounders again. The kid would have as much pressure as Nurse considering 'who else we couldve gotten'..

 

[I am the Liquor]

I don't see how it's cherry picking facts when it's the last 4 Vezina winners that were drafted 5th rd or later AND in each of those years the guys taken in the first rd were complete flops (except for DiPietro maybe, but one of the worst 1st overalls). I didn't list Bobrovsky's year because he wasn't drafted, but he would have been 2007, where no goalies went in the first round, but several in the second - all flops.

You want further evidence? Quick - mid 3rd, Anderson - mid 3rd (twice, re-entered draft), Rinne - 7th. Of the top goalies in the game today, there are as many - if not more - "darts" than high pedigree picks. IMO, any team using a 1st or 2nd on a goalie is exhibiting poor management. Throw darts in the later rounds, scour Europe for over age undrafted UFA's or pay big money in UFA.

But I suppose if MacT built a time machine and undid the Gretzky trade, you'd find fault in that

Where's our Quick? Where's our Rinne? We didnt take a goalie at all. Not even with one of the end of the road picks we traded down for.

Our goaltending depth chart reads like this,

Devan Dubnyk
Jason Labarbera
Richard Bachman
Olivier Roy
Tyler Bunz
Frans Tuohimaa

You see a Quick or a Rinne in there?

Using your logic, I guess Grant Fuhr never would have been an Oiler. Good thing the Oiler scouts are on the ball with regards to not drafting goalies higher than the second round. Thank goodness we arent Pittsburgh or Montreal. Those guys are idiots.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

I looked at pick 37 because that is what we had. The point i was trying to make is that we did not give up a for sure NHL player for some magic beans. staples looked at the last 10 years and the odds of a 2nd round pick becoming an nhl player were less than 25%. the odds of a 3rd round pick were about 16%. Five tries with 16% are much better than one shot at 25%

I see what you are getting at, however it just irks me when people basically say "historically pick # blank doesn't yield anything so it should be traded or don't expect anything out of it" as if it's the picks fault that teams have sucked drafting at that spot! And If the trade was our #37 overall for 5 3rd round picks I'd take that trade all day unless you had one hell of a prospect available at #37, but that was not the trade.

How is it on the scouting staff that these three havent developed?

The facts are that any players taken that late in the draft will have to progress from where they are at on draft day to make it into the NHL and yes even the end of the first round start of the the 2nd is far back in the draft. It's only the top 10 or so on any given year that you can expect to make the NHL after that it's throwing darts and not at a dart board but one of those carny games where you are trying to pop a balloon and get a prize inside.

These players are playing in different leagues in different situations, as backups as 2nd line players, with players as much as 3 or 4 years older than them. It's amazing scouts have as good a record as they do. At that point they really are just darts and teams that find those good players late in the draft probably arent any better at scouting just luckier.

How is it on the scouting staff? Are you serious? Good teams have good players emerging beyond round 1 in the draft. Marincin is our best bet since Petry to be a solid contributor beyond the 1st round. Now we could see guys like Moroz, Gernat, etc. come on strong and make cases for themselves, but the fact remains that we've been full of high picks in every round the last 3 drafts before this one and we should be having better results than average because we have had more options on the board. If you are given a 25 meter head start in a 100 meter dash I'd expect you to win more often than not unless you are running against Usain Bolt.

 

[Lacaar]

I'd be happy if we never drafted a goalie again. They're so generic these days you can find a bazillion of them on the free agent market.

This game is changing and while goaltending statistics are at all time highs. They're much more a product of the team play then the goaltender themselves.

The position just isn't as valuable as it used to be. Goalies on good teams look good. Goalies on bad teams look bad.

Add in the amount of time it takes for them to develop.....

 

[Bryanbryoil]

Where's our Quick? Where's our Rinne? We didnt take a goalie at all. Not even with one of the end of the road picks we traded down for.

Our goaltending depth chart reads like this,

Devan Dubnyk
Jason Labarbera
Richard Bachman
Olivier Roy
Tyler Bunz
Frans Tuohimaa

You see a Quick or a Rinne in there?

Using your logic, I guess Grant Fuhr never would have been an Oiler. Good thing the Oiler scouts are on the ball with regards to not drafting goalies higher than the second round. Thank goodness we arent Pittsburgh or Montreal. Those guys are idiots.

I can see your point up until the bolded, MAF is nothing to write home about even though they won the cup with him in net. That said it will be interesting to see how the kids that we did draft progress. Stu has been given the mandate in the past to add size and grit, now he's been given the mandate to add skill. If his staff fails this time around then changes need to be made.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

I'd be happy if we never drafted a goalie again. They're so generic these days you can find a bazillion of them on the free agent market.

This game is changing and while goaltending statistics are at all time highs. They're much more a product of the team play then the goaltender themselves.

The position just isn't as valuable as it used to be. Goalies on good teams look good. Goalies on bad teams look bad.

Add in the amount of time it takes for them to develop.....

Yeah, that's why we ended up with studs like Labarbara and Bachman

 

[CupofOil]

Where's our Quick? Where's our Rinne? We didnt take a goalie at all. Not even with one of the end of the road picks we traded down for.

Our goaltending depth chart reads like this,

Devan Dubnyk
Jason Labarbera
Richard Bachman
Olivier Roy
Tyler Bunz
Frans Tuohimaa

You see a Quick or a Rinne in there?

Using your logic, I guess Grant Fuhr never would have been an Oiler. Good thing the Oiler scouts are on the ball with regards to not drafting goalies higher than the second round. Thank goodness we arent Pittsburgh or Montreal. Those guys are idiots.

Why does it have to be a Quick or a Rinne?
The Oilers are being built as an offensive powerhouse that will depend on puck possession and skill to win out. I don't think they will be highly dependent on elite goaltending when they are ready to compete.
Niemi, Crawford, Fleury and Osgood (none even close to elite) are recent Stanley Cup winning goalies backstopping teams that were built similar to how the Oilers are being built now so i don't think that the Oilers necessarily need a Rinne, Quick or Lundqvist.

Also, as has been mentioned already, a lot of good goalies were found in later rounds. Other good goalies/potentially good goalies can be easily found on the free agent/trade market moreso than any other position. Of course MacT struck out on these guys but there were plenty of oportunities out there.
I'm disappointed that MacT traded down and didn't get a goalie in the draft but it's not the end of the world and who knows, maybe Dubnyk can be the guy. The final chapter isn't written on his career yet.

 

[Lacaar]

Yeah, that's why we ended up with studs like Labarbara and Bachman

Umm Because we have Dubnyk?

We were looking for an extremely cheap backup.. Did we find one? Yes.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

Umm Because we have Dubnyk?

We were looking for an extremely cheap backup.. Did we find one? Yes.

Oh o.k., so Dubnyk is the answer to all of our questions, gotcha. So tell me what happens if Dubnyk who I'm still not sold on goes down for 20-30 games?

 

[joestevens29]

I really wanted Hartman and one has to think that if we really wanted the Russians in the 3rd, that there must've been a way to get the picks to make that happen.

I'm actually curious where other teams would've started taking them.

 

[joestevens29]

Oh o.k., so Dubnyk is the answer to all of our questions, gotcha. So tell me what happens if Dubnyk who I'm still not sold on goes down for 20-30 games?

Same can be said about most NHL teams. Not like you can afford a 5mil backup that's actually a starter because your #1 might go down.

 

[Lacaar]

Oh o.k., so Dubnyk is the answer to all of our questions, gotcha. So tell me what happens if Dubnyk who I'm still not sold on goes down for 20-30 games?

Where'd I say Dubnyk is the answer?

I said there's not much difference among all the goalies.

Why pay a ton of cap room for them.

You're not sold on Dubnyk.. i'm not sold on the team making Dubnyk look good.

I don't give a rats ass what goalie you bring in here the last 5 years. We stink. King Henrique himself would probably be in the unemployment line if he was here the last 5 years.

You missed my point entirely.

 

[Halibut]

How is it on the scouting staff? Are you serious? Good teams have good players emerging beyond round 1 in the draft. Marincin is our best bet since Petry to be a solid contributor beyond the 1st round. Now we could see guys like Moroz, Gernat, etc. come on strong and make cases for themselves, but the fact remains that we've been full of high picks in every round the last 3 drafts before this one and we should be having better results than average because we have had more options on the board. If you are given a 25 meter head start in a 100 meter dash I'd expect you to win more often than not unless you are running against Usain Bolt.

They had a head start on buying lottery tickets not a running race. Those teams developing players in the 2nd round and later have gotten lucky, that's it. There's no skill to it, it's virtually all luck. You draft these kids at 18 and hope for the best. The top players have shown something, dominated the teams they play for. By the time you get to the second round it's all guesswork.

 

[I am the Liquor]

I'd be happy if we never drafted a goalie again. They're so generic these days you can find a bazillion of them on the free agent market.

This game is changing and while goaltending statistics are at all time highs. They're much more a product of the team play then the goaltender themselves.

The position just isn't as valuable as it used to be. Goalies on good teams look good. Goalies on bad teams look bad.

Add in the amount of time it takes for them to develop.....

This is nonsense.

One only has to look to the last time the Oilers were in the playoffs to see what difference a good goalie makes.

We were a good team with a bad goalie for most of the year, until we brought in Roloson. That made all the difference in the world. Then when Roloson got hurt...........well, you know the rest of the story.

Goaltending is huge, and more often than not is the difference between winning and losing.

 

[joestevens29]

They had a head start on buying lottery tickets not a running race. Those teams developing players in the 2nd round and later have gotten lucky, that's it. There's no skill to it, it's virtually all luck. You draft these kids at 18 and hope for the best. The top players have shown something, dominated the teams they play for. By the time you get to the second round it's all guesswork.

Maybe it has more to do with other teams knowing how to develop better. Who exactly does this team have as a proven developer?

 

[Halibut]

Maybe it has more to do with other teams knowing how to develop better. Who exactly does this team have as a proven developer?

Who are these other teams that have proven to be better at developing all these later round picks? I think Shea Weber is the perfect example of how much luck is involved. The predators took him in the 2nd round of 2003 but guess what he was their third pick in the second round they took Konstantin Glazachev and Kevin Klein before him. If they only had one pick in the second round they likely wouldnt have taken Weber. It wasnt good drafting that got him it was luck.

 

[Asher]

How is it on the scouting staff that these three havent developed?

The facts are that any players taken that late in the draft will have to progress from where they are at on draft day to make it into the NHL and yes even the end of the first round start of the the 2nd is far back in the draft. It's only the top 10 or so on any given year that you can expect to make the NHL after that it's throwing darts and not at a dart board but one of those carny games where you are trying to pop a balloon and get a prize inside.

These players are playing in different leagues in different situations, as backups as 2nd line players, with players as much as 3 or 4 years older than them. It's amazing scouts have as good a record as they do. At that point they really are just darts and teams that find those good players late in the draft probably arent any better at scouting just luckier.

If that's the case then the Oilers have had an amazing string of bad luck finding players in round 2 and beyond. It may seem like making a mountain out of a molehill but these picks are criticial in building up depth, especially in a cap system. Teams like CHI and LA manage to find these players in the later rounds, and right now I'd say that's the biggest obstacle between where those teams are and where the Oilers hope to be.

 

[taunting canadian]

Oh o.k., so Dubnyk is the answer to all of our questions, gotcha. So tell me what happens if Dubnyk who I'm still not sold on goes down for 20-30 games?

Interestingly, both Labarbera and Bachman were entrusted with exactly that role by two different NHL clubs in the past two seasons.

They are what they are - backup goalies. That's the role they've filled on multiple different teams. Scenarios where teams spend 10M$ on 2 goalies just because are the exception, not the norm, and for that matter they generally turn out to be less than ideal scenarios, or at best are extremely temporary.

 

[plikestechno]

Time has proven that there is no way of knowing whether an 18 year old is going to turn into a quality NHL starting goaltender or not. The list of failed goalie prospects in the first two rounds is massive. Hopefully one day teams will understand that picking goalies early is like picking punters and kickers early in NFL drafts. Occaisionally there will be a generational talent worth picking in the first couple of rounds but you have just as good of a chance picking a starter in the last round or signing someone at 21 or 23 that shows more progression and potential.

JDD and Dubnyk were both highly touted goaltending prospects drafted by us in the first round and where did they get us that someone drafted much later wouldn't have?

I think it's more that the Oilers are crap at developing players than the players themselves. They don't just come ready to go. Other teams can crank out starting goalies out of thin air at will while nobody we develop becomes great. Frederic Chabot has been terrible, Todd Nelson doesn't trust young goalies or young players down in OKC. A lot of times I wonder if some of our young players would have been better if developed by other teams. O Roy, Petry, Pitlick, Lander instantly come to mind.

Can't blame the players or even the scouting staff forever, this team is just bad at developing NHL talent. Hall, RNH, Eberle, Yakupov, Schultz would succeed on any team and who knows but with proper development they'd probably be better on other teams.