MBS VS. KP: ROUND ONE

In his fascinating book THE ROAD TO HOCKEYTOWN, Jimmy Devellano talks about the goal of a scouting director and his staff:

  • ‘We’re trying to determine if the player can get to the next level, that’s the real job. Most people can sit and watch a game and tell you who the best player on the ice is, but the good scout will be able to judge whether or not  a player can go a step or two higher. We in the hockey business call it projecting. “

The current Oilers are counting heavily on Stu MacGregor and his staff to be very good at projecting into the future. It is a vital component to success: anyone who watched the Oilers fall so quickly from the top circa 1990 through 1993 can tell you that drafting well is job one for a successful NHL team.

This doesn’t mean every pick is going to be a winner, and it also doesn’t mean that every pick is going to end up as the scouts projected him. However, a good scouting department should be able to deliver quality with their 1st rd picks and be on point in rounds 2 and 3. After that, all drafting teams face the vagaries of the crap shoot and Edmonton isn’t impervious to that reality.

The problem for an organization is that by the time a scouting director and his department have a drafting record you can evaluate, many seasons will have passed and many opportunities missed.  We are just now getting into the period where we can evaluable Stu MacGregor and I think this is a good time to compare his early draft record with that of his predecessor Kevin Prendergast.

Both had enormous success in their first selections, and both have had selections which darted off the rails early. Such is the business of the scouting life.

I am looking for three main things in this look at the scouts:

  • Success in the first 100 selections of each draft (1st, 2nd, 3rd round)
  • Success in what Devellano calls “projecting”
  • Success in addressing team needs beyond the first round.

 

KEVIN PRENDERGAST 2001

  • Success in the first 100 selections of each draft (1st round): In his first draft as scouting director, Prendergast and staff knocked it out of the park with Ales Hemsky at #13 overall in 2001. It is important to note that Hemsky was not among the top 10 forwards ranked by Redline going into the draft and Central scouting ranked him 9th among NA skaters. I think it is reasonable to suggest that KP and his staff correctly identified Hemsky as the BPA despite other more touted players being available.
  • Success in the first 100 selections of each draft (2nd round):In the second round, the Oilers selected Doug Lynch at #43 and he was on course for an NHL career until derailed by a hand injury. Lynch was an AHL All-Star at age 20, and I think you could reasonably argue that this would have been a solid selection without the injury. Finding fault with the selection seems contrary. Central scouting had Lynch ranked #23 NA skater that season. The first misstep then for the 2001 draft came at selection #52 when the club announced Eddie Caron from Phillips Exter HS. However, he had been ranked as #29 NA skater by CS, but he stalled out and became something of a nightmare with college transfers and the like. I don’t know if the Oilers gave up on him or vice versa at the end, but it really didn’t matter.
  • Success in the first 100 selections of each draft (3rd round): Kenny Smith was a 6.02, 210 D from Harvard and ranked #74NA by CS in 2001. He did not develop as a pro and was a draft flop.
  • Success in what Devellano calls “projecting”: The Oilers exercised an option to flip picks with Boston in 2001 (a remnant of the Bill Guerin-Anson Carter trade) in order to secure Hemsky. They  could be credited with selecting wisely and projecting Hemsky into something resembling the player he became. Hemsky had a “Hossa” buzz around him on his draft day, so he was a player of interest by the time the first dozen names had been called that day. The Lynch selection was also a solid projection, the big defender was on track as a prospect before injury. I’ll also give the organization credit for projecting Jussi Markkanen as a ‘plug and play’ goaltender in round 5.
  • Success in addressing team needs beyond the first round. A positive grade here too, not only for Markkanen but also later round overage selections Ales Pisa and Kari Haakana. Although they were short term, stop gap additions, both players contributed to the organization in NHL GP.

The first KP draft included a big fly (Ales Hemsky) as well as another useful player in Jussi Markkanen. Doug Lynch was also a plus despite his career altering injury. On the other side of the ledger, the club wasted several selections, notably #52 and #84 as well as three picks after #150.

OVERALL GRADE: B

 

STU MACGREGOR 2008

  • Success in the first 100 selections of each draft (1st round): MacGregor plucked Jordan Eberle at #22 and as with Hemsky rates a big fly. Over the last year or so there is a storyline emerging that suggests Eberle was an obvious choice by the Oilers. In fact, Eberle was not an obvious choice at #22 if you believe Bob McKenzie (he had him #29) and Mike Remmerde established the concerns about him.
  • Success in the first 100 selections of each draft (2nd, 3rd round): Oilers didn’t have selections in this round. Although the scouting department apparently pushed for trades during these rounds, the price was too high and the Oilers sat for a long stretch.
  • Success in what Devellano calls “projecting”: Credit where due here the Oilers were on target with their assessment of Eberle. Motin was a “low ceiling” player, I don’t know that there was much to project and Cornet looked like a tweener then and now. I’ll give credit for the drafting of Hartikainen in this category, he had a rep for poor footspeed but has progressed beyond the scouting report and his draft number.
  • Success in addressing team needs beyond the first round. A tough question in a draft that featured 5 picks overall and 4 after #100, but I’d give some credit for Hartikainen here.

MacGregor’s draft was made with the Eberle selection. Unlike KP, he didn’t have a chance to build on it in the second and third rounds, and for that I’ve ranked the 2008 entry draft slightly above 2001. Should Harikainen emerge as a legit NHL player, the grade still has room to improve. We can assume the other selections are not strong contributors to the draft grade until further notice.

OVERALL GRADE: B+

 

written by

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

40 Responses to "MBS VS. KP: ROUND ONE"

  1. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    Interesting to note that 4 of the 5 players drafted in 2008 – Eberle, Motin, Cornet and Hartikainen – have played in at least 1 NHL game. That’s pretty impressive, although obviously Eberle is the only one who has been an impact player. Hartikainen has a chance, a strong chance, to play 10 years + in the NHL, in what capacity remains to be seen. I can see Cornet getting more games, though he’s not likely to stick – that opinion may change though if he improves his consistency down in OKC.

    Bendfeld was never going to be an NHLer, but then very few 7th rounders can realistically be projected to be.

    I think people often forget how many variables there are AFTER a player is drafted. All sorts of things can happen to a player that can result in him either advancing well, or completely flaming out. Prendergast made some very suspect decisions in many drafts, while most of Stu’s picks at least have some measure of realistic usefulness as players. I was genuinely surprised when Hesketh flamed out, he seemed like a fair project to take on – taken a bit high, but had tools. But the question is, was it that he was a bad player all along, or did something happen to not take him to the next level? Personal issues, attitude, unforeseen circumstances, and perhaps most importantly player development. If the teams a drafted player is on aren’t developing said player well enough, well then said player isn’t going to stand much of a chance.

    As an example, a friend of mine was something of a child prodigy in music, and great things were expected of him if he were to receive great mentorship, teaching and work hard. He worked hard, he had great teachers and mentors, but he never developed into the musical genius many thought he would be. He’s a damn good musician, and currently studying jazz at Trinity College In London, so he’s not a failure in the slightest, but it just goes to show that you can’t always predict the future. Things happen, sometimes even things DON’T happen but people’s “ceilings” aren’t always where you think they are.

    The Oilers can have Mike Sillinger and Billy Moores out talking to players as much as they like, they can do all the background checking and combine interviews that they like, statistical projections, scout’s experience-based projections, but at some point there is a HUGE measure of the unknown that I think we would all do well to remember when judging whether or not it was Stu’s fault if Anton Lander or Tyler Pitlick never turn into their original projections.

    The same of course goes for if those picks are successful: woohoo, well done Stu for making those picks, they’ve turned out great – but lend some credit to everyone else along the way, player included, for working to make that projection reality.

  2. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    I would also add that I am a “fan” of Stu, although I think his mantle of MBS is somewhat misunderstood, is that right LT? Do you not call him that because of the Eberle selection, not because of his overall draft record?

    For the record aswell, in defence of the Magnus Paajarvi selection which I know people who are anti-Stu will jump to point out (I know DSF will jump at the chance to disagree with this): at the time of the 2009 NHL draft, the Oilers were in turmoil, underperforming in many parts of the organisation having missed the playoffs for the 3rd straight year. Hemsky, Souray, Gilbert, Grebeshkov, Visnovsky (despite the injuries) all had good seasons, even Horcoff was solid. But basically, I think most at the time believed the Oilers had a pretty solid blue line (at least offensively). Up front was where the Oilers lacked. Gagner, Cogliano, Nilsson all underperformed from the previous season when they were considered the wonder kids, Penner was below average in boxcars (still good underlying stats though), Erik Cole was a misused disaster, and none of the Oilers’ other forwards showed much (except perhaps for Brodziak’s solid play).

    Basically the Oilers needed another skilled forward to add up front. Top forwards in the system at the time was perennial-youtube-star Rob Schremp, well-liked-but-never-put-it-together Slava Trukhno, didn’t-want-to-develop-in-the-AHL Riley Nash, and Finnish-bull-on-skates-longshot Teemu Hartikainen. And of course Jordan Eberle. By this time, Eberle had starred for Team Canada at the WJC’s, but in Regina he had a solid-but-unspectacular season, and was still far from a sure-thing at the NHL level.

    At the 2009 draft, the Oilers were picking 10th. I was really hoping they could move up to 4th to take the highly-rated Swedish giant who skated like a bullet, despite the questions about his finish. The Oilers, in my mind and from what I remember a lot of other people’s minds, needed more dominant skill up front, and Magnus certainly looked to be that. Of course there questions, there are questions about every single draftee.

    Of the players taken shortly after Paajarvi:
    Ellis – highly skilled but small d-man dominating in junior, many questions, Oilers d-corps skilled offensively at the time, has still only played 32 NHL games to date but performed OK, lots of upside;
    De Haan – a bit of a reach pick by NYI, great junior d-man, average first pro season, 1 NHL game, still projects quite well but not as good as previously;
    Kassian – massive physical player with questions about his ceiling as an offensive player, performed well in the AHL and was average in his first 44 NHL games, still looking pretty good;
    Kulikov – the “other” guy in many peoples minds (as in it’s either MPS or Kulikov) but as with all junior defenseman there were questions about whether his game would translate to the Pro’s, has been great for the Panther’s since they drafted him and is pretty much a homerun for a mid-1st rounder;
    Holland – quality junior player, showed well in first AHL season and scored a goal in his first 4 NHL games, still looking good but pretty unknown as an NHL player so far.

    Paajarvi was a big, fast, mature player putting up solid numbers in a Pro league – the only player from picks 10-15 that had played pro to that point – and so projected to be able to slot into the NHL quicker than any of the others available. Of course Kulikov took that honour and looks to be a great defenseman for years to come, great for the Panthers, but given the Oiler’s d-corps and lack of good forwards both on the team and in the system (remember, this was pre-Hall, pre-RNH, pre-Yakupov and the questions still remaining over Gagner, Nilsson, Cogliano, Eberle) at that time Paajarvi was a perfect pick for the Oilers, and I will continue to believe that. Kulikov would look great now, I don’t doubt, but I think Paajarvi matches up to any of the other guys stated above, if not beats them outright at this moment in time. We still don’t know how the rest of his career pans out, and even if he’s “just” a quality third-liner who you can trust to move the play in the right direction (which he’s already doing) then there is nothing wrong with that.

    Let us not forget, there were questions about RNH and Eberle and how their offense would translate to the NHL too and we still picked them and they look very good. Stu made the right selection for the team at the time, and the rest is on player development and Paajarvi to try and be the best he can be.

    Sorry for the long post, y’all.

  3. Lowetide says:

    Chris: What a great comment, thanks for it. When I was reading it, my thoughts turned to my kids and various struggles they’ve had during school years. You have to credit the parents (my wife, in this case), the teachers (tremendous bunch) but the bottom line is that you have your own hide to pack to market. And that’s a very big thing in the development of one person.

    Are you being reached? Do you care? Are you progressing? Are you what you appear to be? It’s that old Bill James quote about Mike Ivie/Pete Rose all over again.

  4. sliderule says:

    In 2008 McKenzie had John Carlson at number22 so you wouldn’t have done to bad with the consensus.

    However the difference between Kevin and Stu is in the first round Stu has gone with the consensus.From what Kevin was saying prior to this years draft he would have gone with Murray.

  5. Lowetide says:

    Sliderule: That’s exactly it. Risk averse in scouting is a good thing–especially early.

  6. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    Lowetide,

    Thanks LT. It’s exactly that with kids, whether it’s in academic work, sports, the arts, music, whatever it is – very few people can make it completely on their own, if any. Even those that are “naturally talented” still need to go out there and work to actually show it. And that’s certainly not to say that anyone who doesn’t “make it big” is a failure. It’s why I hate it, HATE it when so-and-so states, “Such-and-such is a crappy hockey player, he shouldn’t be in the NHL”… No, he isn’t a crappy hockey player, he just maybe isn’t an NHL-level hockey player, or at least is being asked to do too much. There are plenty of fantastic hockey players all over the world who aren’t NHL calibre. That guy on your rec league team who you say is a really good player? Exactly.

    As much as I enjoy the work being done on stats – and I absolutely love it, despite never being what you’d call a stats guy in the slightest back in school – there is always a human element, and that includes the unpredictable nature of being a human. People can do unpredictable things, act in ways you didn’t think they would, perform in ways you didn’t expect (whether it’s over- or under-), perform in ways THEY didn’t expect themselves. S**t happens, basically, and no matter how well you think you know a person they can always surprise you, intentionally or otherwise, positively or otherwise.

    Did anyone think Joe Juneau would be a 1.2 points per game player in his first 2-and-a-bit seasons? Did anyone think after that that he’d be a 0.56 points per game player the next 667 games of his career? Just when you think you know a guy.

  7. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    On a less “heavy” note, did anyone else see Sammy Påhlsson had signed a 3-year deal with MODO in the SEL this season?! I did not know that.

    Would have been nice to pick him up for a year or 2, although I don’t know how his underlying numbers looked this season. I’m guessing this was more a decision from him though as opposed to lack in interest from NHL clubs.

  8. Ducey says:

    LT,

    What grade would you give the Oilers 2003 draft? :)

  9. DEFENDING THE NHL’S AMATEUR SCOUTS | Ice Nation UK says:

    [...] via Wikimedia Commons Over at the fantastic Lowetide blog, LT has an article up comparing two distinct eras in the draft history of the Edmonton Oilers.  The first, from 2001 to 2007 with then-Oilers Head [...]

  10. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    LT: just wrote an article on my own blog about what I was just discussing with you above, thanks for the inspiration – hope you don’t mind the mention! (didn’t realise the pingback to your site would appear in the comments here, woops!)

  11. uni says:

    Just an aside, might want to change the Swedish Oil link to dohfos.tumblr.com LT.

    Also don’t type Swedish Oil into Google unless your safe search is on.

  12. Mr DeBakey says:

    What grade would you give the Oilers 2003 draft?

    That’s a tough one
    But, higher than whatever the 2004 rating might be.

  13. SK Oiler Fan says:

    Isn’t the best way to evaluate the head scout by comparing within the same draft year the kids selected by the Oilers vs. the ones selected by the rest of the league? In the big picture it’s Stu vs. the rest of the head scouts each draft year. Stu’s job is to select the best players possible out of each draft class.

    For example Eberle looks to be a great pick / projection at 22 as compared to the rest of the league’s picks in Round 1.

    Best way I can think of is do a redraft of each year and rank all players based on GP. The scout’s score ends up being a differential of where the Oilers prospects were actually picked vs where they would theoreticallly be re-drafted. You’d essentially end up with a plus minus. I know it’s not perfect: would be a painful process, and doesn’t account for injuries…

    By just concentrating on how many GP prospect A played for the Oilers you’re limiting the evaulation to within alot of mediocre to crappy Oiler teams over the past 2 decades. There’s a good chance the Oilers prospects in this time period are getting overvalued.

  14. edwards_daddy says:

    I remember sitting through the long 2008 well into the early hours of the morning hoping that Eberle would fall to us. So many teams passed on him that he couldn’t have been the obvious choice.
    As for 2004 over 2003, we plucked Dubnyk from a shitty draft and MAP from a collection of superstars.
    2004 wins every time.

  15. hunter1909 says:

    Oilers are, post lockout arguably the team with the very brightest future; the real story here is watching the various Oilers bloggers with pretensions of careers as they come to understand Opportunity Knocking.

  16. Ducey says:

    hunter1909: Oilers are, post lockout arguably the team with the very brightest future; the real story here is watching the various Oilers bloggers with pretensions of careers as they come to understand Opportunity Knocking.

    Yeah, who needs to watch NHL hockey when you can watch bloggers!

  17. Moosemess says:

    Two things I think that Prendergast did wrong (and to be fair, many scouts do it) is he overrated the production in the prospects’ draft year, while ignoring the earlier development path AND he underrated the impact of the prospects’ linemates.

    I’m thinking in particular of Sam Gagner and MA Pouliot. Both players were trending very high at the time of the draft based on a strong coming out year, and both benefited from playing on strong teams with excellent linemates. With Pouliot in particular, how could KP honestly not conclude that Crosby joining the team and MP moving to wing on his line was the sole reason his production nearly doubled over his previous two seasons with Rimouski?

    It’s particularly interesting to compare Gagner vs Eberle and ask the reasonable question why Gagner was considered worthy of such a high (i.e. blue chip) pick while Eberle was not? On the surface, both players shared similar attributes (shot, intelligence, playmaking) and similar perceived weaknesses (lack of footspeed, lack of size). Eberle actually outscores Gagner in his draft year (42 v 35) but whereas Ebs drives the bus in Regina, Gagner benefits greatly from having Patrick Kane on his line and generates far more assists and total points on a very strong London Knights team (8 point night anyone?). In short, it seems like the scouts place huge emphasis on a players’ boxcars in his draft year, while discounting the development path to get there. Or possibly the fact that Gagner came from a family with NHL pedigree also weighed in his favour with Eberle not seen as being as ‘safe a pick?’

    It’s not surprising that many see Stu as being a more safe conservative scouting director than Prendergast. Certainly KP’s many reach picks make a strong case for that. But with Gagner and Pouliot, I think it was KP who made the safe pick with the conventional wisdom of the day overrating both players. Stu, conversely takes a risk on Ebs, seeing enough skill and intangibles there to overcome the perceived weaknesses.

  18. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    hunter1909,

    I assume this is a dig at my mention of my blog. I can promise you I have no pretensions of a career on the back of my writing, and just because I am an Oilers fan starting to blog at an exciting time in Oiler history has nothing to do with it – my blog is an NHL blog, not simply an Oilers one. I write because I enjoy it and because I am from the UK – there isn’t really anyone in my social circle here in England to chat about hockey with, so blogging – and visiting blogs like this – are the only places I can do so. I’d write if no-one read my blog. Which at the moment isn’t far from the truth ;-)

  19. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    Moosemess,

    Common mistake, but Crosby didn’t start playing for Rimouski until after Pouliot was drafted. He actually had solid numbers carrying that team before no.87 arrived.

  20. Moosemess says:

    They played on the same line in the 2004-2005 season.

    “Pouliot spent his junior career with the Rimouski Océanic of the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League (QMJHL). In addition to playing for Canada’s under-18 team in 2003, he spent two seasons as the captain of the Océanic. His final junior year was spent on a line with Sidney Crosby. Although naturally a centre, Pouliot switched to left-wing to allow Crosby to play his natural position.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc-Antoine_Pouliot
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Crosby

  21. Moosemess says:

    Marc Pouliot’s route to the Edmonton Oilers helped by Sidney Crosby
    http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=290088

    Pretty revealing quote from Pouliot here…

    “Of course it helped me to play with Sidney,” said Pouliot, who has had two stints with the Oilers since November. “Everybody who plays with this guy looks better.”

  22. Ducey says:

    But MAP was drafted in June of 2003.

  23. Moosemess says:

    My bad.

  24. Mr DeBakey says:

    That Pouliot – Crosby story is just like a pizza from Dominos,
    Its just keeps coming back up.

    Anyways, here is the drafting of Pouliot:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEfMt8vB9Ak

    As for Dubnyk and the 2004 draft,
    I like Dubnyk,,
    But its 2012 and he’s going to be paying dividends real soon.

  25. hunter1909 says:

    Chris Hext—formerly EasyOil—,

    Chris – The fact you posted had nothing particularly to do with my post, and since you’re in the UK – someone there needs to start up a 4-6 team ethnic league; Russians who are allowed to field 2 teams if the thing goes all the way to Original Six. Play UK style rules(think 1974) to ensure the hilarious success of a new rival league.

    Ducey,

    Money is on the bloggers.

  26. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Mr DeBakey: As for Dubnyk and the 2004 draft,
    I like Dubnyk,,
    But its 2012 and he’s going to be paying dividends real soon.

    I’m guessing he’s going to start paying dividends for the Oilers sooner than any player they drafted in 2003. A bunch of those guys got a sniff of the NHL, but all have moved on, and only Kyle Brodziak brought any return whatsoever. That was a great draft, which only magnifies how much of a disaster it was from Edmonton’s perspective.

  27. Mr DeBakey says:

    I think Dubnyk’s value is in the lesson learned.

    No goalies in the Top 100.
    Just say NO!

  28. speeds says:

    These are pretty difficult drafts to compare, IMO.

    2001 – 10 picks, 3 in the top 100

    2008 – 5 picks, 1 in the top 100

    Lynch was not a selection error, he was (arguably?) the 3rd best prospect of the 15 picked prior to his injury – he also came from one of the top 100 picks MacGregor didn’t have.

    Is it fair to call Hemsky/Eberle a wash, more or less, for the purposes of crediting the amateur scouts?

  29. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Chris Hext—formerly EasyOil—: As much as I enjoy the work being done on stats – and I absolutely love it, despite never being what you’d call a stats guy in the slightest back in school – there is always a human element, and that includes the unpredictable nature of being a human. People can do unpredictable things, act in ways you didn’t think they would, perform in ways you didn’t expect (whether it’s over- or under-), perform in ways THEY didn’t expect themselves. S**t happens, basically, and no matter how well you think you know a person they can always surprise you, intentionally or otherwise, positively or otherwise.

    Excellent comments, EasyOil, especially this paragraph. Numbers are wonderful tools but they will never reveal the whole picture. The human element is far too complex to be quantified in the present state, let alone predicted with any great degree of confidence.

  30. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Mr DeBakey:
    I think Dubnyk’s value is in the lesson learned.

    No goalies in the Top 100.
    Just say NO!

    Yeah, MAP was a much more useful pick than DD. (Sorry, LT!)

    Dubnyk is already this > < far from covering the bet. He's been a work in progress for a long time, but at least he's MAKING progress.

  31. Cactus says:

    Mr DeBakey:
    I think Dubnyk’s value is in the lesson learned.

    No goalies in the Top 100.
    Just say NO!

    You’re jumping the gun just a bit considering this coming season will be Dubnyk’s first as a starter. If he winds up as a top 10 goalie, I’d say he’s covered the bet.

    I generally agree with the notion that teams should wait on drafting goaltenders as they develop “by sundial” in the words of a certain blogger, but I wouldn’t say that Dubnyk is the poster child to justify this.

    EDIT: Or just read Bruce’s above comment. He’s the credible one!

  32. Mr DeBakey says:

    Yeah, MAP was a much more useful pick than DD.

    i don’t think its being suggestied that MAP was a more useful pick than anyone.

    But so far, Pouliot’s usefulness has been remarkably similar to Dubnyk’s.

    With Nittimaki in 02, that makes 4 first round picks flushed in 3 years.

    This might explain why things were so bad by the end of the Oughts [at least in part]

  33. Lowetide says:

    Easy: Never worry about posting links to pertinent stuff like your blogpost. The Japanese dating stuff I have issues with, however. :-)

  34. slopitch says:

    With Nittimaki in 02, that makes 4 first round picks flushed in 3 years.

    This might explain why things were so bad by the end of the Oughts [at least in part]

    Almost justifies how they were so willing to throw firsts at Vanek and Penner.

  35. PerryK says:

    Hey LT,

    I was looking for last Saturday’s Nation Radio!

    Any idea when that may be up?

  36. Lowetide says:

    PerryK:
    Hey LT,

    I was looking for last Saturday’s Nation Radio!

    Any idea when that may be up?

    Should be soon, usually comes out Sunday or Monday.

  37. DSF says:

    Cactus: You’re jumping the gun just a bit considering this coming season will be Dubnyk’s first as a starter.If he winds up as a top 10 goalie, I’d say he’s covered the bet.

    I generally agree with the notion that teams should wait on drafting goaltenders as they develop “by sundial” in the words of a certain blogger, but I wouldn’t say that Dubnyk is the poster child to justify this.

    EDIT: Or just read Bruce’s above comment.He’s the credible one!

    In the period of time since the Oilers drafted DD, the Canucks have drafted Schneider, Lack and Cannata, all of whom have better arrows than Dubnyk.

    Hanging that draft on Dubnyk is a huge tell.

  38. Bruce McCurdy says:

    DSF,

    DSF: In the period of time since the Oilers drafted DD, the Canucks have drafted Schneider, Lack and Cannata, all of whom have better arrows than Dubnyk.

    Oh, please. Dubnyk is a starting goalie in the NHL, one who posted a .926 save percentage in the 25 games after he was made a starter.

    Schneider is still a back-up, Lack has never gotten out of the AHL, and Cannata has played one professional game. But hey, all their arrows point to Vancouver so I suppose that makes them “better” from a particular point of view.

  39. art vandelay says:

    What’s an “arrow” and how can anyone tell which direction it’s pointing?
    The stats I look at have letter designations, like “GP,” “GAA,” etc.
    Don’t they count anymore.

  40. Lowetide says:

    Hi ART!

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca