Sens v Buffalo tonight

[Wallet Inspector]

Sorry but you guys can't use the "drafting is a crapshoot tho" excuse when our scouts continually draft guys 20-30 spots above their consensus spot.

One of the benefits of being a bad team is you have a high 2nd, but our scouts keep refusing to pick those picks to use, and keep going after off the board guys that don't work out.

 

[Xspyrit]

Chara and Hossa were both Muckler, but Ya Dorian wasn’t good,

Of course, I gave examples of an "ever lasting damage"

The difference between us and them in terms of stock pilling picks is essentially the Chychrun and DBC trades. Had those trades been more targeted towards our actual needs, so for example, maybe Fiala with an extension, and Marino, then we'd have been fine (cap might be an issue, could probably only make one of those trades), assuming we still found a way to get Ullmark

The issue was less about trading the picks, and more about not trading them for the right pieces.
.

I made posts about this and would need to dig them out but while Chychrun and DBC trades have been the biggest "asset deficits" in the recent past, there has been SO MANY during Dorion's tenure. I doubt it has ever happened like this in other NHL rebuilds, you're supposed to add assets, not dilapidate them

Just a few quick random examples to illustrate this. We thought Nick Paul for Joseph + 4th was one of Dorion decent/good moves, in the end we ended up downgrading a 3rd to a 4th. Same when we traded Hoffman. Even when we traded good players we ended up in a deficit.

Matt Murray? What we gave up to get him and then to get rid of his contract. Same with Zaitsev. I could go on and on. We dilapidated assets like crazy.

That said, you're right that if some of these trades gave us some core or at least medium term players, that would have been much better

 

[UglyPuckling]

Trading away the picks failed because ultimately neither player ended up staying and what we got when we moved them was nowhere close to what we paid.

On the chychrun deal, our goaltending last year was so bad there was no way for that deal to work out. Average goaltending may well have put us in the playoffs and that in itself likely changes perspectives

We didn’t address our largest need (a top 4 RD) with either trade, and there wasn’t a lot of term with either of those two. So there’s multiple reasons why these trades were not smart for a rebuilding team.

If goaltending was our only problem, we should be a lock for one of the top three spots in our division this year.

 

[UglyPuckling]

That suggestion has been put forward before. Criteria would have to be established for measuring drafting success and applied to every team's record and that of Central Scouting and other reputable rating entities. I suspect that the result might show that some of the rating entities might have records that are as good as some teams' scouting records. There will be outliers (much worse and much better) just as there are with stock performance and projections.

I don't think a team should get rid of all of its scouts; however, it might save money by using reputable scouting entities instead of more scouts, and do just as well. I think some teams already do that. Concentrating the scouting staff's efforts on players expected to be taken in the first 2 or 3 rounds of each draft might be optimum. The record of success for picks in rounds 4 and after is low compared to the first 3 rounds.

Aren’t the rating entities comprised of “scouts"?

Or, maybe another question is does the Central Scouting agency attract better scouts?

 

[UglyPuckling]

Yes, I think proponents of both sides of this debate have stated that a big (or biggest) problem was trading away high 1st rounders when the rebuild wasn’t even finished. On top of that, the players they traded for didn’t even have term on their contracts.

A thing that has made me curious though is that if drafting success is purely random, why does any team bother having scouts then? Why does every team have multiple scouts and its been this way forever? Couldn’t they just use the Central Scouting system (etc.) and get rid of a needless expense?

If draft success is based on luck, then the Central Scouting agency wouldn’t be any better as they’re just scouts whose results are based on luck as well.

 

[Wondercarrot]

Johnston Wallstedt Zellweger off the top of my head

Picks 20, 23, 34
Looks like 10-15 other teams missed as well.

The reality is that it was kind of a shit draft and any of the guys we likely would have taken instead of Boucher have been shit as well. At least Boucher has the injury excuse.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Picks 20, 23, 34
Looks like 10-15 other teams missed as well.

The reality is that it was kind of a shit draft and any of the guys we likely would have taken instead of Boucher have been shit as well. At least Boucher has the injury excuse.

It was a bad draft class, made worse by being the Covid class, where no live viewings occurred, and a lot of players weren’t even playing.

 

[Cosmix]

Aren’t the rating entities comprised of “scouts"?

Or, maybe another question is does the Central Scouting agency attract better scouts?

It would depend on the money! I don't know which orgs pay more for scouts.

 

[UglyPuckling]

It would depend on the money! I don't know which orgs pay more for scouts.

I did a little research on the Central Scouting agency. One article and one long time successful scout said they travel less and that was one of the reasons he joined the Central Scouting agency.

I was also trying to figure out how long scouts have been used in the NHL. My search didn’t provide an answer, but I did determine that Gordie Howe was scouted by Red Wing scouts around 1945/1946. So, one can conclude scouts have been used for at least 8 decades (minimally).

Odd that NHL teams continue to use and pay them when the draft is basically or mostly just random and dependent on luck. There’s got to be a good opportunity here for someone (maybe even for a HF poster) to revolutionize the game by letting a NHL team know they are wasting time and money on scouts.

 

[Cosmix]

I did a little research on the Central Scouting agency. One article and one long time successful scout said they travel less and that was one of the reasons he joined the Central Scouting agency.

I was also trying to figure out how long scouts have been used in the NHL. My search didn’t provide an answer, but I did determine that Gordie Howe was scouted by Red Wing scouts in the 1950s. So, one can conclude scouts have been used for at least 7 decades (minimally).

Odd that NHL teams continue to use and pay them when the draft is basically or mostly just random and dependent on luck. There’s got to be a good opportunity here for someone to revolutionize the game by letting a NHL know they are wasting time and money on scouts, maybe even for a HF poster.

I remember when I was a young boy & teenager in the late 1950s and early 1960s, the original 6 teams had territories where they had the rights to sign players. I think NYR had the rights in the Winnipeg area. I and none of my friends who played together were good enough to get selected and get some goodies (equipment and sticks). Andy Bathgate was and played for NYR; however, he was much older than I (as old as my father).

 

[Masked]

Odd that NHL teams continue to use and pay them when the draft is basically or mostly just random and dependent on luck. There’s got to be a good opportunity here for someone (maybe even for a HF poster) to revolutionize the game by letting a NHL team know they are wasting time and money on scouts.

While it does seem like luck, I'd compare it to poker. Yes, anyone can step up to a poker table and win a hand but the pros are going to be better in the long run even if they make decisions that look bad after the flop is revealed.

 

[UglyPuckling]

While it does seem like luck, I'd compare it to poker. Yes, anyone can step up to a poker table and win a hand but the pros are going to be better in the long run even if they make decisions that look bad after the flop is revealed.

I’m not convinced that its only a matter of luck. There was some tongue in cheek in that post. Drafting is not an exact science and there’s definitely some luck involved. But, I do think some teams and scouts are better than others. I would imagine its also impossible to view every player that’s eligible for a draft as well.