This is Zack Kassian. He’s got some size (6.03, 210) and some skill (63 points in 61 OHL games for the Petes) and he rocketed up the Central Scouting charts (24th at the midterms, 10th at the final bell among North American forwards) this season.

However, we know the final CSB rankings don’t count for much (Gare Joyce exposed it in his wonderful book) and the smart money has him 15-25 for this entry draft.


Except he’s one of the best Coke machine’s in the draft and I fear we’re headed for another round of big wingers with smoke stacks at the draft this summer.

Kassian is the guy who clocked top prospect John Tavares at the top prospects game, and he’s also a confident fellow: “I’m a power forward. I like to go into the corners, go to the dirty areas to score goals, set up guys; stand up for teammates.”

His coach in Peterborough (Ken McRae) says “Zack Kassian is a great kid that loves the game and approaches practices the same way he approaches games with hard work and intensity. (He’s a) big, tough right shot power forward with a mean streak. Very heavy shot to go along with a high skill level as well as a physical, intimidating style of play. Zack takes pride in his off-ice workouts and is a very well conditioned athlete.”

Notice the words “foot speed” don’t come up? It’s a Blues Clue. The Oilers during the Prendergast draft era would go for skill in round one and took the Coke Machines later on. They drafted a lot of big men between Brad Winchester and Geoff Paukovich (they’re all mentioned here) but none higher than 35. Based on Steve Tambellini’s words about where this team needs to improve, I think they might take him as a reach pick.

Which is a textbook draft for need selection and probably a mistake.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

66 Responses to "Kassian"

  1. LP says:

    You forgot to add the Coke Machines tag to your post.

  2. PunjabiOil says:

    Tambellini isn’t Lowe.

    His words were along the lines of, “We’re going to try to draft the best player available. If there is size, and talent we’ll draft that guy….but you can’t manufacture talent.”

  3. Lowetide says:

    LP: Only if hey draft him.

    PJ Oil: We’ll see.

  4. HBomb says:

    Lowetide: I saw a mock draft (somewhere) that had Kassian going 8th overall. I’ve seen him anywhere from 8 to 22nd in several mocks.

    That being said, why not deal a couple assets and try to snag a 2nd first rounder somewhere around 15th overall, then walk away with Kassian AND Ryan Ellis or Scott Glennie?

  5. boopronger says:

    So if a GM states that he wants a team that is bigger, stronger and meaner, is the idea to aquire these players through trade if they are not available when you draft?

    Just curious what the strategy is.

  6. mf37 says:

    HBomb: There are two mock drafts up at NHL.com. One has Kassian going 7th to the Leafs, the other has him going 8th to the Stars.

  7. PunjabiOil says:

    That being said, why not deal a couple assets and try to snag a 2nd first rounder somewhere around 15th overall, then walk away with Kassian AND Ryan Ellis or Scott Glennie?

    Because having Schoerder AND one of Ellis/Glennie/Kulikov/Kadri is a better alternative.

  8. Matt N says:

    Notice the words “foot speed” don’t come up? It’s a Blues Clue. .

    The book on Kassian is that he is an average skater with good straight line speed but relatively poor acceleration. He is a better skater than Greg Nimisz or Jared Staal (OHL big men taken in last years draft at 25 and 49 respectively).

    This a link to a post on an OHL prospects website that describes him as “showed off great speed, especially for his size.”http://ohlprospects.blogspot.com/2009/01/ryan-yessies-thoughts-on-peterborough.html

    He is a much better skater than Lucic was at his age (a player he draws comparisons to).

    He is consistently mentioned as being an (over)aggressive hitter, sticking up for teammates, respected in the room (wore an A last year) and put up over a point a game.

    He doesn’t get mentioned in the Kadri, Ellis, Glennie etc. group that will be available when the Oilers pick. However, I just wanted to voice an opinion that he is not a huge reach or to have the blogosphere be disappointed if we end up with him. I don’t think that he is going to be a miss. His upside is Lucic or Doan playing in your top 6. His down side is Brad May or even thecaptainethanmoreau being a 3rd line banger and 15 goal scorer. I see him as a safe pick, not a coke machine project.

    An ideal situation would be flipping picks with someone at 14 or 15 that is in love with Ellis, getting Kassian and picking up another pick.

  9. HBomb says:

    Ok, so if we draft Kassian at 10th, we’re going to potentially end up with Hugh Jessiman.

    We could also land the next Milan Lucic.

    Any pick at that point is some degree of a crap-shoot, so would it be THAT bad?

  10. Lowetide says:

    ISS has him 20th and Redline has him outside the top 10. These mock drafts aren’t really reflective imo of the reality of each draft. They’re fan mocks mostly, and the two at nhl.com look crazy. tsn has him at #15 (in a tie) in their latest update.

    He’d be a reach anywhere in the top 10.

  11. Lowetide says:

    HBomb: Schroeder is a much better prospect. By a mile. I’m no draft expert but the ONLY reason you take Kassian over Schroeder is size.

  12. Traktor says:

    I’m betting on Kassian.

    I hope Tambellini does too.

  13. Coach pb9617 says:

    Sporting News has Kassian at 8.

    Hockey News has him at 17. And Edmonton going with John Moore.

    Dobber has Kassian at 14 and the Oilers going with Cowen.

  14. HBomb says:

    Jesus, if Cowen slipped to 10th, I’d do backflips, mostly because a year ago he was a projected top-three talent prior to injury.

  15. HBomb says:

    As for staying away from a guy because of size, on one hand, we’re flush with small forwards…but we were in 2003 as well, and it was the reason the Oilers didn’t take a hard look at Parise.

    That turned out REALLY well.

    In short, I don’t know where I want them to go, but there’s going to be a few names to consider at 10th overall, and if someone goes Thomas Hickey in the first nine, it could get even more interesting.

  16. Coach pb9617 says:

    Don’t get your hopes up HB. I’ve gone through 50 different mock drafts and Cowen goes at an average of 6. High of 3, low of 11.

    Player most often assigned to the Oilers: Kulikov

  17. HBomb says:

    Kulikov, eh?

    What are we talking here, Grebeshkov v2.0?

    I’m kind of opposed to drafting a defenseman unless the upside is absolutely massive. It will take 5 of the guy’s 7 seasons prior to UFA status to develop into something more than an end-of-the-roster type.

    The three exceptions in this draft, for me, would be Hedman (not happening), Cowen (unlikely), and Ellis (quite possibly available).

  18. Nennog says:

    Boy, Kulikov hasn’t looked good at all in these last two games. It was mentioned that he’s fighting illness, but I would think his stock has fallen in the last days. Some drafted players (Riendeau, Almond, Benn, Cormier, Piché, and Cousineau tonight) have looked very impressive though, which tells you that these scouts generally do their jobs very well.

  19. speeds says:


    Yes, it would ideally be nice to select the best player available, and happen to have that player be one with size that fits a need.

    As for a team making a surprise pick in the top 9, it depends what you mean by surprise. There seems to be a top 7 that most would agree upon, but I don’t think there’s any clear top 9 group. Who do you see as the likely top 9?

    Most/all? have Tavares, Duchense, and Hedman top 3, and after that it seems like many have Paajarvi, Kane, Cowan, and Schenn in some order. Following that, the two most common names I’ve seen are Kulikov and Ekman-Larsson, but I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say those are likely to be the 8th and 9th picks on most team’s list.

    I guess my point is I’m not sure that after the top 3 there are really any guaranteed players to be selected before EDM. There are some that I’m would be fairly surprised to see available at 10 (notably Kane, Schenn, and Paajarvi), but none nearly as unlikely as the top 3, and those 4 are just my personal guess on what I think might well happen.

  20. Ducey says:

    Don’t know squat about any of these guys but I sure like the description by his coach: Hard working, mean streak, good hitter, intense.

    Sounds like he has the intensity that the Coke Machines TM didn’t have. Hell, if Paukovich would go out and layout people (from the front!) every shift he would be in the show.

  21. doritogrande says:

    I posted on Kassian about a month ago in a thread I can’t remember, but the gest of it was that Kassian had one of the worst +/- on Peterborough. He’s never going to be a world killer if he can’t take on at least middling competition in his draft year. If we’re picking at 10 I want a player with a future, not Jesse Niinimaki again.

    H-bomb: The more I think about Kulikov, the more I see him as the Ales Hemsky of european defensemen. Beating up on Canadian talent in the Q-league during his draft year. Staying on for another season in junior, then straight to the bigs (hopefully). He’s the one I’ve been targeting since everyone told me Paajarvi won’t go past Toronto, and since I started listening to them. With the signing of Motin and what I’m assuming to be the signing of Plante soon, our amateur prospect cupboard if I haven’t missed my guess consists of one player; Jeff Petry. Not only will Kulikov fill an organizational need, I have no problem projecting him as a top-10 pick that won’t be considered a ‘reach’.

  22. speeds says:

    I would be mildly surprised if Kulikov were available at 10. He seems like just the kind of guy, traditionally, OTT or DAL might select.

    That said, the consensus at this time of year will generally change (on the messageboards and in some of the published mocks available at certain sites) somewhat come the draft, even though the season is pretty much over for notable draftees (Kulikov and Ellis being the two most notable exceptions, Jordan Caron as well).

  23. PDO says:

    Kulikov got absolutely cranked twice tonight.

    Mean much? Probably not, but jesus…

  24. oil dude says:

    The one thing that excites me about this draft is that there WILL be a player with an elite draft year on the board when the oilers pick. After the top 7 one of Schroeder, Kulikov, or Ellis will be available at 10. I believe Tambellini was referring to the current players when said he said we needed to get bigger in our top 6, and Kassian will not play in anybodies top 6 before Tambos contract is up in 3 years. I think he drafts a player with an elite track record (up to this point) and then brings in a big top sixer via trade or FA.

  25. jon k says:

    To whomever cited the NHL mock drafts, I recommend you look elsewhere for mocks. The NHL staff writers are some of the worst in the business (surprise, surprise) and their mock drafts are simply atrocious.

    To whomever cited Kassian as having only “average” foot speed, I would suggest watching him play or even simply highlight videos. His skating is substantially below average. I can’t even think of a player in the NHL I’ve seen recently with similarly poor skating. Maybe Stortini at his very first training camp following the lockout. Stortini could probably lap Kassian in a race now.

    If we draft Kassian at 10th I’d seriously consider becoming one of those hate-indoctrinated fans you see who constantly have a bone to pick with management. He simply doesn’t belong in the top 12 picks in this draft. 15 and up, sure take a chance on him. He could be Morrow-lite if you’re lucky. He could also be Brad May though.

  26. Jon says:

    After the top 7:
    Tavares, Hadman, Duchene, Kane, MSP, Schenn, Cowen

    Their seems to be a fairly large grouping that the scouts have ranked from 8-15, with only a couple consistently being at the top of this grouping.

    Kadri, OEL, Kulikov, Ellis, Schroder, Moore, Despres, Kassian

    I have never been a supporter of trading down. But if none of the top 7 drop to 10 then I think we should trade down to the 14th (panthers) and pick up an extra 2nd rounder as this draft is very deep with many interesting prospects in the 2nd and third rounds.

  27. Jon says:

    To go with the above comment.

    I hope the oilers take the best player available, but, if they have located one player as being special (kassian) then I hope they trade down and get more assets.

    Ninamaki and Mikhonov set back an organization because the Oilers took two players who were supposed to be taken in the 2nd or third rounds. Taking a player ranked in the 20’s with a ten spot is not good practice but it is not the biggest travesty this org has ever been guilty of.

    Does anyone have any insight on Chris Kreider? Or Carl Klindberg?

    I have seen both of then ranked as low as 7 on some mock drafts and in the 2nd round of others?

  28. Rick says:

    I don’t follow prospects like you guys do but ever since Matheson threw out Kassian’s name as a guy the Oilers are interested in I have kept my eye out for comments on him.

    He seems to get compared to Lucic most often, which I don’t think would be such a bad thing even at #10.

    What has caught my attention more than anything is that his basic numbers line up quite favourably with another guy that was slated and ultimately drafted in the bottom 1/3 of the first round.

    That guy is Ryan Getzlaf.

    When Getzlaf was drafted there was no great shock at the position he went in and yet looking back there are probably fans of 20 other teams that wish their scouts went a little off the board and took a flyer on him.

    At any rate, since you guys are much more dialed in on what can be expected from these kids, is a comparison to Getzlaf in his draft year that much of a reach?

    If not then the gamble obviously gets more interesting and if the consolation prize is getting a guy like Lucic that isn’t so bad either.

    Obviously though they better be damned sure it’s between one of the two and not the third option of Hugh Jessiman.

  29. Smytty777 says:

    I generally get nervous when the Oilers go for a reach pick and Kassian is a reach based on the rankings that I have seen.

    I’m convinced that Ellis (if available) will be BPA so he’s my pick if he lasts that long.

  30. Boondock says:

    For every player like this drafted that turn a player into Lucic or Getzlaf, there are ten more that become Moreau, Kilger, Rupp, Rasmussen, Wayne Primeau or worse.

    Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing to draft a player who should still find a role if he doesn’t develop offensively as planned.

    Just saying it’s dangerous to compare players numbers to guys who were late bloomers.

  31. Traktor says:

    jonk: I think you’re overstating his skating issues. He needs work on his acceleration but overall he’s not near as bad as you suggest imo.

  32. Rick says:


    I guess that’s kind of my point or question.

    If the potential is there for him to be a truly impact player but short of that is very likley to atleast develop into a solid role player, isn’t it a solid gamble when faced with a boom or bust type prospect like Schroeder or Ellis (just as examples)?

  33. NBOilerFan says:

    I admittedly don’t know much about prospects but my line of thinking is that you should pick by BPA not by need. However, its quite obvious just based on comments posted here that there is no clear cut ranking of prospects, at least after what seems to be a general consensus of the Top-7.

    Even the pro-scout sites have different opinions on the BPA. So it comes down to each organizations opinion on the ranking of the players. Whomever the Oilers pick, some here will say they didn’t pick the BPA (especially if the player is a bigger player), just because they personally feel another prospect was better. But that doesn’t mean that the Oilers did not pick the BPA in their opinion. I have heard many say that after the Top-7 it’s a “crap shot”…. so BPA is very hard to determine.

    I also wonder how much weight the organizations put into the interview seassions? How much does that sway their rankings based on talent assessment alone? Would they take a player ranked below another based on how well he did or how mature he seemed in an interview?

    Or further more, how much do they weight in comments such as LT presented here from the Peterborough coach on Kassian? McRae’s comments sure seem to fit the bill on what they team seems to be lacking right now.

    I also feel that dispite what Tambellini indicated about picking by BPA, the optics of picking a smaller player even if they are the BPA, over a coke machine will be hard on hime and I also wonder if he has the balls to make that choice.

    It wouldn’t surprise me that they don’t pick Kassian either. But as LT says… “we’ll see”.

  34. jon k says:

    Traktor: His skating is smoother than Stortini’s, but it takes him half a rink to get speed that we see on most NHL players after a few strides.

    And as Boondock noted, for every Getzlaf you find there are 5 Brad Mays or Ethan Moreaus out there in the first.

  35. Traktor says:

    “And as Boondock noted, for every Getzlaf you find there are 5 Brad Mays or Ethan Moreaus out there in the first.”

    The same can be said about every type of prospect though (PW, 2WC, SHD, OD, SSF).

    That said, I’d rather Brad May than Marc Pouliot (Scott Glennie).

  36. speeds says:

    I need to read more about Schroeder. Anyone have some insight as to what made Kessel a better prospect than Schroeder?

    Same age (both very old 18 year olds, just missed the previous year cutoff), both play for Minnesota.

    Kessel posts 18G 33A, 51 pts in 39 GP.
    Schroeder posts 13G 32A,45 pts in 35 GP.

    Schroeder’s team scored 3.2 GPG, while Kessel’s scored just over 4 GPG.

    Kessel is listed as 3″ taller and 9 pounds heavier. He also had a superior track record, statistically, with the U-18 program.

  37. Dennis says:

    I don’t know shagall about the kids but once matheson starts throwing out a fella’s name, it behooves you to consider him.

    my problem with the getzlaf comparison is I think the only knock on Ryan was he was half lazy and immature and wasn’t getting everything out of his talent.

    I don’t think that would be said about this guy, would it?

    I am a BPA draft guy but if you do that, you gotta have a GM that knows how to de-surplus one position to improve another. Lowe was a fucking dummy who said openly, “geez, we’ve got a lot of dmen.”

    So, there’s a guy I didn’t want pulling qual for quan deals.

  38. MattM says:


    Kessel is listed as 3″ tallerThere’s your answer.

  39. Rick says:


    I thought the knock on Getzlaf was that he was considered a bit of a meatball or problem child.

    Similar, but not as bad as, Kyle Beach’s reputation.

    I have no idea on if Kassian is carrying similar baggage.

  40. speeds says:


    Sure, but I’m just wondering what else might be going on there, or if that is all it is?

  41. Coach pb9617 says:

    There’s already a power forward that needs to work on explosiveness in the system. No need to draft a second one – especially if he’s not BPA.

  42. MattM says:


    As far as I’ve seen, that’s the only knock on him. I’m sure others will enlighten us if there’s anything else.

  43. oilersfan says:

    i agree with you guys saying for every Lucic out there there are 10 Joe Hulbig and Ryan O’Marra’s.
    I would prefer to pick Ellis. Skill has a trade value, size often does not

  44. PDO says:


    … who?


    Kessel also had elite speed.

    That said, if he’s available, you absolutely take him.

  45. HBomb says:

    Skill has a trade value, size often does notSize also has trade value.

    See “Isbister, Brad”.

  46. Lowetide says:

    Or Schremp, Sugartits.

  47. speeds says:


    Yeah, from what I’ve read it sounds like Kessel was faster, but Schroeder compensates for that with better hockey sense.

  48. PunjabiOil says:

    Aside from maybe Ellis, I don’t see why the Oilers would pass on Schoerder at 10th.

    Just doesn’t make much sense.

  49. Lowetide says:

    I don’t think Schroeder makes it to 10.

  50. Vic Ferrari says:

    I don’t follow junior hockey, but as this is a site that uses numbers to put value on prospects:

    The CHL started putting out data that shows who was on the ice for every goal scored. so we can see those breakdowns and get an idea of the QUALCOMP using jonathon’s AHL metric.

    Looks like you can go back several years, so we could check on Schremp as well, though perhaps the cork is best left in that bottle. Sailed ships and all that.

    Peterborough wasn’t a particularly good team at evens: 129 GF and 159 GA if my numbers are right, and that doesn’t count times when the goalie was on the bench.

    So 45% of the goals scored in the game were potted by the Petes. The same whether Kassian was on the ice or not.

    Using a simple ‘tough minutes’ check of whether or not a top 40 OHL scored was on the ice when a goal happened (at either end of the rink, and excepting Romano, who played for the Petes) … 54% of the time that was the case with Kassian. 40% of the time when he wasn’t on the ice. So that suggests he was clearly playing tougher than average minutes, though not brutal.

    Also, at even strength with both goalies in their nets, he was only on the ice for 44 Pete goals scored, and registered but 8 goals and 21 assists. More than half of his 63 points came on special teams or with the goalie riding pine.

    If you’re scoring at home, that’s a Ron Wilson ratio of 29/53 = .55. Which is brutal for a first round calibre pick, even on a below average team.

    Of course that has to be held up against the picture of history to have real meaning, and that is Lain’s part of the ship, but I find it hard to believe that the prognosis is good.

    I have a bad feeling about this.

  51. speeds says:

    How does one use that information to check on the Brandon Wheat Kings, to compare teammates and linemates?

    I would be curious if it can give us some numbers to show if Schenn should rightly be ranked as far ahead of Glennie as he seems to generally be. And if Jay Fehr might be a decent overage draftee, though I’m sure his size is a knock against.

  52. jon k says:

    One of things I think that might hurt Schroeder is actually that he plays in college. College hockey is not nearly as physical or gritty as hockey in the CHL, at least by my eye. Maybe there’s a tendency in the scouting community to knock a small guy putting up big numbers in NCAA on a good team?

    I’ve also heard that there are possible team attitude issues. He was also hurt a little for not showing up at the big games for the US at the WJC I believe.

  53. Vic Ferrari says:


    that will churn out every goal scored in the last WHL regular season. Cut and paste that into a spreadsheet, text-to-columns using “~” as a separator, and you’re good to go.

    I’m sure that you can do better than me here, my QUALCOMP is half assed, jonathon’s metric would carry more weight.

    BTW, how did you like ‘Curveball’, speeds? And did you read the Albert articles on ‘Luck And Batting Averages’ and ‘Streakiness In Baseball’?

    I think it is fascinating stuff, MLB is a whole lot more like the NHL than I realized. I think that Albert will be talking against a wall for a while though, the “Conventional Sabermetrics” school and the “Saw Him Good” school are both firmly entrenched in their positions. Neither will budge easily.

  54. speeds says:

    To add some context:

    Glennie posted 70 pts in 55 games, +22, while Schenn put up 88 pts in 70 games, +20. Very similar PPG. Glennie has the better +/-, and +/- per game, but that wouldn’t strike me as surprising on the face of it since I thought they were playing together and it wouldn’t be surprising if Schenn’s numbers decreased a little bit while he wasn’t playing with Glennie. But they didn’t.

    Glennie was injured for February and a chunk of March. During the 16 games Glennie missed*, Schenn recorded 9/14/23 pts, +6.

    Until Glennie was hurt for that stretch, their totals were:

    Schenn 22G 39A 61 pts, +14
    Glennie27G 39A 66 pts, +22

    So we know that Glennie had slightly better numbers than Schenn while they were both healthy and (presumably, I suppose this could be checked via the on-ice data) playing together.

    Schenn’s numbers actually got better without Glennie, so Schenn “proved” he can play without Glennie while Glennie never proved he could play without. Then again, 16 games is not exactly the biggest sample size.

    *-other than that stretch, Glennie missed 1 other game, and Schenn missed 2 games last season.

  55. speeds says:

    jon k:

    With Schroeder (and Kessel, I suppose), there may also be the factor of U of Min’s home rink being Olympic-sized ice. I’m not sure how much scouts deal with that factor in their projections, I guess they’d want to make sure they saw him home and away, and checked his scoring numbers home and away (though I imagine that, on average, you’d expect players to have better stats at home than on the road?)

    Vic: I have barely read any of it, gonna have to renew that book to be able to finish it.

    And thanks for the heads up on how to do that.

  56. speeds says:

    For those interested, Schroeder had 14 pts in 13 road games, thus 32 pts in 22 home games.

    That’s a strange home/road split for a team, to play that many more home than road games. Is that common for MIN?

  57. Mr. Bugg says:

    Chris Kreider is the right guy to pick if we’re after a bigger forward with skill. Kid can skate and think the game at a high level. He also does nice things with the puck, and can lay the odd bomb physically when challenged (although he doesn’t go out of his way to make a hit).

    If Burke doesn’t reach wayyyy high for him, I really, really hope Tambellini considers him long and hard.

  58. Vic Ferrari says:

    I don’t know if you’ve checked yet, but Glennie looks like a beast, and Schenn a coattail rider.

    Granted, not much time apart (events together: 71, just Schenn: 39, just Glennie: 16.

    But Glennie does even better without Schenn, just ridiculously good. 3 GF for every goal against at evens. And Schenn drops back to spot on the team average sans Glennie, in fact a shade below it.

    There is a Falloon/Whitney lesson begging to be heard here, methinks. Glennie is the smart bet by the 5v5 numbers, and it ain’t close.

    Granted, I don’t even know what positions these guys play, and haven’t watched a WHL game in forever. But either Glennie is spectacularly lucky, ot he was just plain old a lot better than Schenn last season in Brandon.

    That doesn’t mean that one guy won’t develop better than the other, and I haven’t considered qualcomp here, the concensus of the ‘saw him good’ guys is probably the best gauge of that.

    I can say that definitvely, last season, Glennie drove results at evens much more profoundly than Schenn. And it ain’t close.

  59. Alice says:

    Vic, if the total events you’re talking here are 16 (the just Glennie figure) how do you extrapolate that into one killed the other at 5v5? It seems the sample size is way below miniscule. Unless there’s something else?

    On Kassian (or anybody) being a good pick if he’s high-percentage to make the show, 3rd/4th line regular. No, no, no. There is no shortage of useful journeyman-level backfill in the AHL, waiver wire, lightweight trades. Look at the bodies we’ve parted with cheaply (Reasoner, GlenX, Torres, Stoll). Kyle Wellwood was a walk-on last year, wasn’t he? If you’re drafting in the top-half of the first round, your BPA is the guy with the highest upside, possible difference maker, impact player. If you lay down a bunt with that pick you’re thinking about it the wrong way.

  60. Vic Ferrari says:


    Sample size is always an issue with prospects. That’s why scouts will always have a large role imo. The confidence interval for shooting% alone is still enormous after a full season.

    In this case, if we assume that when Glennie and Schenn were playing together at even strength, that their results (EV+42, EV-29) or to put it another way 59.2% of the goals scored when they were both on the ice at evens … they were Wheat King goals. That’s a big number in any league. The Wheat Kings had very good overall 5v5 results, but were outscored when neither Glennie or Schenn were on the ice.

    So if we assume that both Glennie and Schenn are equal drivers of results, then the chances of Glennie going +12/-4 or better when apart (Alt: 75% or more on 16 total events), and Schenn +21/-18 or worse (still very respectable btw) when apart … that’s about 22:1 odds of that happening by coincidence alone.

    And of course there is no such thing as too much common sense. I don’t know if their roles shifted when apart, though from what I’ve seen of CHL coaching this seems unlikely. Or maybe Schenn was playing with a nagging injury for a stretch. That would seem to be more likely Glennie though, given that he missed a bunch of games.

    And of course the point of the draft isn’t to pick the guy who is the best player ‘right now’, it’s to get the guy who will be the best 24 year old player. Maybe one of these guys doesn’t have the size or speed to be able to translate their results to the NHL level. Maybe one of them is a lazy ass, and the other the picture of dedication, I dunno. But these things are obviously very important too.

    With the data that I have, all the smart money should be on Glennie being the better 5v5 hockey player right now.

  61. Traktor says:

    Drafting is about projecting talent two or three years down the line.

    Assessing who had the greatest impact at EV this year is fine but it doesn’t do much for predicting who’s going to be the best talent in the future. If I passed on Kassian it certainly wouldn’t be because of his EV/PP split.

    It’s a great draft year though so I’m sure I’ll be happy with our 10th overall selection.

    If I could have it my way though I would move up and select Kane. He would probably cost half of what it would cost to get #1 or #2 and Kane could easily end up the best player in the draft.

    Although if I’m Atlanta (large black population) I’m holding onto the pick and selecting him myself. I could see him being an instant fan favorite and those Kane jerseys flying off the shelves.

  62. Traktor says:

    Ryan Ellis was +52 in 57 games this year.

    But how is he going to react to an NHL forecheck?

  63. Vic Ferrari says:

    I suspect it has tremendous predictive value. Points themselves translate from the OHL (draft year) to future NHL quite well. Desjardins and Lowetide have illustrated that frequently, and there have been several academic publications that arrive at the same conclusion.

    Nobody is claiming to predict the future, just estimating the odds on the wager.

    I’m not a prospophile, but when I would read the prospect threads on HF back in the day, it seemed a touch mad. I really doubt that most of these people have seen these kids play much, so it’s personal bias, a hunch built by reading several scouting reports. And no doubt the scouts that are the best poets sway the most prospect fans.

    What Lowetide does is different, he makes reasonable assumptions based on comparable players and the historic behavior of the population (Desjardins NHLE). It’s a reasonable line in the sand, a wide line, because things like luck and context of the ice time are difficult to assess. But it’s reasonable imo.

    On Ellis, those are big offensive numbers, I suspect he’ll be a first round pick. But that was a powerhouse team, 201 GF and 99 GA would be just ridiculous at the pro level, but these things seem to happen fairly often in the CHL. Some wild swings year to year as well, obviously there is a short rebuilding cycle there.

    So Ellis’ +99/-29 at evens is crazy good. That’s 73.1% of on-ice goals being the good kind. But a bunch of players on that roster have similarish numbers. And even when Ellis isn’t on the ice the team is a terrific 63.5%.

    Still, that 9.6% swing is significant, not far off Glennie. If he was 6.02 and 220 lbs he’d probably have a good shot at going at the top of the draft.

    But hockeydb.com lists him as a defenceman, and 5.10, 185 lbs. So he’s probably 5.08, 165 lbs. There are a lot of big humans in the NHL, you have to be awfully good to overcome that size disadvantage as a defender. Rafalski has taken on the top lines from the other squad right from the back half of his rookie season in N.J., but few small D manage that. I can’t think of any others off the top of my head.

    Still, if he can make the PP go, he’ll have value. And maybe he’ll fill out, maybe his dad is built like Tie Domi and looks skinny next to his mother’s brothers, and maybe he’s a workout fiend, I dunno. You pick a guy like that hoping he’ll get stronger, I would think.

  64. Vic Ferrari says:

    Also, using the same crude QUALCOMP measure as used on Kassian, Ellis wasn’t intentionally played against the star players of the other team, he ranks a shade below average i QUALCOMP, which is rare for a top minutes defender, which I would think he was.

    That whole team surely had way more offensive zone draws than ones in their own end. And I suspect that Ellis wasn’t sent over the boards for even his share of the few, or else he would have faced the Tavares types more.

  65. Bruce says:

    Lowe was a fucking dummy who said openly, “geez, we’ve got a lot of dmen.”

    So, there’s a guy I didn’t want pulling qual for quan deals.

    Dennis: You mean deals like Brewer, Lynch and Woywitka (defencemen all) for Pronger?

    Or Schremp, Sugartits.

    LT: Ha! Well played.

    Interesting to review your original post about coke machines and note that the one guy who has been most successful was the lowest draft selection, that being my man Zorg at #94. Shows what a crapshoot it is. That the oft-cited Lucic somehow survived to #50 attests to that.

    Rafalski has taken on the top lines from the other squad right from the back half of his rookie season in N.J., but few small D manage that. I can’t think of any others off the top of my head.

    Vic: Few indeed. Rafalski was the exception that proves the rule, 26 years old before he got his NHL chance after 4 years in NCAA and 4 more in Scandinavia. Similar defencemen of the small, offensively-skilled type — Brian Campbell, Dan Boyle, and MAB spring to mind — don’t seem to make a positive impact before that age in any event, and I note even today my three counter examples all played below-par QualComp in 2008-09, compared to Rafalski’s +0.07. So he really is an exception.

    Moreover, his exceptional results should be tempered by the fact he has always had an exceptional partner. He’s a great player, don’t get me wrong, but his career path is a long way from typical. Having beaten the odds and made it to the show, he has subsequently come up smelling like roses on great teams.

  66. rickibear says:

    that being my man Zorg at #9417G 12A pace once back from injuy.

    Bruce you allways trumpet the correct cause.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!
© Copyright - Lowetide.ca