Earlier this week a question was posed in another thread; who is more likely to develop when acquired in a trade, a 1st & 2nd round draft pick or a young player? I, stupidly, volunteered to take on this task.
I went through 9 drafts, 2010-2018, and sorted each player in the first two rounds under the following categories: Impact, NHLer, Fringe, and Bust. There wasn't a hard criteria for who fits where and just used my best judgement. I also separated the draft picks. In the first round I looked at picks 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 20-25, and 26-30/31. For the second round it was 31-40, 41-50, and 51-60/61. The idea behind this is that top-5 picks should yield a higher rate of Impact NHL players. To determine the percentages I just divided the category by the amount of players in that part of the draft.
Results
A top-5 pick's most likely outcome is to become an impact player with a low fringe and bust percentage. However, impact players decrease significantly immediately afterwards. By the mid-to-late 1st round the chances of drafting an NHLer are almost even with drafting a bust. In the second round, the most likely outcome is your draft pick busting.
Next I looked at trades from the same time period. It was difficult as I had to use my own judgement to figure out what classified as a young player. I ended up with 44 trades containing 81 young players from 2010-2018. I then used the same Impact, NHLer, Fringe, and Bust criteria for each player. I mostly stuck with trades that involved someone classified as a veteran going on way with young players coming back but there are a few young player swaps or draft pick for young player trades.
Results
The 4 impact players were Tyler Seguin, Filip Forsberg, Jakub Voracek, and Ryan McDonagh.
Conclusion
When acquiring 1st and 2nd round picks for stars, they are almost always at the end of the their rounds. Trading for 1st round pick in the 20-32 range has, roughly, the same outcomes as trading for a young player. There is a less chance of the player becoming a fringe asset, however. This does change when trading 2nd round picks, however. The young player is far more likely to develop into an NHLer than a 2nd round pick is.
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
Anyone interested into looking at my methodology can look at this google spreadsheet I worked off of.
The following expressed an interest into looking at the results in the other thread:
@4Twenty , @Nucker101 , @MS , @pitseleh , @credulous , @racerjoe , @Canucker , @rypper
I went through 9 drafts, 2010-2018, and sorted each player in the first two rounds under the following categories: Impact, NHLer, Fringe, and Bust. There wasn't a hard criteria for who fits where and just used my best judgement. I also separated the draft picks. In the first round I looked at picks 1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 20-25, and 26-30/31. For the second round it was 31-40, 41-50, and 51-60/61. The idea behind this is that top-5 picks should yield a higher rate of Impact NHL players. To determine the percentages I just divided the category by the amount of players in that part of the draft.
Results
Picks 1-5 | Picks 6-10 | Picks 11-15 | |||||||||||
Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | ||
22 | 15 | 4 | 4 | 12 | 18 | 10 | 5 | 7 | 24 | 5 | 9 | ||
49% | 33% | 9% | 9% | 27% | 40% | 22% | 11% | 16% | 53% | 11% | 20% |
Picks 16-20 | Picks 20-25 | Picks 26-30/31 | |||||||||||
Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | ||
9 | 18 | 10 | 8 | 1 | 17 | 11 | 15 | 3 | 18 | 9 | 17 | ||
20% | 40% | 22% | 18% | 2% | 39% | 25% | 34% | 7% | 38% | 19% | 36% |
Picks 31-40 | Picks 41-50 | Picks 51-60/61 | |||||||||||
Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust | ||
7 | 19 | 21 | 43 | 2 | 22 | 21 | 45 | 1 | 29 | 23 | 44 | ||
8% | 21% | 23% | 48% | 2% | 25% | 23% | 50% | 1% | 30% | 24% | 45% |
A top-5 pick's most likely outcome is to become an impact player with a low fringe and bust percentage. However, impact players decrease significantly immediately afterwards. By the mid-to-late 1st round the chances of drafting an NHLer are almost even with drafting a bust. In the second round, the most likely outcome is your draft pick busting.
Next I looked at trades from the same time period. It was difficult as I had to use my own judgement to figure out what classified as a young player. I ended up with 44 trades containing 81 young players from 2010-2018. I then used the same Impact, NHLer, Fringe, and Bust criteria for each player. I mostly stuck with trades that involved someone classified as a veteran going on way with young players coming back but there are a few young player swaps or draft pick for young player trades.
Results
Impact | NHLer | Fringe | Bust |
4 | 35 | 11 | 27 |
5% | 43% | 16% | 36% |
The 4 impact players were Tyler Seguin, Filip Forsberg, Jakub Voracek, and Ryan McDonagh.
Conclusion
When acquiring 1st and 2nd round picks for stars, they are almost always at the end of the their rounds. Trading for 1st round pick in the 20-32 range has, roughly, the same outcomes as trading for a young player. There is a less chance of the player becoming a fringe asset, however. This does change when trading 2nd round picks, however. The young player is far more likely to develop into an NHLer than a 2nd round pick is.
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
Anyone interested into looking at my methodology can look at this google spreadsheet I worked off of.
The following expressed an interest into looking at the results in the other thread:
@4Twenty , @Nucker101 , @MS , @pitseleh , @credulous , @racerjoe , @Canucker , @rypper