Djp
Registered User
my question is…irrelevant of dispute on picking the right player— was it a reach to draft him at 41 if many had him in the 40-52 range ( mid 2nd grade) ?
Prospect Info: G Topias Leinonen -- Selected 41st overall in 2022
- Thread starter Zman5778
- Start date
my question is…irrelevant of dispute on picking the right player— was it a reach to draft him at 41 if many had him in the 40-52 range ( mid 2nd grade) ?
Zach716
Pucks in deep
- Nov 24, 2018
- 4,437
- 5,013
I didn’t love the pick at the time given who was left on the board but I’m starting to get a feeling that people are being too harsh on the kid because of it after injury and surgery. He was still ranked the best goalie in a bad goalie draft and has had extenuating circumstances since. He’s the type of guy you forget about for a few years and hope he shows something to get you excited later on. Not really too much to talk about until we see it.
MarkusKetterer
Shoulda got one game in
I love the fact that we’re now in to “our current goalies suck” territory and “our maybe future goalies suck” territory.
~98% HATED Levi as a return for Reinhart. Because he was a 7th rounder so therefore he could never be good. But now he’s the Sabres #1 prospect. Maybe it’s extremely hard to judge goalies, because any goalie taken is a crapshoot.
~98% HATED Levi as a return for Reinhart. Because he was a 7th rounder so therefore he could never be good. But now he’s the Sabres #1 prospect. Maybe it’s extremely hard to judge goalies, because any goalie taken is a crapshoot.
Ya well when Jesus walked on water people said it was because he couldn't swim.
MarkusKetterer
Shoulda got one game in
I certainly think so.
My issue is that i don't think a single published scouting list or mock had him ranked 40-52.
By in large most scouts had him in the late third or fourth round. Mckenzie had him at 71, and most of the respected prospect analysts had him quite a bit later.
Like @Zman5778 stated, 2022 was a weak draft for goalies. Being the best of a subpar pool doesn't make the prospect any better when looking at the BPA picture.
It was a reach at the time. Just because the organization liked a prospect because they felt he was the best prospect available at that position does not automatically mean that drafting him with your next pick is good draft value.
we're actually lucky that florida drafted knight the year before, cause levi was fantastic at world juniors in his draft year and followed that up with a quasi-legendary year in the NCAA. i remember watching him and being like, 'wow, this kid is a gamer, he might actually be pretty good one day'.
personally, i was floored when he got made part of the sam trade. it really felt like a major coup. but he could still not pan out. we don't know. good to have as many good Gs in the system as possible
I really appreciate Adam Stark's work: 2022 NHL Draft Aggregate
He aggregates as many ranking lists as he can find and does a pseudo meta-analysis of the individual rankings. He has some minor misconceptions about how meaningful some of the results are (median is a better measurement of central tendency than mean for a bounded sample like this one, confidence intervals should really only be used for random samples of a population so the 95% confidence interval doesn't really mean anything here, etc.), but the data are awfully comprehensive and the results are interesting.
And to Irie's point, Leinonen was ranked on 25 lists with a high of 52nd, a low of 151st, and a median rank of 90th.
That said, with the results we've seen from the last few drafts, I'm inclined to trust the Sabres' scouts even if a few dozen pundits disagree (yes, this may be the appeal to authority fallacy, but I'm going with it).
Last edited:
I feel like this case was different than the teams normal MO. They usually clearly chose who they identified as the BPA, as evidenced by them picking wingers when the farm was overflowing with wingers in the past.
This definitely felt like the organization clearly identifying a positional need and then targeted who they felt was the best player in that position and took them too high because they were worried the player would not be available with their next pick.
It happens. Doesn't mean it wasn't a bit desperation fueled or a reach. The solace is that as a Sabres fan, there have not been too many clear reaches in the Adams' tenure so far, so the likely misuse of a second round pick is not the end of the world. It just stings a bit because the 22 draft was pretty deep and their were some pretty outstanding non-goalie prospects available at 41 that would have been substantially better value.
In terms of the big picture though, Adams has drafted so well that there is already going to be more good prospects than slots in the organization, so taking a long-shot with that 2nd is definitely forgivable and worrying about it a year later is mostly a waste of time.
Djp
Registered User
I seriously question those “ weak draft” concepts after the 1st round.
they were saying thst around the 2014 draft but it wasn’t that bad of a drsft when they were saying a hugh fall off after top 20-35.
I also understand goalies are sooo hard to predict. If you want a decent goalie in the draft you make sure you get one.
once you are out of the 1st round three chance of you getting a star player is the same at 40 and it is at 90. If you feel you want to make sure you get a goalie you use the 2nd if you feel thry won’t be there at your next pick.
I get what they did…if this was a weak goalie draft then use the 2nd on what you think is the best one.
Most "smart" analysts called 2022 a very deep draft. They characterized it as a draft with a lot of typical "late first round/early second round talent" available possibly into the 3rd round.
It was deemed a weak draft in terms of top-end talent, which I think was mostly true. Would any of Slafkovsky, Nemec or Cooley go top three in most drafts over the past 20 years? probably not.
Goalies develop so much later than skaters, that drafting them at the age of 17 or 18 is such a crapshoot.
The success rate of goalies vs skaters when related to draft position is quite different. A 3rd round goalie does not have a big advantage over a goalie drafted in the 5th of becoming a regular starter - statistically speaking. So using a high second in a deep draft on what would typically be a 3rd round goalie talent in an average draft is probably not the best value.
TheMistyStranger
ミスト
- May 21, 2005
- 31,607
- 7,456
How old ARE you?
Old enough to remember when there were Fifteen Commandments!
SundherDome
Y'all have to much power
That is why the front office drafted him. It is obviously more than " he is a Finnish goalie". I'm sure they did years of work on him and determined he had a first round grade and used a second round pick on him. You gotta take a goalie every year with how volatile the position is and how long the curve is.
SundherDome
Y'all have to much power
Based on your post, if he was projected 40-52 and we nabbed him at 41 it is not even remotely a reach. Also, our next pick was 74 which by your guide he would be long gone.
Last edited:
TheMistyStranger
ミスト
- May 21, 2005
- 31,607
- 7,456
Probably the best part of that entire movie. Though I do hold a place in my heart for The Inquisition musical number.
I remember Cornel Karabacek Johansson Hurley and Bailey. I can forgive Leinonen. And maybe one day he will be found money, who can know these things
Perry Tegula
Yes... that'll do
- Dec 7, 2022
- 155
- 255
SundherDome
Y'all have to much power
MOGlLNY
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2008
- 12,393
- 12,762
I’m willing to forgive a potential reach and miss. I’m glad we seem to be taking an approach of taking a goalie every draft. Levi-UPL-Leinonen-Ratzlaff and hopefully we take another next year.
One will turn out decent I imagine. Maybe even two
One will turn out decent I imagine. Maybe even two
MarkusKetterer
Shoulda got one game in
I don’t agree with that. Every 2-3 years is the sweet spot. Especially if you can stagger their development
Zman5778
Moderator
I've long been a proponent for 2 out of every 3 or 3 out of every 4. Doesn't need to be every year, but it needs to be more than every other year.
MOGlLNY
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2008
- 12,393
- 12,762
