• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
DickieDunn

perspective on the #7 overall pick

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Starting at the '14 draft, going back:

Haydn Fleury 

Darnell Nurse 

Mark Schiefele 

Jeff Skinner 

Nazem Kadri 

Colin Wilson

Jakub Voracek 

Kyle Okposo 

Jack Skille

Rostislav Olesz

Ryan Suter

Joffrey Lupul

Mike Komisarek

Lars Jonsson

 

So not many real stars, not many busts either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

The point isn't cherry picking busts or superstars. The point is we should be expecting a good player but not necessarily a cornerstone type player.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

Gotcha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stars selected after the seventh pick

Lundquist (205)

Keith (54)

Seabrook (14)

Parise (17)

Getzlaf (19)

Burns (20)

Perry (28)

Bergeron (45)

Weber (49)

Pavelski (205)

Byfuglien (245)

Green (29)

Rinne (258)

Kopitar (11)

Rask (21)

Letang (62)

Quick (72)

Bishop (85)

Yandle (105)

Giroux (22)

Marchand (71)

Couture (9)

Shattenkirk (14)

Subban (43)

Simmonds (61)

Benn (129)

Karlsson (15)

Holtby (83)

Tarasenko (16)

Faulk (37)

Gaudreau (104)

Forsberg (11)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bannedforlife said:

Stars selected after the seventh pick

.....................

This. Why constrict it just to the players that were picked at number 7? We should be looking at players that have recently been "available" at number 7.

There are steals in every single draft, it's just a matter of finding that gem. There will be a franchise type player available for us to pick wherever we end up picking, I just hope we make the right decision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nurse's sister Tamika played PG for my alma mater (BGSU).  She was a lil' cutie  (in street clothes...basketball uniforms..unlike volleyball..aren't very flattering)

I would LOVE to trade up from the second to the mid teens....take a run at C's like Suzuki, Glass or a D like Foote or Hague.  

Say "no" to Makar...we have him already in Vili and Hronek

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

This. Why constrict it just to the players that were picked at number 7? We should be looking at players that have recently been "available" at number 7.

There are steals in every single draft, it's just a matter of finding that gem. There will be a franchise type player available for us to pick wherever we end up picking, I just hope we make the right decision...

I used #7 because that's where they're sitting right now.  Those players were taken later because they weren't as highly regarded.  The players I listed are the types that are generally considered to be worthy of a #7 pick.  Similar types went in the 6-9 range.  Again, some busts, some that ended up being elite level players, but mostly just guys who are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

I used #7 because that's where they're sitting right now.  Those players were taken later because they weren't as highly regarded.  The players I listed are the types that are generally considered to be worthy of a #7 pick.  Similar types went in the 6-9 range.  Again, some busts, some that ended up being elite level players, but mostly just guys who are good.

I understand why you used that criteria, I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it should be expanded beyond the picks made at #7. If we do end up picking 7th overall, we have the opportunity to pick from a dozen or so players, any of which could become anything from a complete bust to a future Hall-of-Famer... Look at the 2008 draft where Nashville took Wilson at 7. Chances are they had their eyes on many other players before they made their final decision. Maybe one of them was Karlsson (maybe not). The point is, at number 7 you're not always going to get an elite talent, but there is always elite talent available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And like I said, expand it to picks 6-10 or whatever you want, you're going to get a similar mix of players.  Go back farther than 9 or 10 though, you get higher chances of not getting a star and a lesser chance of getting one.  It doesn't change my original point at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is your original point? Just to say that we aren't guaranteed a star at #7? Because that I agree with, and the same can be said if we win a lottery pick as well. It's common sense that the later you draft in each round, the less likely you are to get a star, especially with the way scouting is today. My point is that just because we aren't guaranteed a star at #7 (or wherever we end up), it is still very possible that we could land an elite, build-your-team-around type player.

Will it be Vilardi? Glass? Tippett? Suzuki? Liljegren? Or some other lesser known? Who knows...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

This. Why constrict it just to the players that were picked at number 7? We should be looking at players that have recently been "available" at number 7.

There are steals in every single draft, it's just a matter of finding that gem. There will be a franchise type player available for us to pick wherever we end up picking, I just hope we make the right decision...

Well, not really that. 30-odd players in like 12 draft years...less than 2% of the players drafted. There really isn't a "right" decision in that regard. There are no franchise type players available, a lot of years there isn't even a franchise player at #1. There are a ton of players with franchise potential, but only a rare few will fulfill that potential. Many of those that do will be those showing few if any signs of even having that potential at draft time. 

The luxury of picking high is that you'll almost certainly have multiple options of players showing good signs of that potential, and there's a high chance that those players will at the very least become good. But there's no skill in picking stars, it's luck.

Sure, you can be hopeful. Can even be hopeful at 15 or 25 or 45. Just don't expect too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what is your original point? Just to say that we aren't guaranteed a star at #7? Because that I agree with, and the same can be said if we win a lottery pick as well. It's common sense that the later you draft in each round, the less likely you are to get a star, especially with the way scouting is today. My point is that just because we aren't guaranteed a star at #7 (or wherever we end up), it is still very possible that we could land an elite, build-your-team-around type player.
Will it be Vilardi? Glass? Tippett? Suzuki? Liljegren? Or some other lesser known? Who knows...

It was to show the type of guy we can expect.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Well, not really that. 30-odd players in like 12 draft years...less than 2% of the players drafted. There really isn't a "right" decision in that regard. There are no franchise type players available, a lot of years there isn't even a franchise player at #1. There are a ton of players with franchise potential, but only a rare few will fulfill that potential. Many of those that do will be those showing few if any signs of even having that potential at draft time. 

The luxury of picking high is that you'll almost certainly have multiple options of players showing good signs of that potential, and there's a high chance that those players will at the very least become good. But there's no skill in picking stars, it's luck.

Sure, you can be hopeful. Can even be hopeful at 15 or 25 or 45. Just don't expect too much.

Maybe I shouldn't have said "franchise type player", because I assume you took that strictly as the Yzerman, Sakic, Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, McDavid, types. What I said initially -elite, is what I'm referring to, and there absolutely are elite players available every year at or after the number 7 pick.

The bolded I completely disagree with. Sure, there is some luck involved, but there's definitely a ton of skill involved in drafting of these 17/18 year old kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Maybe I shouldn't have said "franchise type player", because I assume you took that strictly as the Yzerman, Sakic, Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, McDavid, types. What I said initially -elite, is what I'm referring to, and there absolutely are elite players available every year at or after the number 7 pick.

The bolded I completely disagree with. Sure, there is some luck involved, but there's definitely a ton of skill involved in drafting of these 17/18 year old kids.

Franchise, elite, star...whatever you want to call it. Very few players in any given year are even NHL caliber players on draft day. Drafting is an evaluation of potential, not current ability. But potential won't always be reached. What a player can become is not necessarily what they will become. There are a lot more players who have star potential than there are players who will actually be stars. There is skill in recognizing potential, but not in predicting the degree of achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this