The weird case of the 2011 draft. What where they thinking?

[SwedishFire]

When i look back at drafts, There is four drafts that stads out, 1996 - probably the worst draft ever, not even half the players in that 1st round sticked at NHL! 1999 - After the Sedins there where almost nothing. And 2011 and 2012 - top 4 where all close to busts or major dissapointments.

That 2011 draft had no real superstar, maybe Huberdeau and Zibanejad If they waited a year with that draft. Ryan Strome at 5? Even at the draft it was way to high, I will never understand.

Duncan Siemens at 11, MarkMcNeil at 18 while there was obvoius bryter choices even at that time. And between 21 - 25 Ottawa and Toronto went dumb mode; Already at 21 ; Stephan Noesen, the roof is/was a 3rd liner -worthy of a 1st round? 22 Tyler Biggs ECHL level of a player even at the draft23 Joe Morrow - just didnt cut it I guess? 24 Matt Puempel - slowest player in the league? What was his assets really? 25 Stuart Percy - a big guy Who wasnt physichal.

and a lot of players that took an eternity to make a name of themselfs in the league;. Strangest case is JT Miller Who went from mediocre trade dump to a 100 pt player!!!
The start of 2nd round- first ten players on theblist wasnt even NHL caliber! but had Edumdson, Kuvherov, Saad etc. far below. Such a super poor draft. What where Ottawa, Chicago and Toronto (Burke..) thinking?? Adam Clemming ahead of Edmundson is some strange drafting I must say.
Is scouts still in the narriative that offensiven Dmens always will be better Dmens?

Click to read more...

 

[lawrence]

1999 after the twins there was Richard jackman Tim Connolly Martin havlat and Henrik setterberg.

 

[Sanderson]

What's so weird about it?

First of, you cannot judge the behaviour of people based on hindsight, you have to look at the knowledge available at that point in time.

Secondly, if a draft is considered to be weaker, some teams might opt for projects. If there is no obvious high-end talent who is a safe bet, why not take a gamble on someone who has a high ceiling or at least an intriguing skillset, even if he might never get there?
That's especially true in the later stages of the first round.

Yes, some teams made odd choices, but that's something you can say for virtually every draft. There is nothing about the drafts you mentioned that makes them an outlier in that regard.

Ryan Strome put up 106 points in 65 games in his draft season. Good enough for third in the OHL, with less games played than the players ahead of him. He was a perfectly valid choice at that point.
Plenty of the players you've mentioned had good junior seasons. For quite a few that didn't translate to the NHL later on, but again, that's like basically every year.

Look at the actual performances of the players. You criticise Siemers and Morrow, and wonder why Clendening got drafted ahead of Edmundson. A quick glance at their ratings and their respective seasons would tell you exactly why they were taken ahead of Edmundson.

Same with Saad. He had a good but not great season in the OHL as a late 1992 player, Noesen and Puempel, who you criticise, had better seasons and were a couple of months younger. There was no reason to assume that Saad would end up being the much better player.

Some players develop early and then plateau, some players have the tools to look good in juniors but not to succeed in the NHL, some players make a big jump right before the draft, and some only years later. Some players are stuck behind others and thus can't show their true potential right away. Some players end up with an NHL-franchise that screws up their development. It is anything but easy to find out who still has plenty of development left and how hasn't.

 

[rubenflamshep]

I have data going back to 1997 and some free time so I calculated the number of NHL games played by each draft in the first 7 post-draft years:

YEAR    # Games
1999    8079
2000    8367
2007    8825
1997    9365
2002    9488
2006    9834
2001    10169
2010    10283
2017    10606
2005    10740
2016    10991
2004    11338
2014    11408
2008    11536
2009    12438
2012    12475
2013    12628
2011    13149
2015    13419
2003    13646
1998    14668

@lawrence's intuition was good re: 1999 being a particularly bad one. It produced the least # of NHL games of any draft going back to 1997!

2011 isn't actually that bad a year (actually 4th most NHL games of any draft in the timespan):

Going to echo @Sanderson that a lot of decisions look wacky in retrospect. Brian Burke is also maybe the worst drafting GM of the last 20 years so I wouldn't pay too much attention to what he gets up to:

 

[lawrence]

I have data going back to 1997 and some free time so I calculated the number of NHL games played by each draft in the first 7 post-draft years:

YEAR    # Games
1999    8079
2000    8367
2007    8825
1997    9365
2002    9488
2006    9834
2001    10169
2010    10283
2017    10606
2005    10740
2016    10991
2004    11338
2014    11408
2008    11536
2009    12438
2012    12475
2013    12628
2011    13149
2015    13419
2003    13646
1998    14668

@lawrence's intuition was good re: 1999 being a particularly bad one. It produced the least # of NHL games of any draft going back to 1997!

2011 isn't actually that bad a year (actually 4th most NHL games of any draft in the timespan):
View attachment 889966

Going to echo @Sanderson that a lot of decisions look wacky in retrospect. Brian Burke is also maybe the worst drafting GM of the last 20 years so I wouldn't pay too much attention to what he gets up to:
View attachment 889968

Briak Burke his own words, mentioned that the 1999 draft was so bad he was considering trading it, despite the Canucks having a awful season, and likely to be a top 4 pick. he just didn't want the pick and believed he could get something to help the team next year.

Thomas Gradin convinced him otherwise about the Sedin twins, and that well hold on, maybe we can use the pick to grab one of them, he really liked the twins. Burke went to watch the Twins play along with 2 other gms. Burke acted like a poker player. The 2 other gms thought they were very good. Burke was like, "meh they were ok" he was convinced to keep the pick and eventually was able to trade for the other pick and grabbed both twins. but yea 1999 weak as hell.

 

[SwedishFire]

What's so weird about it?

First of, you cannot judge the behaviour of people based on hindsight, you have to look at the knowledge available at that point in time.

Secondly, if a draft is considered to be weaker, some teams might opt for projects. If there is no obvious high-end talent who is a safe bet, why not take a gamble on someone who has a high ceiling or at least an intriguing skillset, even if he might never get there?
That's especially true in the later stages of the first round.

Yes, some teams made odd choices, but that's something you can say for virtually every draft. There is nothing about the drafts you mentioned that makes them an outlier in that regard.

Ryan Strome put up 106 points in 65 games in his draft season. Good enough for third in the OHL, with less games played than the players ahead of him. He was a perfectly valid choice at that point.
Plenty of the players you've mentioned had good junior seasons. For quite a few that didn't translate to the NHL later on, but again, that's like basically every year.

Look at the actual performances of the players. You criticise Siemers and Morrow, and wonder why Clendening got drafted ahead of Edmundson. A quick glance at their ratings and their respective seasons would tell you exactly why they were taken ahead of Edmundson.

Same with Saad. He had a good but not great season in the OHL as a late 1992 player, Noesen and Puempel, who you criticise, had better seasons and were a couple of months younger. There was no reason to assume that Saad would end up being the much better player.

Some players develop early and then plateau, some players have the tools to look good in juniors but not to succeed in the NHL, some players make a big jump right before the draft, and some only years later. Some players are stuck behind others and thus can't show their true potential right away. Some players end up with an NHL-franchise that screws up their development. It is anything but easy to find out who still has plenty of development left and how hasn't.

I remmeber that draft, and there was a OpenOffice gate for the No1, with RNH finally nagging it in the spring.

Saad was considered a Great prospect, and was a faller at the draft, and really i dont know why.
Strome made a lot of points, but was known to be kind of soft.

Siemens at 11 was and is a real headscratcher, even at that time the draft was held.

Noesen was a real reach at the time, but actually become at least something quite useful.

But it was a year there it was more 1st rounders than usual that was major dissapointments or even busts. Half the 1st round was out of NHL under close to 80 games.

 

[Jumptheshark]

When i look back at drafts, There is four drafts that stads out, 1996 - probably the worst draft ever, not even half the players in that 1st round sticked at NHL! 1999 - After the Sedins there where almost nothing. And 2011 and 2012 - top 4 where all close to busts or major dissapointments.

That 2011 draft had no real superstar, maybe Huberdeau and Zibanejad If they waited a year with that draft. Ryan Strome at 5? Even at the draft it was way to high, I will never understand.

Duncan Siemens at 11, MarkMcNeil at 18 while there was obvoius bryter choices even at that time. And between 21 - 25 Ottawa and Toronto went dumb mode; Already at 21 ; Stephan Noesen, the roof is/was a 3rd liner -worthy of a 1st round? 22 Tyler Biggs ECHL level of a player even at the draft23 Joe Morrow - just didnt cut it I guess? 24 Matt Puempel - slowest player in the league? What was his assets really? 25 Stuart Percy - a big guy Who wasnt physichal.

and a lot of players that took an eternity to make a name of themselfs in the league;. Strangest case is JT Miller Who went from mediocre trade dump to a 100 pt player!!!
The start of 2nd round- first ten players on theblist wasnt even NHL caliber! but had Edumdson, Kuvherov, Saad etc. far below. Such a super poor draft. What where Ottawa, Chicago and Toronto (Burke..) thinking?? Adam Clemming ahead of Edmundson is some strange drafting I must say.
Is scouts still in the narriative that offensiven Dmens always will be better Dmens?

It was not considered a hall of fame type of draft. Lots of projects were in that draft

 

[GKJ]

Two of the favorites for 1OV going into the season were Adam Larsson and Sean Couturier. Larsson was supposed to be a high-end D, and Couturier got mono that affected his whole season.

 

[SwedishFire]

It was not considered a hall of fame type of draft. Lots of projects were in that draft

I think that thing, this draft was a projectdraft, with the real superstar - Kucherov considered a risk cause KHL bound, snd hardly could speak english... what an epic GM fail to not draft him as a chancepick.

Landeskog was no1 christmastime.
Coutorier was considered a solidplayer, but without any flashy or finesse plays. No superstar by any means asa no1 should be as a narriative, and my guess that effected him from being a no1 candidate.

Larsson and Coutorier was early developed physically, and probably therefor they was ahead at the pre- draftyears.

Actual potential talentwise at that time, the top should been Kuch, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Nuge, Zibnejad, Schefiele, Coutorier, Hamilton - had size, skating and talent dont know why he fall to 9?? , Brodin, Klefbom.

Yes, Larsson not rven a top 10 pick. He had size and a breakout pass.