- Aug 24, 2011
- 28,799
- 13,838
Is it better to have a great Pro Scouting department or a great Amateur/Draft Scouting department?
- Thread starter x Tame Impala
- Start date
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,321
- 12,454
Really, you need both or to get really lucky on some things, or you're not going anywhere. But i'd lean toward Amateur Scouting being more important. That's where you're going to get your "core players" at key positions. The guys you really build around. The Pro Scouting element is really just about putting in place the right supporting cast, and in a lot of cases...it's just about avoiding the huge mistakes that hamstring your Cap flexibility.
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 49,110
- 30,077
ScottyMascotty
Registered User
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 49,110
- 30,077
Reinhart probably qualifies - obviously Tkachuk too but that comes with some situational aspects.
Verhaege and Forsling are definitely of the complimentary variety.
Even then as a Canucks fan I can say that we haven't been a serious SC contender with Miller here right?
I say this with egg in my face as I wasn't in favour of that trade at the time given the state of our team and he is much better than expected but team outcomes haven't differed all that much.
TheDoldrums
Registered User
I think there’s more luck involved in drafting so I’d go with the pro scouting.
People act like these late round picks that hit are the work of genius scouts when it’s more random than that. Amateur scouting is more impactful at the top of the draft but you won’t always be there. You can always improve the team through FA/trades
People act like these late round picks that hit are the work of genius scouts when it’s more random than that. Amateur scouting is more impactful at the top of the draft but you won’t always be there. You can always improve the team through FA/trades
I think that year in and year out the best players are slotted at the top of the draft and after the top X are gone in any given year it's a bit of a crap shoot
But on the pro side, some teams seem to be consistently better at winning trades and FA signings
But on the pro side, some teams seem to be consistently better at winning trades and FA signings
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,321
- 12,454
This is really the argument for Pro Scouting being more important. And it's a very fair one. The draft really is far more of a crapshoot than people give credence to. A lot more luck involved. There's also a huge influence of "development" vs purely amateur "scouting".
That, and recent Cup Winners like Florida and Vegas being built heavily around pro scouting acquisitions, free agents, trades, etc.
Though in the case of Vegas, obviously for early success with an Expansion Team, Pro Scouting is going to factor more heavily. That's an outlier case though, and not strictly applicable to the typical team situation.
In the case of Florida...an unusually high proportion of high profile Trade/Free Agent acquisitions, but still lean heavily on some core "drafted" players as well. They aren't doing anything without Barkov for instance, and you don't get Barkovs anywhere other than the draft.
The other aspect to this as well though, is that you typically have to draft reasonably well, just to get the "trade chips" to make some of those bigtime deals. Like...Florida aren't getting Tkachuk, if they don't draft Huberdeau and find and develop Weegar up from the Amateur level.
That's where i think good Amateur Scouting and Development are still slightly more critical in typical team situations. To get those "core players" or desirable trade chips to swap for "cornerstone players" you can't typically get any other way. But it's really hard to draw a line there, because good Pro Scouting is still massively important. You still have to even know who to go after to supplement things.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Pro scouting without a doubt. Tank teams that can't escape the basement are the ones that lack pro scouting.
Coffee
Take one step towards the direction you want to go
- Nov 12, 2021
- 9,298
- 8,189
this is a good poll. It’s thought provoking, I ended up going with Amateur scouting
RedHawkDown
still trying to trust the yzerplan
Easily pro scouting. You could have zero amateur scouts and just pick players based on public scouting service lists and the average hit rate would be essentially the same. Pro scouting and identifying underutilizes players is way less reliant on complete luck, which is most of amateur scouting since they are 17 year old kids
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,321
- 12,454
The problem with this to me, is that if you're just hitting "average" based on public scouting service lists, you're not really getting anywhere unless you're winning the lottery (and even then, it's not always clear). You're not going to gain any real traction by doing "medium okay" at the draft table. You're just roughly keeping pace, at best.
It's certainly a more volatile market than established Pros, but i'd argue that's why it's even more important to at least have your Amateur Scouting beating "average". It's also not that difficult to be "average" at Pro Scouting. If you just go by public perceptions or whatever on that, you'll also probably end up roughly "average" as well.
IdleTraveller
Registered User
Really interesting question. If you're talking about whole departments, then that's really about having the right people to scout well lower down the draft and/or getting players that are currently under-appreciated but who could fit your system well and excel. Ahem, my team. I mean, everyone knows who the stars are/would be - and I imagine the GMs would know/have opinions on them. Presumably, the reason to have whole departments devoted to scouting is so that you're able to find the hidden gems for cheap that all teams need, whether in trade/FA or in the draft.
Obviously both is necessary but I would also err on the side of pro-scouting as you have a lot more evidence on body of work, whereas drafting, particularly in the later rounds, is much more uncertain. Barkov and Huberdeau were top prospects and were going to be taken high in the draft by some team: yes, the GM needs good advice to choose correctly in the first round, but you don't need a departments for that - that's more about judgement IMO.
Obviously both is necessary but I would also err on the side of pro-scouting as you have a lot more evidence on body of work, whereas drafting, particularly in the later rounds, is much more uncertain. Barkov and Huberdeau were top prospects and were going to be taken high in the draft by some team: yes, the GM needs good advice to choose correctly in the first round, but you don't need a departments for that - that's more about judgement IMO.
- Dec 2, 2007
- 17,416
- 2,438
A great pro scouting department can get you a cup. A great amateur department can get you a dynasty. IMHO I would take the amateur one.
It's a great question. Both are reasonable answers. But as an Avs fan whose seen great pro scouting build a championship team but terrible amateur scouting make a dynasty elusive, I value drafting more.
It's a great question. Both are reasonable answers. But as an Avs fan whose seen great pro scouting build a championship team but terrible amateur scouting make a dynasty elusive, I value drafting more.
Sabres fan voting pro scouting. We have had decent amateur scouting the last 15 years and ghastly horrible pro scouting. All of our trades and FA signings have been bad for the most part (except maybe McLeod and Zucker this year). I don't need to tell anyone about the playoff drought that has resulted.
Fixed to Ruin
Come wit it now!
Pro scouting.
By simply not signing free agents to stupid contracts you would be way ahead of the curve.
By simply not signing free agents to stupid contracts you would be way ahead of the curve.
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
The pro scouting under Jim Benning was god awful, the pro scouting under the Rutherford/Allvin regime has been fantastic to a degree.
Lou Bloom
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2020
- 1,060
- 2,018
Both have examples of success in recent years.
Tampa Bay built a decade long contender and back to back Stanley Cup winner through great drafting.
Vasilevskiy was 19th overall pick.
Point, Kucherov, Palat, Gourde, Cirelli, Killorn, Cernak and Colton were all taken outside of the 1st round of the draft.
Carolina has been a consistent contender getting their two most important players in Aho and Slavin after the 1st round. Plus other important pieces outside of the top 10 in Pesce, Necas and Jarvis.
Dallas has been able to do a quick re-tool with their aging core by drafting Hintz, Robertson, Stankoven, Johnston, Oettinger and Harley all outside of the top 15 picks.
Bruins drafted Bergeron, Marchand, Krejci and Lucic all outside of the 1st round. They were also able to lengthen their contender window when they drafted McAvoy, Pasta and Carlo in a 3 year span, all outside of the top 10.
As for Pro scouting.
Florida is the best example. Adding Verhaeghe, Bennett, Forsling, Rodrigues, Marchment, Montour and OEL for cheap.
Vegas became an instant contender though the expansion draft.
Avalanche were able to add Toews, Burakovsky, Lehkonen and Nichushkin to help win the cup.
They're both viable methods but I'd give the edge to amateur scouting since it's a lot easier to find a star player outside the top 10 of a draft than being able to find a cheap star player though great pro scouting.
Even in the examples in favor of pro scouting, they all acquired their best players either though the draft or through a big trade/signing for an established star (Avs with Makar, Mackinnon and Rantanen), (Vegas with Eichel, Stone, Pietrangelo), (Florida with Tkachuk, Barkov, Reinhart).
Tampa Bay built a decade long contender and back to back Stanley Cup winner through great drafting.
Vasilevskiy was 19th overall pick.
Point, Kucherov, Palat, Gourde, Cirelli, Killorn, Cernak and Colton were all taken outside of the 1st round of the draft.
Carolina has been a consistent contender getting their two most important players in Aho and Slavin after the 1st round. Plus other important pieces outside of the top 10 in Pesce, Necas and Jarvis.
Dallas has been able to do a quick re-tool with their aging core by drafting Hintz, Robertson, Stankoven, Johnston, Oettinger and Harley all outside of the top 15 picks.
Bruins drafted Bergeron, Marchand, Krejci and Lucic all outside of the 1st round. They were also able to lengthen their contender window when they drafted McAvoy, Pasta and Carlo in a 3 year span, all outside of the top 10.
As for Pro scouting.
Florida is the best example. Adding Verhaeghe, Bennett, Forsling, Rodrigues, Marchment, Montour and OEL for cheap.
Vegas became an instant contender though the expansion draft.
Avalanche were able to add Toews, Burakovsky, Lehkonen and Nichushkin to help win the cup.
They're both viable methods but I'd give the edge to amateur scouting since it's a lot easier to find a star player outside the top 10 of a draft than being able to find a cheap star player though great pro scouting.
Even in the examples in favor of pro scouting, they all acquired their best players either though the draft or through a big trade/signing for an established star (Avs with Makar, Mackinnon and Rantanen), (Vegas with Eichel, Stone, Pietrangelo), (Florida with Tkachuk, Barkov, Reinhart).
