Where Are The Point Getters?

[e_prime 1,936]

"Floated" huh? That's gonna go over well around here.

[Bill Berzeench 310]

"Floated" huh? That's gonna go over well around here.

Did not concentrate on his defensive responsibilities as much as the team needed him to, if that works better for you. I'm not calling him lazy by any means.

[kickazz 5,459]

Did not concentrate on his defensive responsibilities as much as the team needed him to, if that works better for you. I'm not calling him lazy by any means.

It's not that he didn't concentrate. It was moreso that it wasn't part of his game. Not everyone plays that way, especially compared to now. But that changed when Scotty came along.

I think what's impressive about Yzerman is that he changed his game entirely because Bownman asked/wanted him to. And he did a damn good job of it (ended up winning a Selke trophy). That speaks for the inherent skill a guy like him had. Can you imagine asking Ovie to be more defensive? Mountains would fall apart before he tried or be even good at it.

Edited February 25, 2016 by kickazz

[Bill Berzeench 310]

It's not that he didn't concentrate. It was moreso that it wasn't part of his game. Not everyone plays that way, especially compared to now. But that changed when Scotty came along.

I think what's impressive about Yzerman is that he changed his game entirely because Bownman asked/wanted him to. And he did a damn good job of it (ended up winning a Selke trophy). That speaks for the inherent skill a guy like him had. Can you imagine asking Ovie to be more defensive? Mountains would fall apart before he tried or be even good at it.

Yes, sir. Stevie Y became an awesome player when that happened. I liked the 2nd half of his career a lot more than the first half. He was really tough to match up against for the other team.

[lomekian 201]

Development is important, but you're not going to develop Corey Emmerton into Jonathan Tavares no matter how well your organization takes care of the prospects. To get a player like that you need to either draft high or get lucky and have a player exceed expectations. There's a reason most of the Cup winners the last 25 years were built around guys who were top 5 picks.

True but...

Players after the EuroTwins steals picked lower than Emmerton in the last 15 by the red wings. (and Not including Grigorenko who was a possible/probable? 1st liner before he nearly died in the crash)

Hudler, Fleischmann, Filppula, Ericsson, Howard, Quincey, Franzen, Abdelkader, Helm, Matthias, Andersson, Nyquist, Tatar, Nestrasil, Jarnkrok, Pulks, Mrazek, Oullett, Marchenko, AA ...

Ok none are equal to a top 5 overall pick, but given that there's not 1 first rounder among them, that's a decent haul.

Looking further around the league in the last decade or so almost every year a small handful of genuine first-liners fall past the first round. Ok, so the franchise players are few, but the very best D-men and goaltenders are drafted AFTER the first round as much as in it. Of course most of the very best forwards are in the first round, and at its upper echelons.

But Give the wings 3 or 4 of

Weber or Bergeron instead of trading our pick in teh top 50 away, Byfuglin or Enstrom (instead of trading away our 7th round pick) or Pavelski (instead of Stefan Blom) All in 03

Edler instead of trading our 2nd Round pick, or Rinne instead of Stolyarov in 04.

Rask, Oshie, Niskanen, Neal, Vlasic instead of Kindl, Letang or Quick instead of Abby, Hjalmarsson or Yandle instead of Ritola or Hornquist or Stralman instead of Stamler in 05.

Etc Etc ( including the Likes of Lucic, Subban, Benn, Simmonds, Holtby, Josi, O'Reilly, Barrie, Faulk, Klingberg, Palat etc who either were second round cornerstones or late round steals).

and suddenly we are a major contender without a single top 30 pick.

Of course multiple picks in the top 10 should yield better players, particularly at centre, but great scouting can make a massive difference.

As for the cup winners being built around top 5 picks, sure its true, but in each case there were 1 or 2 players that were as important as their first 5 picks who were drafted 2nd round or later. Keith, Quick, Letang spring to mind immediately out of the winners who tanked first.

[Buppy 1,720]

Yzerman was always awesome. Extra awesome in the Bowman era because he still "lit it up" pretty damn well. No one in the late 90s was scoring like players did in the late 80s. Given that and being in his 30s, Yzerman's offense would have been impressive even without the defensive play.

Though back on topic, our secondary scoring is a little above average, even with Nyquist and Tatar scoring less than last year. Our depth scoring hasn't been great, as some thought it might be, but it's not too bad. Scoring from our defense is poor and our primary scoring sucks.

Yet the thing most commonly talked about for change is the secondary scoring.

[lomekian 201]

Detroit got lucky with Datsyuk. Nobody believed he'd be close to this good, not even the scouts. He was projected as a potential second line center, iirc his biggest issues were strength and skating. He worked hard and improved both and turned out to be a star. He could have jast as easily never seen a second of ice te in North America.

The other difference between them and now is that teams are all scouting Europe a lot heavier and guys like that are being taken earlier.

This is undoubtedly true. 7th round superstars are even rarer now than they were.

But...

Schneider is the only goaltender in the top 10 stat wise in any category taken in the 1st round.

2 of this years current top 5 goal scorers (and 8 of the top 20) were 2nd round or later picks.

In points its 4 of the top 10 and 11 of the top 30.

6 of the top 10 scoring D men (and 19 of the top 30 were taken 2nd round or later).

Sure if we are looking at a decade of 5th, 6th or 7th round picks, they are not as good Datsyuk, but Shaw, Palat, Stone, Fast, Klingberg, Gallagher, Anders Lee, Hoffman, Nyquist, Brodie, Atkinson, Demers, Jamie Benn, Muzzin, Hornqvist and Stralman still fell through the cracks. And If I were to include 4th round picks, the number and quality increases a fair bit.

No-one expects another 7th round Franchise center. But that's also why we aren't trading away our 1st round picks any more.

[kickazz 5,459]

I'm wondering what the correlation is between Nyquist and Tatar's drop in scoring and not playing with Datsyuk and Zetterberg this year like each of them did last year. Could be why their numbers have dropped.

Yzerman was always awesome. Extra awesome in the Bowman era because he still "lit it up" pretty damn well. No one in the late 90s was scoring like players did in the late 80s. Given that and being in his 30s, Yzerman's offense would have been impressive even without the defensive play.

Though back on topic, our secondary scoring is a little above average, even with Nyquist and Tatar scoring less than last year. Our depth scoring hasn't been great, as some thought it might be, but it's not too bad. Scoring from our defense is poor and our primary scoring sucks.

Yet the thing most commonly talked about for change is the secondary scoring.

Define secondary scoring in your analysis.

Edited February 26, 2016 by kickazz

[Buppy 1,720]

This is undoubtedly true. 7th round superstars are even rarer now than they were.

But...

Schneider is the only goaltender in the top 10 stat wise in any category taken in the 1st round.

2 of this years current top 5 goal scorers (and 8 of the top 20) were 2nd round or later picks.

In points its 4 of the top 10 and 11 of the top 30.

6 of the top 10 scoring D men (and 19 of the top 30 were taken 2nd round or later).

Sure if we are looking at a decade of 5th, 6th or 7th round picks, they are not as good Datsyuk, but Shaw, Palat, Stone, Fast, Klingberg, Gallagher, Anders Lee, Hoffman, Nyquist, Brodie, Atkinson, Demers, Jamie Benn, Muzzin, Hornqvist and Stralman still fell through the cracks. And If I were to include 4th round picks, the number and quality increases a fair bit.

No-one expects another 7th round Franchise center. But that's also why we aren't trading away our 1st round picks any more.

I think this argument is getting a little confused. No one's saying it's not possible to find really good players with later picks. Just that isn't possible to do so consistently.

A couple years ago I went over the draft success for every team. The Wings at that time were notably better than average in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, and we were only like a 20-25% success rate at finding NHL players, let alone very good ones. Beyond the 3rd round things were mostly even. Late round success is almost entirely luck, and even late-first and mid-round picks are as much luck as anything else. (Goalies excepted, since very few are taken in the early rounds. Take one in the 3rd round and it's probably going to be a top 5 prospect for that year.)

Sure, 4 of the top 11 scorers (Thornton and Pavelski are tied) were picked after the 1st round (technically 3, Panarin wasn't drafted at all). But also 4 were picked 1st overall, and another was 2nd.

Out of 824 skaters to play so far this year, 69 were picked top 5, 120 in the top 10, 166 in the top 15, 281 for the 1st round total. That spans, with a few exceptions, about 20 years of drafts. So, close to 70% of the top 5 picks are playing, 60% top 10, a little over 50% top 15, a little under 50% overall for the first round. 424 other drafted players, out of like 3500-4000 picks. 100-odd undrafted out of whatever uncountable number of possibilities. That doesn't account for those who aren't playing yet, nor those who are already gone, but that wouldn't change the numbers significantly.

Consistently finding NHL talent, period, is practically impossible outside the top picks. You need good scouting and development just to find one per year. For truly high-end players, it is absolutely impossible.

[Buppy 1,720]

I'm wondering what the correlation is between Nyquist and Tatar's drop in scoring and not playing with Datsyuk and Zetterberg this year like each of them did last year. Could be why their numbers have dropped.

Define secondary scoring in your analysis.

By secondary I mean the "Next 3" category from the chart I posted earlier in the thread. Specifically for us, Tatar, Nyquist, and Abby.

I'm sure not playing with D and Z is a big part of it, but may also be something systemic. Almost every player on the team is down from last year. The PP is the biggest noticeable difference. Our 5v5 scoring is about the same, though you'd think it should have improved with the addition of Larkin. Maybe it's just more decline from D and Z, but it could be something with Blashill.

[Number19 159]

Each of our top 6 would have 6-8 more points if the power play was just a little less terrible.

[kliq 3,755]

I feel the steady decline of both Hank, and Dats is now becoming apparent, and it's having an effect on Tatar, Nyquist, and Abby (which begs the question regarding how 'good' will these 3 be when Hank/Dats decline, and retire).

Tatar maybe, but when Nquist had his amazing run a couple of years ago, D & Z were both out with injuries.