A LITTLE MORE ON MOROZ

We knew before day two of the draft that the Edmonton Oilers had an interest in Mitchell Moroz and big wingers. The question we’re left with now is what kind of player is Moroz?

I discussed Moroz as an option for the Oilers in the 10 days leading up to the draft. As it turned out, more teams than Edmonton appeared to be looking at him as the final draft list before the actual event–the McKenzie–had him 56th and trending. When Lisa McRitchie spoke to Steve Tambellini after the first round he indicated it would be draft for need and that the club was content with their stockpile of defenders.

After the draft, Stu MacGregor expressed they liked Moroz and stepped up to get him before he was plucked later in the second round. Jason Gregor–who was at the draft–confirmed to me that Moroz was indeed on the radar and certainly would have been taken before Edmonton drafted again in round 3.

What kind of player is Mitch Moroz. Quite a bit different that some of the other power forwards taken in the top 50 picks this season. I chose Tom Wilson and Lukas Sutter to compare Moroz to, in order to see what the tale of the tape and in game usage told us about each player.

  • Mitchell Moroz 6.175, 209
  • Tom Wilson 6.35, 203
  • Lukas Sutter 5.1175, 214

Those are the Central Scouting Numbers so are the best available to the fans. Moroz still has some time to grow, but based on footspeed and age can be considered a “load” at this point in time.

Moroz is most comfortable as a fighter. I counted 19 regular season 5-minute majors and there must be at least 15 on youtube. Here’s a breakdown (there may be a couple of mistakes, this is among the more tedious things to do) of penalties by each of the three players we’re discussing:

PIMS

NAME GP 5 2  

PIMS

LUKAS SUTTER 70 9 50 165
TOM WILSON 49 9 48 141
MITCHELL MOROZ 66 19 16 141

Moroz fought twice as often as the other two forwards and both Sutter and Wilson took a lot more minor penalties than the young Oil King. A couple of obvious reasons come to mind: Moroz wasn’t playing as much as either Sutter or Wilson, and I do think there’s some evidence that both of them have a lot of “disturber” in them as players.

Some evidence of the latter comes in the “type of foul” performed to gain these minors. Here’s a list of infractions and the number by each player:

  • Roughing (Sutter 18, Wilson 15, Moroz 1)
  • Charging (Wilson 5, Sutter 1, Moroz 0)
  • Checking from behind (Wilson 4, Sutter 1, Moroz 1)
  • Check to the head (Wilson 4, Sutter 3, Moroz 0)
  • High sticking (Wilson 4, Sutter 2, Moroz 2)
  • Boarding (Wilson 2)
  • Cross Checking (Wilson 3, Sutter 2, Moroz 0)
  • Goalie Interference (Sutter 3, Wilson 2, Moroz 1)
  • Slashing (Sutter 6, Moroz 2, Wilson 1)

Again we have to factor in games played and time on ice, but Moroz is clearly not in the same ballpark for these infractions. Some is ice time but I’m not certain we can explain all of it with TOI. Moroz is no angel but does appear to be a “protector” or “enforcer” as opposed to a disturber. I’m not certain my read is correct but there does seem to be a difference there.

SCORING

EVENS

NAME GP  G A PTS PTS/GM
LUKAS SUTTER 70 18 20 38 .543
TOM WILSON 49 6 14 20 .408
MITCHELL MOROZ 66 11 8 19 .288

PK

NAME GP  G A PTS PTS/GM
LUKAS SUTTER 70 1 0 1 .014
MITCHELL MOROZ 66 0 0 0 .000
TOM WILSON 49 0 0 0 .000

PP

NAME GP  G A PTS PTS/GM
LUKAS SUTTER 70 9 11 20 .286
TOM WILSON 49 3 4 7 .143
MITCHELL MOROZ 66 5 1 6 .091

Sutter has the most offensive talent based on these numbers (again lack of TOI is the devil here) and is the one you’d expect to have the best pro career. Interesting that he was drafted third in the group.

I had a look-see at Moroz’ powerplay goals and they all appear to be later goals in blowouts and times of the game that would be consistent with a 4liner getting a push.

written by

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

52 Responses to "A LITTLE MORE ON MOROZ"

  1. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Sutter has the most offensive talent based on these numbers (again lack of TOI is the devil here) and is the one you’d expect to have the best pro career. Interesting that he was drafted third in the group.

    You did say he was under 6 feet. I know, I know, I don’t disagree, but it does seem to be a factor.

    I’ve never seen Sutter, can he skate?

  2. Lowetide says:

    Haven’t seen him but Corey Pronman says “One area of contention amongst scouts I’ve talked to is his skating, as some like his mechanics and skating output, while others see him as a bit of a clunky mover who doesn’t generate much speed. I lean a little to the latter, although I have seen some nice flashes from Sutter in that area.”

  3. PaperDesigner says:

    I did not like this pick then, and I still do not. Trying to project kids who are at least a couple years out from making the team, and at least five years away from finding an established level of ability at the NHL level, trying to fill nonsense like “organizational need” given how much turnover any given NHL roster goes under in that time, is ridiculous. Mitch Moroz is not a good bet to be an NHL player of any quality.

    Something one has to consider when tracking prospects is how many hurdles they have to clear to get to NHL employment. I think you could rank the steps as such:

    1: Okay junior player.
    2: Star junior player.
    3: Okay pro player.
    4: Star pro player/Superstar junior player (I think being someone who can kick the daylights out of junior is roughly equivalent to a high end pro player, and some players peak there–see Schremp, Robbie)
    5: Okay NHL player.
    6: Star NHL player.

    The draft is going to consist of players who are either in category one or two, with a couple of outliers who are so much better than their league, that they’re easy projections as immediate impact players in the NHL (see the first overall picks and the players good enough to be in the same discussion). The goal is to find the players who will end up being the top, I guess about 1%- 0.1% of kids playing serious hockey at that age. The most obvious way to do this is to simply pick the players who are obviously amongst the best at their age. This gets you players like Eric Staal, Sidney Crosby, and if you’re extremely unfortunate, Patrick Stefan, at the very top. Then there are your usual assortment of players who are amongst the best, but are not so far ahead of the pack that some players couldn’t catch them. But they do have the lead, and there are only so many Marc Pouliots who will get caught by Kyle Brodziak. Most of the time, the guy picking 22 gets at least a useful player like Sean Bergenheim while the team picking at 214 ends up with some guy named Marc-Andre Roy who has scored a grand total of three goals in his entire HockeyDB profile. And almost never does the guy picking that far back end up with a star– whereas soimeone who is picking 22 can end up with Claude Giroux or Jordan Eberle. When a player at 22 overachieves, they end up as superstars. When a player at 214 overachieves, they play an NHL game. Or have a career as a useful guy. Anyone notice that the two guys often cited as the late round astonishers, Datsyuk and Zetterberg, are both over thirty? Yeah, not too common, are they?

    This is a very long way of saying that if the player who is a first or second round talent climbs a montain, they become a star. The same mountain for a later round player is just being an NHL guy.

    This is a very long way to say that Moroz, if everything breaks right, may be a fourth line crasher in the NHL. MAYBE, if God is with him and he experiences immediate substantive improvement, he’s a third line player.

    So they draft a player that other teams are stupidly overvaluing as a late second round pick by miraculously acting as though he is an early second round pick.

    Moroz will need a substantive leap in his game just to be a top junior player. Then another substantive leap to adjust to the pros. Then another to be a top player. Then another to be a NHL player.

    I mean, they could have picked Aberg, who scored a tiny bit in the SEL as a teenager, a pretty good feat. Or Finn, who outscored Moroz as a defenceman, but they both lack the clearly hockey related skill, as clearly demonstrated by mountains of evidence, of being over six feet and over two hundred pounds.

    Stupid.

    But what do you expect? This is an organization that sees nothing wrong with entrusting the rebuild to the same people who necessitated it.

  4. Reg Dunlop says:

    PaperDesigner,

    It is apparent that the late round gem is much rarer now. Chalk it up to the fact that every kid with skates is on scout’s radar, everywhere hockey is played. This type of efficiency is kinda boring.

    The Moroz draft was a reach, but the draft by definition is a gamble so we will have to wait and see. Afterall you can teach a player to skate but you can’t teach a player to be big.

  5. Lowetide says:

    I think the Oilers (and Canucks) have embarked on an older draft pick style for rounds 4-6, at least this past season. the Denver D, the Swedish D and the big Cornell winger are all older prospects.

    And there were a lot of good kids left undrafted including two pretty good Oil King defensemen (Cody Corbett and Ashton Sautner).

    Corbett is #20
    http://whl-from-above.blogspot.ca/2012/05/my-whl-player-rankings-for-2012-nhl_23.html

    Sautner is #42
    http://whl-from-above.blogspot.ca/2012/05/my-whl-player-rankings-for-2012-nhl.html

  6. asiaoil says:

    Sutter (shit disturbing center) was the far better pick if they wanted to draft for need. Moroz could be Lucic – but the odds are ridiculously low – and hence the reason mos people consider this a bad pick. Probably a complete waste really. Pick Sutter and people likely think EDM had a great draft given who they got later.

  7. PaperDesigner says:

    Reg Dunlop:
    PaperDesigner,

    It is apparent that the late round gem is much rarer now. Chalk it up to the fact that every kid with skates is on scout’s radar, everywhere hockey is played. This type of efficiency is kinda boring.

    The Moroz draft was a reach, but the draft by definition is a gamble so we will have to wait and see. Afterall you can teach a player to skate but you can’t teach a player to be big.

    How did draft size and teach hockey work for Jacques?

    The thing is, I think that understates how much size can be adjusted, and overstates how much skating and other skills can be taught.

    Basically, there’s only so much development time. If a player works endlessly on their skating, how much time are they going to have left to work on puck-handling, or passing, or defensive zone coverage, etc.?

    I’d rather draft a rail thin 6’0″ player who plays a smart game with a lot of puck skills because he isn’t going to need to split his attention in development that much. Just continue to improve as he has in areas of overall ability to distribute and shoot the puck, and pay special attention to developing strength. Moroz, from a scouting or report or two, looks like he generally has to work on his puck skills, and his skating. That’s a lot taller order than a player who is already pretty good, and just has one major area to address.

    If a player has excellent size, skating and maybe just a few troubles with passing, yeah, I say go for it. That sounds like Zharkov, who seems like a far more legitimate top sixty selection talent. But with Moroz? Even with all the coke machines they drafted, the guy they got in round two is about their fifth best prospect from this draft.

  8. Dalton says:

    No matter what happens, he can’t be worse than Pitlick.

  9. ashley says:

    PaperDesigner,

    Well, Moroz was a second round pick. Our natural positivity bias tells us there have been useful NHL’ers picked in the second round and we immediately think about a handful of current NHL players with that resume. Naturally, we expect our team to get one of those players in the second round.

    The reality is that most of the guys picked in this range don’t make it, if you define making it as someone who plays regular NHL games. There might be anywhere from 5-8 guys picked in the second round that have NHL careers, but only 2 or 3 end up as quality non-4th line/PB players.

    So over a 10 year period of time, we might expect one of our second round picks to show us some offense as a quality NHL’er. This is the homerun second round pick. The Jarrett Stoll. We might expect another one or two that grind out a career on the fourth line/7th defenseman. A Theo Peckham type.

    It’s a crapshoot at this point in the draft, and no team consistently finds the 2 or 3 second round gems lurking on the draft list.

    I don’t mind a bit of gambling at that point. Maybe it works out for us. You’re exactly right though, Moroz is a longshot to become a regular NHL player. That is neither in indictment of his style/effort nor the Oilers drafting ability, rather the simple reality of picking after the best 15 or so in any given year have already been claimed.

  10. sliderule says:

    I think your analysis is bang on.The other two guys aren’t that tough they are shit disturbers

    I think Wilson and Sutter were getting second and third line ice time which has a big bearing on junior hockey scoring.Moroz this year should get at least third line minutes and his scoring will reflect that.

    Moroz has Eager type skating .Hopefully with the increased ice time we will find out this year whether he unlike Eager has hockey sense to go with the skating.

  11. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Matt Greene and Jeff Petry were both second round picks.

  12. gnikkles says:

    I dislike this pick. Why draft Ben eager when you can sign him in his UFA years for ~1 million or so? Drafting for need isn’t a good philosophy. This pick makes absolutely no sense. I’d love for someone to explain it to me.

  13. Lowetide says:

    Mark Messier was a 3rd rd pick. Lordy.

  14. nathan says:

    1 in 5 you get a real NHL player in the 2bd round. Worse beyond that. Interesting that they went older after the 2nd and picked a player with only one CHL season in the 2nd round. They know exactly how he was used and what he produced from his green first half through to the playoffs. By Christmas we’ll have some idea whether they were right not to lose him to someone in the middle of the 2nd round.

  15. DSF says:

    While the odds of a second round pick becoming an NHL player are generally about 25 percent, the first 5 picks in the second round are above 50 percent IF the right player is selected.

    The narrative that you shouldn’t expect to get an NHL player later in the draft or undrafted doesn’t hold all that much water.

    For example, the LA Kings had several such players on their roster in their Cup winning season.

    Slava Voynov – 2nd round
    Kyle Clifford – 2nd round
    Dwight King – 4th round
    Alec Martinez – 4th round
    Jordan Nolan – 7th round
    Davis Drewiske – undrafted

    The Canucks have also been very successful in finding players later in the draft or undrafted.

    Mason Raymond – 2nd round
    Alex Edler – 3rd round
    Kevin Bieksa – 5th round
    Jannik Hansen – 9th round
    Alex Burrows – undrafted
    Chris Tanev – undrafted

    It would seem successful teams have a pretty good record of drafting in later rounds or identifying players who were off the radar.

  16. ashley says:

    DSF,

    Other Kings second rounders include back to ’95:

    Donald MacLean
    Pavel Rosa
    Marian Cisar
    Josh Green
    Matt Zultek
    Justin Papineau
    Andrei Shefer
    Jaroslav Bednar
    Sergei Anshakov
    Konstatin Pushkarev
    Paul Baier
    Dany Roussin
    TJ Fast
    Joey Ryan
    Oscar Moller

    Others are drafted too recently to judge, but you can see the trend. Most second rounders don’t work out.

    The Kings really had a lot of missed first rounders too. Drafting is hard and only one part of building a championship team.

    We probably shouldn’t force our hopes and dreams on every second round (or later) pick coming through the system. We’re asking to be disappointed.

  17. Rondo says:

    LT,

    Do you thinks Oilers will be trying for a to 4 D-man before the summer ends?

    I don’t buy the idea that NJ made a mistake in not forfeiting their pick. They had a trade in mind

    Fedor Tyutin or Andrej Sekera would look good in an Oiler uniform.

  18. Lowetide says:

    Rondo: I’ll tell you, the Oilers have way too many forwards.

    1. Nuge
    2. Gagner
    3. Horcoff
    4. Belanger
    5. Lander
    6. Hall
    7. Yakupov
    8. Smyth
    9. Hartikainen
    10. Eager
    12. Hordichuk
    13. Petrell
    14. Eberle
    15. Hemsky
    16. Jones
    17. Paajarvi

    Now they can send Lander, Paajarvi and Hartikainen down and there’s always injuries. But I don’t think they’ll have those 17 names at training camp. Someone is going.

  19. DSF says:

    ashley:
    DSF,

    Other Kings second rounders include back to ’95:

    Donald MacLean
    Pavel Rosa
    Marian Cisar
    Josh Green
    Matt Zultek
    Justin Papineau
    Andrei Shefer
    Jaroslav Bednar
    Sergei Anshakov
    Konstatin Pushkarev
    Paul Baier
    Dany Roussin
    TJ Fast
    Joey Ryan
    Oscar Moller

    Others are drafted too recently to judge, but you can see the trend.Most second rounders don’t work out.

    The Kings really had a lot of missed first rounders too.Drafting is hard and only one part of building a championship team.

    We probably shouldn’t force our hopes and dreams on every second round (or later) pick coming through the system.We’re asking to be disappointed.

    Oh, no doubt…it would seem Petry, and perhaps Peckham, Hartikainen and Petrell could be on the plus side of the Oilers ledger but the 32nd overall pick is not good time to swing for the fences.

  20. jp says:

    Dalton:
    No matter what happens, he can’t be worse than Pitlick.

    No matter what happens, he can’t be worse than Abney. I know it’s a round earlier, but that’s a better comp in terms of player type. I’ve never seen Moroz play, but the scouting reports say he can skate, likes to hit, and it’s clear he’s willing to fight. The reports, and numbers, also suggest that he doesn’t have a heck of a lot of skill. I think this was drafting a potential enforcer who can hopefully play a regular shift.

    Early 2nd round is high to pick an enforcer, but it sounds like this guy has a not so crazy chance to be a Laraque style enforcer (Laraque style in that he can play a little, not in the super heavyweight sense). If so, this isn’t such a terrible pick. I give him almost zero chance of being a Lucic, and only a very outside chance of even being a 3rd liner, but I think there’s a fairly decent chance he can become an 8 min a night 4th liner who hits, intimidates, and sticks up for his teammates.

    It is a bit hard to see a guy with 3rd/4th line upside taken that early, but this player type can have real value. The Dowd 4th line mentioned in the Eager thread had Laraque on it. That type of playable 4th line isn’t possible with Steve MacIntyre out there. I’m still not a big fan of this pick, but it is directed towards filling a need, and it’s a hell of a lot better than picking Abney a round later. I think the guy does have a decent chance of being an NHL player too – just not a particularly good NHL player.

  21. "Steve Smith" says:

    DSF:
    While the odds of a second round pick becoming an NHL player are generally about 25 percent, the first 5 picks in the second round are above 50 percent IF the right player is selected.

    That is possibly the clearest example of ex post-facto reasoning that I have ever seen.

    I put to you that the chances of an early second round pick working out are actually 100 percent, IF the right player is selected.

  22. Lowetide says:

    This new math will be the death of me.

  23. Rondo says:

    “Steve Smith”,

    The similarities are different

  24. spoiler says:

    We do have too many Forwards. It will be interesting to see if something breaks loose from Philly if NSH doesn’t match. Timonen seems like the obvious player to be moved. Big salary but there’s no term remaining. I was big on him earlier this summer, but having him for one year doesn’t solve a whole helluva lot. Although he should bring a decent pick at the deadline.

  25. bookje says:

    Rondo:

    I don’t buy the idea that NJ made a mistake in not forfeiting their pick. They had a trade in mind.

    Two hours after the deadline had passed, Lou said the deadline was still a week away and that they had not made a decision yet. He persisted in arguing that the deadline had not passed when pressed on the issue. The decision to not give up the pick this year was really really bad. I think that the most likely case is that they made a mistake. Even if they were thinking of a trade, their first round pick next year would hold more value than thief pick this year did.

  26. mumbai max says:

    DSF:
    While the odds of a second round pick becoming an NHL player are generally about 25 percent, the first 5 picks in the second round are above 50 percent IF the right player is selected.

    This is a funny statement. I would say the chances are around 100% IF the right player is selected!

  27. bookje says:

    Rondo:
    “Steve Smith”,

    The similarities are different

    The Duck is in the Oil, I repeat, the duck is in the Oil.

  28. Ducey says:

    No matter what happens, he can’t be worse than Abney. I know it’s a round earlier, but that’s a better comp in terms of player type. I’ve never seen Moroz play, but the scouting reports say he can skate, likes to hit, and it’s clear he’s willing to fight. The reports, and numbers, also suggest that he doesn’t have a heck of a lot of skill. I think this was drafting a potential enforcer who can hopefully play a regular shift.

    Having wathced both Moroz and Abney a dozen times, there is no comparison.

    Abney has good wheels for a heavyweight, but has little in terms of skill with the puck. He doesn’t have much ability to run over guys either. He is a fighter.

    Moroz is a hockey player who can fight. He can play physical, and can play a regular shift. I didn’t really see much difference between Samuelson and Moroz in terms of skill. Samuelson has more advanced scoring skills and was on the first line with some skill.

    I think Ewanuk and Moroz will surprise some naysayers next year.

  29. Bar_Qu says:

    Ducey,

    Thanks for that. The angst over this puck is a little intense considering forward is a well-stocked position, currently & moving forward, and that it only occurred 3 weeks ago. The doldrums of summer can bring on cabin fever, but imo the general rush to judgement on the pick just feels like piling on.

    Let’s give the kid another year in the WHL, lobby like mad for TOI stats from the CHL, and then maybe we have a fuller picture of where he ends up. And if it ain’t on the Oilers, big whoop. He would likely have to fight Pitlick or Hamilton for that spot down the road anyways, and I would rather either one of those guys make it ahead of him.

  30. VOR says:

    Paper Designer, as it happens the Zetterberg, Datysuk late round steal phenomena is alive and well.

    In 2009 Nahville took Craig Smith in the fourth round. He is 10th in his draft class in points and 14th in games played. He tracks to being a solid 2C, who wins faceoffs and kills penalties but has offensive upside. In 2011 Chicago wasted their fifth round pick on Andrew Shaw. How about Jared Spurgeon? Speaking of Spurgeon, since the 2008 draft 86 players taken that day have made it to the NHL. 41 were taken in the 3rd round or later. As well as Spurgeon that includes Braden Holtby. The kid taken at 186 in a great draft year has the 13th most NHL games and is clearly an NHL impact player, Jason Demers.

    The reason I am focusing on 2008 isn’t cherry picking, just that in the first year post draft a typical draft class will have around 5% of the drafted players play in the NHL, in the second year that will be 16%, by the third year 30% of the draft class will have played in the NHL. Year 4 it rises to 40%. After that there may be slight additions but most of the players will have arrived in the NHL who are going to and we can begin to get some idea of the true rate of sleepers.

    In 2007 we have Jamie Benn taken in round five. He has the fifth most points of anybody in his draft class. Datysukesque.

    What does that have to do with Moroz, nothing directly. However, big, fast, fighters who can score don’t need to be superstars in junior to be very useful in the NHL. In 1994 Vancouver used the 42nd pick to take a kid who had 9 goals and 11 assists for 20 points with the Portland Winterhawks, the scouting report said he was big, strong, fast, trending, could fight, and made his teammates braver. Dave Scatchard played over 600 games in the NHL and had a very useful career. With pick # 51 New Jersey tried to do the same thing, they took a flyer on a big, strong, fast kid with hands of stone, 9 points in 27 games, who could fight and make his teammates better and braver. The scouting report said he had a high compete level and leadership skills. Now of course we all know being good in the room is way overvalued, and the kid never did fight much, but OMG did he have some compete in him.

    I’d argue Moroz’s future lies right between those guys. Dave Scatchard who hadn’t shown much as a junior but was a plug and play NHL third liner and the certain Hall of Fame inductee Patrick Elias. Neither guy had ever shown anything when they were drafted. Being between those two guys would suggest a career for Moroz like another second round pick, the Cloquet Lumberjack. Now here is a kid who had never played a game of junior or against men when he was drafted. We are talking about a high school player who flashed some offence but nobody wanted him for his offence, they were impressed by his size, speed, and toughness. Jamie Langenbrunner has built quite a career out of those three things.

    All of which is my way of answering all those Oilers fans who keep saying what were we thinking when we took Moroz? They were thinking his upside is Patrick Elias, his downside is Dave Scatchard, and a likely comparable is Jamie Langenbrunner. Let us all prayer they were right. The thing is sometimes you have to take a stab in the dark and project. Most of the time you are going to roll craps, but if once in a dozen years the dice come up Elias you’ve earned all your money back and then some. The number of high scoring juniors who have never played a game in the NHL is very high and growing with each draft. Yet these guys and many, many more, who never showed much before their draft have had good to great NHL careers. At this point Moroz’s counting numbers matter not a bit. He is a projection pick and only time will tell if the projection was right.

    Hell, I’d be happy if he was Georges Laracque!

  31. rickithebear says:

    “Steve Smith”: IF the right player is selected.

    Lets look ! Whos better choice to choice!
    2008:
    Eberle #22 a huge yes
    Motin #103 11 d selected after. T.j. brodie is better.
    Cornet #133 17 Fwd selected Olver & Martin better.
    Hartikainen #163 13 Fwd Hartikainen the best.
    Benefe #193 none.

    2009:
    MPS #10 18 Fwd Maybe O’rielly, Johansson.
    Lander # 40 17 FWd Maybe jeremy Morin
    Hesketh # 71 8 D David Savard
    Abney # 82 8 Fwd Eakin, Cizikas, C. Smith.
    Bigos #99 13D none
    Rajalas #101 16Fwd Foligno, Maybe horak, vicour, G. bourque
    Roy #133 lehner #46 better progresion. Kuemper #161 equal

    2010:
    Hall#1 seguin?
    Pitlick #31 11 Fwd D. Smith-Pelley
    Marincin #46 13D none better.
    Hamilton #48 7Fwd Zucker, jarnkrok, J. larsson better.
    Martindale #61 None better.
    Blain #91 22 d to Davidson they choose him over blain
    Bunz #121 F. Andersson #187, Sam Brittian #92, Simpson #58,

    2011:
    RNH #1 Couturier best def Fwd in NHL last year.
    Klefbom #19 WJC all star
    musil #31 8D Sproul maybe
    Perhonen #62
    Ewanyk #74 10 Fwd worst choice.
    Simpson #92 8D Noonan
    Rieder #114 wow
    Gernat # 24D none better

    Alot of correct choices versus the %.

  32. PaperDesigner says:

    ashley:
    PaperDesigner,

    Well, Moroz was a second round pick.Our natural positivity bias tells us there have been useful NHL’ers picked in the second round and we immediately think about a handful of current NHL players with that resume.Naturally, we expect our team to get one of those players in the second round.

    The reality is that most of the guys picked in this range don’t make it, if you define making it as someone who plays regular NHL games.There might be anywhere from 5-8 guys picked in the second round that have NHL careers, but only 2 or 3 end up as quality non-4th line/PB players.

    So over a 10 year period of time, we might expect one of our second round picks to show us some offense as a quality NHL’er.This is the homerun second round pick.The Jarrett Stoll.We might expect another one or two that grind out a career on the fourth line/7th defenseman.A Theo Peckham type.

    It’s a crapshoot at this point in the draft, and no team consistently finds the 2 or 3 second round gems lurking on the draft list.

    I don’t mind a bit of gambling at that point.Maybe it works out for us.You’re exactly right though, Moroz is a longshot to become a regular NHL player.That is neither in indictment of his style/effort nor the Oilers drafting ability, rather the simple reality of picking after the best 15 or so in any given year have already been claimed.

    I looked at the number of pLyers who, from 2000-2006 drafted, and counted skaters with at least 150 games a hit and goalies with at least a hundred a hit. I found the second round yielded about a one in three chance of a player of some sort. You are underselling the odds.

    But here’s the thing… Lesser players are FREQUENTLY failed first round picks. Take a gander at Ben Eager or Brule. You can draft top talent and still end up with fringe talent. Why? They don’t develop as much as you hoped. But what seems more likely, a player amongst the best of his age who peaks as a fringe player, or a fringe talent that develops faster than his peers and ends up as at least NHL quality? The longer the road, the fewer the travellers. One of those roads is a lot longer.

    When compared to the later rounds, I found that rounds four through seven had negligible differences decreasing very slightly, but came out to about one in seven.

    Basically, I am critical because to my eye, they took a chance that is less than half as good as going with one of the consensus first round picks that slipped. It’s like someone rolling two dice, and you betting that it comes up a four. If they pay five to one regardless of what you bet on, the only way to win is to consistently bet on seven every single time. BPA. Yes, there will be worse players at the age who turn out much better over the course of time, but if you consistently make a smart, safe bet you’ll win over the long term over the guy who keeps betting on eleven because he hasn’t seen it in a while, and feels that it is due.

    The maddening thing is that between 2008-2011, that seemed to be what they were doing. I mean, even with Gernat slipping so far down the draft despite supposed being in their top 35… That seems to suggest that they were insisting on picking in the range. I don’t know if this is all on Tambellini, though I think little enough of his competence that I am tempted to blame him, because if your GM says “we need size”, you gotta do everything in your power to insist on picking the smartest bet you have, and tell him if he wants a big skilled winger, well, maybe he should do the job of general manager and actual manage the assets.

    I mean, come on. Filling specific need? That is essentially a GMs job description.

  33. "Steve Smith" says:

    rickithebear: Couturier best def Fwd in NHL last year.

    This sort of thing doesn’t make you even suspect that your metrics might be slightly on the completely fucking insane side?

  34. "Steve Smith" says:

    I mean, we sometimes give you a hard time about your, uh, idiosyncratic approach to written English, but this is the real problem with your posts: you choose these weird, weird measures, and then cite them as if they prove something. If you’re going to hold Couturier up as the NHL’s best defensive forward on the basis of his GA/60 (39th in the league among forwards who played at least thirty games), it seems to me that the onus should be on you to make the case that that determination should be reached independently of his ONSV% (over which it’s been shown statistically that players have negligible impact) and the quality of his teammates.

  35. VOR says:

    Paper Designer,

    I don’t think you are getting my point. Teams make proejction picks all the time. It is very common in the second round. I actually said nothing about the chances of a player from the second round making the NHL. I just said in 2008 41 players of the 86 who have so far played in the NHL were taken 3rd round or later. I also pointed out late round picks continue to build great careers and probably always will.

    So let me be clear, Moroz is clearly tree of Dave Scatchard, a crazy ass pick viewed statistically. But it might pay off occasionally. If once in twelve years of such bizarre second round picks you hit a Patrick Elias it would be a good approach. I don’t think you have a 1/12 chance of picking Elias. I was simply explaining what teams like the Oilers are thinking when they take such fliers. So it really says that the Oilers still practice seen him good scouting and have faith in their scouts.

    We won’t know if Moroz is really a second rounder for quite some time. You can’t predict the performance of individuals using statistics. People are not populations.

  36. "Steve Smith" says:

    If we choose, for example, SA/60 as the measure of a defensive forward (which eliminates the noise of ONSV%, though doesn’t address quality of teammate/competition at all), then Couturier was the 76th best defensive forward to play at least thirty games last year.

    Toby Petersen was the best.

  37. stevezie says:

    “Steve Smith”,

    I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Toby Petersen wasn’t a very good powerplay quarterback so you can just add SA/60 to the growing scrapheap of useless stats.

  38. stevezie says:

    ashley:
    DSF,

    Drafting is hard

    Testify!!! Only delusional egomaniacs think they can reliably project how a seventeen year old kid is going to turn out as an adult professional athlete. If you don’t believe me, name me someone who can*.

    I’m not saying the scouts have no idea at all. A team that replaced their headscout with me would suffer. A team that replaced their headscout with a concensus list? I think they’d be fine.

    Scouting is hard. Each pick is a lottery ticket with a percentage attached to it. Admittedly as scouting has improved high picks have become more valuable and later picks less so, though I’ll bet most of that has to do with more money being involved meaning more games are seen by more people leading to stronger concensus opinions rather than any evolution in the science of scouting.

    I think there is something to be said for overall draft strategies (Coke machines vs. Character vs. Hockey Sense, or whatever), but specific picks? Let me just say this: If Detroit knew Datsyuk was going to be Datsyuk they would have never drafted Tomek Valtonen in round 2.

    *In this case I define “reliably” as someone whose off-the-board picks succeed more often than the guy chosen immediately after. I chose this definition, among other reasons, because it is difficult to research, qualify, or quantify and therefore I am less likely to have someone spend five seconds on google and completely embarass me.

  39. stevezie says:

    “Steve Smith”: That is possibly the clearest example of ex post-facto reasoning that I have ever seen.

    I put to you that the chances of an early second round pick working out are actually 100 percent, IF the right player is selected.

    But surely you concede that the wrong player in the 1st roundis worth more than the wrong player in the 6th?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lcM3yNlhFQ

    Q.E.D mellonfarmers.

  40. "Steve Smith" says:

    stevezie: But surely you concede that the wrong player in the 1st roundis worth more than the wrong player in the 6th?

    Just the opposite: the wrong player in the sixth round seldom signs an ELC, while the wrong player in the first will often take up a roster spot and contract for years after the selection.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lcM3yNlhFQ

    The finest screen actor of his generation or any other. R.I.P.

  41. stevezie says:

    “Steve Smith”,

    You’re absolutely right.

    So, building on what’s been said so far:
    If the odds of a 2nd round pick working out are 50% presuming you draft the right player, what are the odds of success if I draft the wrong player in the 1st round? Higher or lower than the right player in the sixth? When, strategically, is the right time to draft the wrong player? Let’s say I am the wrong player, what can I do to improve my chances of making it anyway? if I’m a GM, and my scout really wants me to draft the wrong player in the third, am I better off trading that pick for two fourths, even if there are no right players available? If I know the right player will be left in the seventh, how many wrong players should I take before him? Let’s say I have found a new metric that shows that a certain player is the rightest player in the NHL, how many 1st rounders would he be worth if I was planning on taking the wrong player anyway?

  42. DeadmanWaking says:

    PaperDesigner: I’d rather draft a rail thin 6’0″ player who plays a smart game with a lot of puck skills because he isn’t going to need to split his attention in development that much.

    Do you remember the old TV series Eight Is Enough? My siblings and I were allowed to watch this in our teenage years despite the occasional nod to subject matter because virtue always carried the day. In the first episode there’s an implied conversation between Mr and Mrs Bradford: “I don’t even know why we buy these things. What colour do they turn when the rabbit lives?” That was pretty much the end of sarcasm for the rest of the series.

    I recall an episode where a house party breaks out when old man rabbit-slayer is away for the weekend. (The actress who played his wife got sick, and her character was written out. Eventually all the children find out). Some varsity stud/college hunk shows up and puts the full-court panty-remover press on Elizabeth, whose reluctance, we sense, was never that deep. At a crucial juncture her younger brother, Tommy, a skinny kid sporting a luxurious afro-mullet girl-magnet, confronts from a lower railing the belt-notching Pied Piper of liquid invert sugar at the top of the stairs, and suggests taking the matter outside. (Tommy tended to channel Danny Partridge whenever the writers were having a slow day.) The poised-for-action belt-notcher at the the top of the stairs–with more hair than a young William Devane–goes “you’re bluffing” then glances dismissively at a drunken Elizabeth sliding down the nearest wall before concluding “she’s not worth it”. Crisis averted. Sour grapes after all. Camera cut to Tommy, with his hand tucked behind his back, wrapped around a baluster-knob the size of a baby head, who tosses it aside with an ever-so-late-seventies man-with-a-plan shrug “Who’s bluffing?”

    I didn’t learn much about women or brawling, but I learned a lot about negotiating right of way that proved helpful in my first years as a driver: whenever possible assess hair first, layers of paint second. Tinted windows weren’t so common back then. These days all the pussies have tint. The game is a bit different now: spot the SUV idling with a 200 HP output. No need to rub shoulders, just slip into the jetstream behind the chirp. 8 MPG looks good on you, pal. I’ve seen it before, the craigslist chirp that foretells a wallet about to have kittens, before the wheels go up for adoption. Sour grapes after all.

    Do you really suggest we go back to the same old rabbit one more time after our octomuppet shag fest? Why do we even hire the scouting team? What colour does the strip turn when BPA isn’t an automatic trip to the Lilliputian delivery ward?

  43. Woodguy says:

    DeadmanWaking,

    Do you really suggest we go back to the same old rabbit one more time after our octomuppet shag fest?

    I had that exact line written out in a post, albeit with a different root reference.

    Now I have to delete it.

    Damn you.

  44. regwald says:

    There you go … the official announcement of the Nail contract.

    http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=638418&navid=DL|EDM|home

  45. rickithebear says:

    “Steve Smith”: This sort of thing doesn’t make you even suspect that your metrics might be slightly on the completely fucking insane side?

    So a person identifies that zone start is the most influential effect offensively for a player. Zone effect and D teamates affexcs Ga.

    then that person takes 5 years of player data. basically 2600 results and extablishes averages for those situations.

    Then states that a rookie has so crushed the averages relative to others in there varying situation. to top it off it is one of the 50 most difficult in those 5 years. 10 a year.

    Two of the selke finalist were in the group of ten. But Courturier was miles ahead.

    if establishing expected performance in a given role is a terrible metric.

    Then baseball’s average’s for a situatuion is on the “fucking insane side”

    Nuts is using the current shot clock as a measure of a player.
    The shot clock is small. The goal display on the clock is large.
    Kind of tells you what is important.

    After spending $240/ ticket I did not go home saying yeah we out shot the other team.

    You win by getting more goals than you give up. The idea is to use your players to maximize that.

    Couturier was asked to be pauhlsson in his rookie year.
    He was Pauhlsson at his best, Plus he produced EVP like RNH, Landeskog, E. Staal, B. Richards, Ovechkin.

    Not even close. Shots! LOL

  46. Ribs says:

    Octomuppet shag fest. Hah, wow.

    I thought the Devils not giving up their pick was especially odd after hearing that the draft will be held in New Jersey next season.

  47. VOR says:

    I know we have all moved on to the exciting Nail news. However, I wanted to taked a moment to debunk the myth that scouting is getting better and you can’t found late round sleepers any more.

    I took the years 1990, 91, 92 and compared them to 2000, 2001, 2002. In the earlier set there were 34 sleepers, guys who had careers at least twice as long as average or scored twice as many points. In the modern series there were 40. There are years in the modern series where any redraft would look very different from the actual draft. How high do we think Lubo would go in a redraft, probably 1 or 2 depending where you slotted Hartnell. He was drafted 118.

    Then you have 2003 which I think is the year that leads people to say look how good scouting has gotten. 2004, after Ovechkin and Malkin the next guy picked should have been the guy Detroit took at the end of the 4th round, Franzen. In fact, there are 23 players taken in the third round or later who are tracking to be well in the top 60 players from their draft. It is an epic fail for the scouts.

  48. nathan says:

    A little perspective. McKenzie had this guy in the 2nd round. First WHL year and rising in the draft. By all account he was going to go middle of the 2nd round. The team that broke him in slowly and pretty much knows what he ate for breakfast yesterday( when everyone would love to at least have TOI) went half a round early… with a pick that on average is what a 1 in 3 chance. Not enough data to project from yet from the outside.

  49. "Steve Smith" says:

    rickithebear: You win by getting more goals than you give up. The idea is to use your players to maximize that.

    Cum hoc ergo propter hoc, bitches.

  50. VOR says:

    Steve, actually more Greek than Latin, don’t you think. Probably more tautology than true logical fallacy.

  51. "Steve Smith" says:

    VOR,

    There’s tautology there, but my point was just that he’s correctly stating that minimizing goals against is the goal, but then incorrectly attributing 100% of the goals against to the players on the ice.

  52. shawnmullin says:

    Sutter was a top 6 C for Saskatoon and played big minutes. Moroz wouldn’t have played nearly as much or in as many key situations. It will be interesting to see how he does if he gets a bigger role this year.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca