Thread: NHL entry draft is more art than science.

Interesting look @ drafting.

Here is the authors methodology:

The methodology, you’ll be keen to know, is the same as the first study and based on baseball’s batting averages and slugging percentages.

One point, or a hit, is awarded to a team for drafting a player who makes the NHL for some duration. This could be Boris Valabik. It could be Sidney Crosby. They both count as a hit. Overall batting average is then calculated.

Slugging percentage is a tad more subjective, but more revealing.

Here players are graded on a four-point system: Four going to a superstar (Evgeni Malkin); three to an impact player (David Backes); two to an NHLer (Justin Abdelkader); and one point to a guy who makes the show without establishing himself as an NHLer (remember Jason King?).

Total points are then added up and the team’s slugging percentage is computed.

...

L.A. fared pretty well scoring;

LOS ANGELES

You don’t think of the Kings as a great drafting team but their record is solid. In 2005 they had just eight picks but grabbed Anze Kopitar and Jonathan Quick. Worth noting: The Kings had three first-rounders in 2003. They did all right, picking Dustin Brown, Brian Boyle and Jeff Tambellini, but players like Corey Perry, Shea Weber and Patrice Bergeron were available with their last two picks. The Kings could have set themselves up for the next decade in that draft.

Average: .255. Slugging: .510. Grade: B.

Full article here: NHL entry draft is more art than science

Thoughts?

You may make the case that developing players is just as important as drafting them.

Originally Posted by Birdman

You may make the case that developing players is just as important as drafting them.

As it should be. I don't know about Kopitar but Quick would have been just another King wash-out goaltender under Taylor's regime. DL brought in Ranford which was a huge step....and it has shown through not only Quick but Bernier, Zackoff etc etc. And I'm certain Chris Gibson will as well.

jom

Also of note for the Kings is that many of the young players that they drafted and did well pre 2000 were traded for aging veterans and established names.