Kings Drafting Under Dean And Futa

[PJ Kings Hockey]

Thought I'd do the comparison with the other scouting staffs in the league using RP's definitions (roughly).

Between the 2007 and 2009 drafts (I booted 2010 and 2011 because most teams had zero impact players)...
League average "impact" players was 1.82 per year (or 5.47 over the three years)
League average hit rate on impact players was 25.5%

The top ten...

1. NYI: 9/25 = 36.0% (Bailey, Hamonic, Donovan, Poulin, Martin, Spurgeon, Tavares, de Haan, Cizikas)
2. MIN: 6/17 = 35.3% (Gillies, Falk, Scandella, Leddy, Kuemper, Haula)
3. NAS: 9/26 = 34.6% (Blum, Spaling, Wilson, Josi, Lindback, Ellis, Smith, Ekholm, Bourque)
4. LAK: 10/29 = 34.5% (Hickey, Simmonds, Martinez, King, Doughty, Voynov, Loktionov, Schenn, Clifford, Nolan)
5. BUF: 7/22 = 31.8% (Tropp, Byron, Myers, Ennis, Adam, Kassian, Foligno)
6. COL: 7/23 = 30.4% (Shattenkirk, Galiardi, Malone, Duchene, O'Reilly, Elliott, Barrie)
7. OTT: 6/20 = 30.0% (Karlsson, Wiercioch, Smith, Cowen, Silfverberg, Lehner)
8. SJS: 6/20 = 30.0% (Couture, Bonino, Braun, McLaren, Wingels, Demers)
9. TBL: 7/24 = 29.2% (Killorn, Stamkos, Wright, Barberio, Hedman, Ashton, Panik)
10. ANA: 7/25 = 28.0% (Tangradi, Gardiner, Schultz, McMillan, Holland, Palmieri, Vatanen)

Notes:

• At the bottom of the heap is poor Vancouver, coming in at a miserable 2/18 or 11.1% hit rate (and I'm even counting Jordan Schroeder as an "impact" player, but he is really on the bubble). They are a fricking mess.
• Surprisingly, Boston is near the bottom as well at 2/17 or 11.8%.
• This is of course not taking into account draft positions. Several teams show up well with lottery picks. But so do the Kings with Doughty and Schenn. If I have time I'll do another set using only rounds 2-7.

But wow, that is pretty good. OK, now I'm on-board the keep-Futa bandwagon. Good thing he's already extended.

Thank you for putting this together, Ukyo. With its reputation, I am surprised Detroit isn't in the Top 10. Also, it is interesting that struggling Buffalo is #5 and the Islanders are #1.

Thanks also to AgentFouser.

 

[northernKing]

Just one correction RP, 2006 was Murray's last draft. That was the year Dean was hired and he went with Murray's suggestions. I remember that draft, they panned on Lombardi and he looked absolutely bored. He had the, "Yeah, let's just get this over with so I can fire your ***" look.

Murray has done very well in stocking TB with young talent

 

[Frolov 6'3]

You can also ask yourself, would King, Lewis and Nolan hit NHL surface if they were drafted by another team ?

I say no.

They fit this system and have their strengths but have a lot of shortcomings.

 

[HYORI 1963]

You can also ask yourself, would King, Lewis and Nolan hit NHL surface if they were drafted by another team ?

I say no.

They fit this system and have their strengths but have a lot of shortcomings.

I think they would.

For King and Nolan, their size alone would have given them the opportunity to stick with a club. As for Lewis, he's a smart two way forward, and there's always room for a heady player like that.

 

[agentfouser]

It would be interesting to know at what point after a draft the number of NHL players from that draft peaks. Five years, maybe? It can't be that much longer after a draft, because a lot of guy who show some promise get a chance, but when they don't develop they give way to other players with promise. So, playing in the NHL at any given time is a function not just of a player's skill level, but also potential.

 

[agentfouser]

Eh, I don't know. King, maybe, because he's got a bit of offensive talent to go with size. Really though, there's no shortage of size in the world. As for Lewis, he does have a fairly good head on his shoulders, but he has very little offensive ability. It's a real stretch to call him "two-way." He did have some offensive upside when he was drafted, and would have gotten a look at another club, no doubt. He might have been able to make an NHL career, but I think he's actually pretty lucky. Defensive forwards are abundant, and he could be replaced pretty easily. If he were a faceoff specialist or had some other attribute that set him apart, then he'd be a more valuable commodity, but as he stands now he's an unremarkable fourth-liner.

 

[ukyo]

Thank you for putting this together, Ukyo. With its reputation, I am surprised Detroit isn't in the Top 10. Also, it is interesting that struggling Buffalo is #5 and the Islanders are #1.

Thanks also to AgentFouser.

Detroit is an anomaly; they are playing a different game than everybody else. Detroit came in at 4/18 = 22.2% (Smith, Andersson, Nyquist, Tatar), which was actually 24th. This actually doesn't surprise me because of a couple things...

1. Poor draft position. During this three year period they have not picked higher than 27, and have only had four picks total in the top 80. On average, about 60% of 1st round picks "make it," about 25% of 2nd rounders, and then in the 3rd and beyond, about 12%. (link, link, link).
2. They leave their prospects in development and out of the NHL for a very long time. It seems to be completely outside of their philosophy to bring prospects up early.

If you check their draft history, Detroit is frighteningly consistent at getting about two NHL players out of every draft (at least since they drafted Datsyuk and Zetterberg in '98 and '99): slightly above average for the league overall, but it's astounding considering they are almost never in the first round (and if they are, it is late). So I think their reputation is well-deserved.