Stars draft picks with Gainey as GM

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

1992 34 R Jarkko Varvio - 13 58 C Jeff Bes 88 R Jere Lehtinen - 568 130 D Mike Johnson 154 L Kyle Peterson 178 L Juha Lind - 133 202 L Lars Edstrom 226 R Jeff Romfo 250 G Jeff Moen 1993 9 R Todd Harvey - 608 35 C Jamie Langenbrunner - 577 87 G Chad Lang 136 D Rick Mrozik 139 R Per Svartvadet - 247 165 R Jeremy Stasiuk 191 W Rob Lurtsema 243 G Jordan Willis 249 C Bill Lang 269 D Cory Peterson 1994 20 L Jason Botterill - 88 46 C Lee Jinman 98 L Jamie Wright - 124 124 G Marty Turco - 185 150 D Evgeny Petrochinin 228 R Marty Flichel 254 L Jimmy Roy 280 R Chris Szysky 1995 11 R Jarome Iginla - 626 37 L Patrick Cote - 105 63 D Petr Buzek - 157 69 D Sergei Gusev - 89 115 Wade Strand 141 Dominic Marleau 173 R Jeff Dewar 193 Andrei Koveshnikov 202 Sergei Luchinkin 219 C Steve Lowe 1996 5 D Richard Jackman - 136 70 L Jonathan Sim - 158 90 R Mike Hurley 112 L Ryan Christie - 7 113 D Evgeny Tsybuk 166 G Eoin McInerney 194 D Joel Kwiatkowski - 149 220 L Nick Bootland

gainey

1997 25 L Brenden Morrow - 370 52 C Roman Lyashenko - 139 77 L Steve Gainey - 13 105 L Marc Kristoffersson 132 L Teemu Elomo 160 Alexei Timkin 189 D Jeff McKercher 216 D Alexei Komarov 242 C Brett McLean - 78 1998 39 D John Erskine - 81 57 R Tyler Bouck - 73 86 C Gabriel Karlsson 153 C Pavel Patera - 32 173 C Niko Kapanen - 158 200 F Scott Perry 1999 32 F Michael Ryan 66 D Dan Jancevski 96 R Mathias Tjarnqvist - 18 126 F Jeff Bateman 156 R Gregor Baumgartner 184 R Justin Cox 186 W Brett Draney 215 D Jeff MacMillan - 4 243 D Brian Sullivan 265 R Jamie Chamberlain 272 D Mikhail Donika 2000 25 C Steve Ott - 99 60 G Dan Ellis - 1 68 C Joel Lundqvist 91 F Alexei Tereshenko 123 Vadim Khomitsky 139 F Ruslan Bernikov 162 F Artem Chernov 192 F Ladislav Vlcek 219 L Marco Tuokko 224 L Antti Miettinen - 16 2001 26 G Jason Bacashihua 70 C Yared Hagos 92 F Anthony Aquino 126 L Daniel Volrab 161 G Mike Smith 167 D Michal Blazek 192 C Jussi Jokinen 255 Marco Rosa 265 R Dale Sullivan 285 F Marek Tomica

[seventeen]

A singularly unimpressive record. Darn good thing our scouting staff was in place before Bob was brought on. I wonder just why it was so bad. Perhaps prior to the purchase of the stars by Moneybags, there just wasn't much money available. Still, it's one of the cheaper ways to ensure you have good players around.

[mic]

seventeen said:

A singularly unimpressive record. Darn good thing our scouting staff was in place before Bob was brought on. I wonder just why it was so bad. Perhaps prior to the purchase of the stars by Moneybags, there just wasn't much money available. Still, it's one of the cheaper ways to ensure you have good players around.

I agree that you can't compare Gainey's draft history with, let's say, the Senators'. But at least, the Stars got a regularely good NHLers, at least at the beginning :

1992 : Lethinen
1993 : Harvey and Langenbrunner
1994 : Turco
1995 : Iginla
1997 : Morrow

1996 and 1998 (no first round pick) were bad. 1999 was a bad year for everybody (www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl1999e.html). And after that, it's a bit early to tell - well perhaps not, but I'm not too familiar with the players drafted by the Stars then.

Yes, I'm also glad we have Timmins and Savard in the office. However, I could survive with Lethinen-Turco-Inginla out of four years.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

mic said:

I agree that you can't compare Gainey's draft history with, let's say, the Senators'. But at least, the Stars got a regularely good NHLers, at least at the beginning :

1992 : Lethinen
1993 : Harvey and Langenbrunner
1994 : Turco
1995 : Iginla
1997 : Morrow

1996 and 1998 (no first round pick) were bad. 1999 was a bad year for everybody (www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl1999e.html). And after that, it's a bit early to tell - well perhaps not, but I'm not too familiar with the players drafted by the Stars then.

Yes, I'm also glad we have Timmins and Savard in the office. However, I could survive with Lethinen-Turco-Inginla out of four years.

Based on the comments of more than one hockey man, one shouldn't seriously evaluate a draft until 5 years have passed. So right now the 1999 draft can begin to be put into a realistic perspective. It doesn't look good, for Dallas or Montréal.

The problem is that most people, and a lot of hockey clubs, don't have the patience to wait for their prospects to mature and develop properly. Too many kids are rushed into NHL action too soon. For every bona-fide wunderkind there are many more youngsters who are pushed into the big league before they are ready, and who up being cases of arrested development (KIlger comes to mind). This instant gratification knee-jerk reflex is no good - not for the young players and ultimately not for the game.

*

Looking at 1992-99 in terms of draft choices, the Habs stack up well against Dallas as far as selecting future NHLers went:

1992 : Valeri Bure, Craig Rivet
1993 : Saku Koivu, Darcy Tucker
1994 : José Théodore, Tomas Vokoun
1995 : Stéphane Robidas
1996 : Mathieu Garon, Arron Asham
1997 : Jason Ward
1998 : Mike Ribeiro, Andrei Markov, Michael Ryder
1999 : ---

[mic]

M. said:

Based on the comments of more than one hockey man, one shouldn't seriously evaluate a draft until 5 years have passed. So right now the 1999 draft can begin to be put into a realistic perspective. It doesn't look good, for Dallas or Montréal.

I completely agree with you.

The problem is that most people, and a lot of hockey clubs, don't have the patience to wait for their prospects to mature and develop properly. Too many kids are rushed into NHL action too soon. For every bona-fide wunderkind there are many more youngsters who are pushed into the big league before they are ready, and who up being cases of arrested development (KIlger comes to mind). This instant gratification knee-jerk reflex is no good - not for the young players and ultimately not for the game.

Here again I agree with you. But I think you can't just blame the organisations. The fact that young players have to go through waivers quite early (Hossa and Hainsey for the us) makes it hard to give them much more time, as it is some times too early to write them off (and so chances of them being claimed are pretty high) but it's not sure that they can get a spot on an NHL roster. I guess that this makes it tough for GMs. If you don't have spots for players who could become but aren't yet NHLers and who are too old, you can easely be tempted to trade them. I wouldn't like the Habs to lose Hainsey and/or Hossa for nothing, nor would I offer them a spot for free. What do we do if one of them don't earn it ?

[TheCaper]

M. said:

The problem is that most people, and a lot of hockey clubs, don't have the patience to wait for their prospects to mature and develop properly. Too many kids are rushed into NHL action too soon. For every bona-fide wunderkind there are many more youngsters who are pushed into the big league before they are ready, and who up being cases of arrested development (KIlger comes to mind). This instant gratification knee-jerk reflex is no good - not for the young players and ultimately not for the game.

Hogwash. Pure speculation. Any stats to back it up?

Are you saying that Simon Gagne would be a better player now if he had spent a couple of years in the AHL? Are you saying that Eric Chouinard would be a lesser player now if the Habs had invested the effort to teach him the game at the NHL level?

Are you claiming that Chad Kilger is a victim of the system? Kilger has been cashing NHL paychecks for 9 years. He’ll likely end up with an NHLPA pension. One could speculate that Kilger would be a better player now if he had been slow cooked in the AHL, but one could just as easily speculate that he’d be playing in Europe, or senior hockey in Newfoundland.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

TheCaper said:

Are you saying that Simon Gagne would be a better player now if he had spent a couple of years in the AHL? Are you saying that Eric Chouinard would be a lesser player now if the Habs had invested the effort to teach him the game at the NHL level?

Quite possibly so.

Are you claiming that Chad Kilger is a victim of the system? Kilger has been cashing NHL paychecks for 9 years. He’ll likely end up with an NHLPA pension. One could speculate that Kilger would be a better player now if he had been slow cooked in the AHL, but one could just as easily speculate that he’d be playing in Europe, or senior hockey in Newfoundland.

Yes to all the above.

My point was that too often (not in *every* case) young players are rushed into the NHL before they are ready.

"Everyone wants you to produce two or three players like it's a
toy-factory assembly line," Devils GM Lou Lamoriello said. "But we're
dealing with 17- and 18-year-old kids. Forcing kids into quick
development would be like sending a kid to four years of college and
expecting him to immediately be a surgeon. That just doesn't happen."

*

All the Devils' rookies overcame long odds to make it. According to
Madden, University of Michigan coach Red Berenson told him to find
another line of work, that he would never make it to the NHL. White
always showed potential, but he needed several seasons with the
Devils' farm team in the American Hockey League to hone his skills.
Gomez got his chance early and became the NHL's rookie of the year,
but only because Brendan Morrison and Denis Pederson were
training-camp holdouts. Rafalski was said to be too small after his
days at the University of Wisconsin, but after one year in Sweden and
three in Finland, he finally got his chance.

*

"You've got to give the Devils all the credit in the world," said
Stars GM Bob Gainey, also a proponent of bringing players along
slowly. "They had more energy than we did in the finals."

Except for defenseman Richard Matvichuk, over the years the Stars
have given their youngsters time to grow and develop. And Mike
Modano, Jamie Langenbrunner, Derian Hatcher and Jere Lehtinen have
thrived as a result.

Last season's exception was Brenden Morrow, who had 14 goals and 19
assists in 64 games as a rookie. "Our plan was for him to spend one
more season in the International Hockey League. But he was so mature
and ready, we couldn't keep him down," Gainey said. "With most of
these kids, you don't know if they are more interested in cartoons
rather than Stanley Cups."

*

"You can't put a prospect in a position to fail. You could ruin
him," Pleau said. "Worse yet, you can make a mistake and give the
player away, as we did when I was with the Rangers with Doug Weight.

"We drafted Weight thinking he'd be a first- or second-line center.
Instead of letting him go back to the minors,
we kept him on the Rangers' roster as a fourth-line center -- and
when he didn't score like we thought he could, some people
got impatient, and we traded him to Edmonton, where he became a
100-point player. You can't waste a blue-chip prospect like that."

- excerpted from this article

[TheCaper]

mic said:

Here again I agree with you. But I think you can't just blame the organisations. The fact that young players have to go through waivers quite early (Hossa and Hainsey for the us) makes it hard to give them much more time, as it is some times too early to write them off (and so chances of them being claimed are pretty high) but it's not sure that they can get a spot on an NHL roster. I guess that this makes it tough for GMs. If you don't have spots for players who could become but aren't yet NHLers and who are too old, you can easely be tempted to trade them. I wouldn't like the Habs to lose Hainsey and/or Hossa for nothing, nor would I offer them a spot for free. What do we do if one of them don't earn it ?

The waiver rules protect players from being buried in the minors. Lots of complex exceptions, but basically, a team has 5 years to develop an 18-year-old, 4 years to develop a 19-year-old. If a team hasn’t developed their prospect in that span, they have to give the opportunity to another team.

I don’t think the NHLPA will be lobbying for waiver rule changes in the new CBA because “too many young players are being rushed into the league”.

In order for a player to have an NHL career, they have to be given the chance to play in the NHL. Some seize that opportunity, some don’t. None of us know if Hainsey has what it takes to play a regular shift in the NHL. If the Habs are unwilling to give him the chance, it’s perfectly acceptable for waivers to offer him the opportunity for an NHL career.

[PTH]

TheCaper said:

I don’t think the NHLPA will be lobbying for waiver rule changes in the new CBA because “too many young players are being rushed into the league”.

Well, even the flops who are rushed make big bucks, so the union is happy, but for hockey as a whole, not developing players is a loss. If Kilger could have been a better player, along with dozens of others, the level of play in the league could be higher.

In order for a player to have an NHL career, they have to be given the chance to play in the NHL. Some seize that opportunity, some don’t. None of us know if Hainsey has what it takes to play a regular shift in the NHL. If the Habs are unwilling to give him the chance, it’s perfectly acceptable for waivers to offer him the opportunity for an NHL career.

Here's the rub: Hainsey might be ready to play in the NHL, but is he ready to be a reliable top-4 guy ? Instead of getting 8 minutes every second game and eventually becoming a Dykhuis clone, another AHL season might help, or maybe just starting down there to be sure he picks up where he left off ? A step by step development might lead to him become "all he can be", a Desjardins-level defenseman perhaps.
We can't even consider those options, though, he'll either get the 8 minutes and perhaps make it in some kind of role, or we send him down and risk giving up on him.

I'd like to see waiver rules extended a bit to give teams some leeway; players who don't get chances get to become Group VI free agents by the time they're 25 anyways.

[TheCaper]

M. said:

My point was that too often (not in *every* case) young players are rushed into the NHL before they are ready.

Scott Gomez never played a game in the minors, and it’s pretty hard to rush Madden and Rafalski into the league when they were never even drafted.

Modano - 0 games in minors
Lehtinen – 1 game in IHL
Hatcher – 2 games in IHL
Morrow – 9 games in IHL
Langenbrunner - 59 games in IHL
Matvichuk - 63 games in IHL

None of these players were slow cooked in the minors. None of these players turned into busts because they were “rushed into the league”.

I could speculate that Doug Weight learned how to play the game at NHL speed at a young age, and that’s why he’s had himself such a good career. Hardly a “rushed too early NHL bust”. The Rangers blundered by trading him, not by playing him.

[TheCaper]

PTH said:

Here's the rub: Hainsey might be ready to play in the NHL, but is he ready to be a reliable top-4 guy ? Instead of getting 8 minutes every second game and eventually becoming a Dykhuis clone, another AHL season might help, or maybe just starting down there to be sure he picks up where he left off ? A step by step development might lead to him become "all he can be", a Desjardins-level defenseman perhaps.
We can't even consider those options, though, he'll either get the 8 minutes and perhaps make it in some kind of role, or we send him down and risk giving up on him.

I'd like to see waiver rules extended a bit to give teams some leeway; players who don't get chances get to become Group VI free agents by the time they're 25 anyways.

Here’s the rub: Eric Desjardins played a grand total of 7 games in the AHL; 3 regular season games, 4 playoff games, at the end of his final junior season. Don’t expect to send a prospect to the AHL for 4-5 years and have Desjardins come out the other end. It doesn’t work like that. If you want Desjardins, you have to develop in the NHL. Rookies make rookie mistakes, the AHL will not guarantee an exemption from this fundamental law of nature.

I’m sure a lot of GM’s would love to be able to keep prospects around indefinitely at AHL salaries, but those days are over.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

M. said:

My point was that too often (not in *every* case) young players are rushed into the NHL before they are ready.

That comment applies to the rest of this post.

TheCaper said:

Scott Gomez never played a game in the minors...

Correct.

Gomez got his chance early and became the NHL's rookie of the year,
but only because Brendan Morrison and Denis Pederson were
training-camp holdouts.

...and it’s pretty hard to rush Madden and Rafalski into the league when they were never even drafted.

Madden spent 4 seasons playing NCAA hockey and 2 more in the AHL. He began his NHL career at age 26.

Rafslki also spent 4 years in the NCAA, plus 1 seaon in Sweden and 3 more in Finland. He too began his NHL career at age 26.

Madden and Rafalski are perfect examples of players whose development wasn't rushed.

Modano - 0 games in minors

Correct.

Lehtinen – 1 game in IHL

Lehtinen spent 3 seasons playing in the Finnish elite league, against men, beginning at age 19.

Hatcher – 2 games in IHL

Correct.

Morrow – 9 games in IHL

Correct.

Last season's exception was Brenden Morrow, who had 14 goals and 19
assists in 64 games as a rookie. "Our plan was for him to spend one
more season in the International Hockey League. But he was so mature
and ready, we couldn't keep him down," Gainey said. "With most of
these kids, you don't know if they are more interested in cartoons
rather than Stanley Cups."

Langenbrunner - 59 games in IHL

Correct.

Matvichuk - 63 games in IHL

Correct.

None of these players were slow cooked in the minors. None of these players turned into busts because they were “rushed into the league”.

No such claim was made. There *are* a small number of exceptional players. They are far from being the norm.

I could speculate that Doug Weight learned how to play the game at NHL speed at a young age, and that’s why he’s had himself such a good career. Hardly a “rushed too early NHL bust”. The Rangers blundered by trading him, not by playing him.

Larry Pleau summed up Weight's situation very well.

*

A handful of players are mature enough as human beings and hockey players to go directly from junior hockey to the NHL. They are exceptions rather than the norm. The vast players are not so blessed and require more or less tutoring and experience.

Too many players are rushed into the NHL in the mistaken belief that they are from the the first category when in reality they are not. Unrealistic expectations and/or the prospect of cheap labour contribute to this decision being made more often than it should be.

Ribeiro was 24 before he had his first "successful" NHL season.
Ditto Ward.
Ryder 23.
Théodore became a starting goalie at age 24.

Komisarek played 46 games, turning 22 halfway through the season.

[seventeen]

There's more of an expectation that 1st rounders can play sooner than 4th rounders. If a 1st rounder hasn't made some sort of impact after their 2nd pro season, it's quite normal to start questioning their development. And most times it probably wouldn't have mattered if they'd been in the minors for 2 years or the show for 2 years. It's not like guys in the majors don't touch a stick except during a game. There's plenty of opportunity to improve. Some guys do indeed age more slowly but with more quality and others are drinkable right away. It's very hard to generalize on this issue, so second guessing is inevitable. Many of the guys mentioned above, who progressed 'slowly', weren't expected to do well and were lower drafts or FA signings. Mike Keane for example was a pretty solid juniour, wasn't drafted, was signed as an FA by the Habs, played one year in the minors and that was it. He covers it all. Might he have been as good if he'd missed the year of juniour? Maybe yes, maybe no, and it probably wouldn't have mattered. It's what's in the guys heart and head that really matter.

The bottom line is that if they're good enough right away, they should play in the majors and if not, then minor league seasoning is appropriate. Simple enough.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

seventeen said:

There's more of an expectation that 1st rounders can play sooner than 4th rounders. If a 1st rounder hasn't made some sort of impact after their 2nd pro season, it's quite normal to start questioning their development. And most times it probably wouldn't have mattered if they'd been in the minors for 2 years or the show for 2 years. It's not like guys in the majors don't touch a stick except during a game. There's plenty of opportunity to improve. Some guys do indeed age more slowly but with more quality and others are drinkable right away. It's very hard to generalize on this issue, so second guessing is inevitable. Many of the guys mentioned above, who progressed 'slowly', weren't expected to do well and were lower drafts or FA signings. Mike Keane for example was a pretty solid juniour, wasn't drafted, was signed as an FA by the Habs, played one year in the minors and that was it. He covers it all. Might he have been as good if he'd missed the year of juniour? Maybe yes, maybe no, and it probably wouldn't have mattered. It's what's in the guys heart and head that really matter.

The bottom line is that if they're good enough right away, they should play in the majors and if not, then minor league seasoning is appropriate. Simple enough.

Dammit Jim, I'm a generalist, not a specialist.

Your points are well taken. However, since I have read and quoted comments made by Lamoriello, Gainey, Pleau, Madden (Martin) and Savard cautioning against premature evaluation, I am led to believe that it is something that occurs on a fairly regular basis. I know for a fact that it happens at the fan level. I'll just use the cases of the young Habs I mentioned in an earlier post as examples.

Ribeiro: Ripped up the Q. 2nd round choice. High hopes for him. Brought up to Habs at age 19 and bombed. Same thing at age 20. And at age 21. Again at 22. Finally won a regular roster spot at age 23 and ended up leading the team in scoring. All along the way his mere presence was greeted with derision by many, and still is by some even to this day. But Ribeiro listened to his coaches and worked hard at those lessons he was given. And, as I write this, Ribeiro has out-scored every other player taken in the second round of the 1998 entry draft, and 16 of 27 chosen in the first round (http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl1998e.html).

Ward: A first round selection. Development hampered by injuries. Brought up at age 20; couldn't stick. Same thing at 21. At 22 was left in the AHL for the whole season; stayed healthy and ratcheted his game up several notches. Age 23 continued his improvement to the point of being a leading scorer in the AHL, making the first all-star team and winning league MVP honours. Brought his game with him for an end of season try-out with the big team. Continued where he left off with the Habs at age 24, though the injury bug bit him again. Through the hard times, did he quit working and improving? Did he curl up into a ball when André Savard described him during his titanic minor league season as a "Very good AHL player" (btw, I think savard knew what he was doing by uttering that remark). Ward has now played more NHL games than 12 of the other 26 playuers selected in the first round of the 1997 entry draft.

Ryder: Who? That kid in the ECHL? NHL rookie-of-the-year material? What are you, some kind of clown? Get outta here before I...Well, look at that - the kid who was selected 216th of 258 players has out-scored 13 players selected in the first round of the 1998 entry draft. Good thing his junior coach followed him around and showed faith in him, eh?

Théodore: Up and down between the AHL and NHL for 5 seasons, before getting a chance to take the reins at age 24 because Jeff Hackett broke his right hand. Théodore has made the most of that break.

While I appreciate the meteoric phenom that now and again flashes across the ice, I have a special admiration for those who rise to their highest level through strength of character and perseverance, and for those who recognize that panning for gold is not a matter of sifting a couple of times and giving up.

[HabbaDasher]

In assessing Gainey's drafting record with the Stars, consider their average 1rst round drafting position: 22.6

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

HabbaDasher said:

In assessing Gainey's drafting record with the Stars, consider their average 1rst round drafting position: 22.6

Granted, but:

1992 : 88. Lethinen
1993 : 9. Harvey and 35. Langenbrunner
1994 : 124. Turco
1995 : 11. Iginla
1997 : 25. Morrow

Average 48.7

1992 : 33. Valeri Bure, 68. Craig Rivet
1993 : 21. Saku Koivu, 151. Darcy Tucker
1994 : 44. José Théodore, 226. Tomas Vokoun
1998 : 45. Mike Ribeiro, 162. Andrei Markov, 216. Michael Ryder

Average 107.3

Our bird-dogs smell better.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

M. said:

While I appreciate the meteoric phenom that now and again flashes across the ice, I have a special admiration for those who rise to their highest level through strength of character and perseverance, and for those who recognize that panning for gold is not a matter of sifting a couple of times and giving up.

Speaking of the kids:

Hainsey: 23 years old. The better parts of 3 seasons spent in the AHL. It seems that it hasn't been a lack of talent but rather a surfeit of the proper attitude that has held him back. Has he finally paid his rent, er, dues? Will he choose to re-sign with the Habs?

Hossa: 22 years old. also the better part of 3 seasons spent in the AHL. Also not a question of a lack of talent but a perceived lack of consistent application. Is he on the verge of pushing it up a notch? Will he re-sign, or go back to Europe?

Higgins: 21. Seems to have the talent and the outlook. Should one expect anything less from a Yale man?

Plekanec: Also 21. Began to emerge as a team leader on the ice for the 'Dogs this past season. Benny would be proud. Also: Tied for second on the team in goals (23), led the team in assists (43) and points (66 - 13th in the league), second on team and first among forwards with a +21 rating, third on team with 90 PIM, led the team in short-handed goals (3) and game winners (9 - 4th in the league), led all forwards and second on the team in shots (207).

Of the four above who has more talent? I know who seems to have more desire. Heck, Dagenais seems to have more desire than two of those guys. That's right, I'm picking Higgs and Pleky to make the show (and stick) before the two RFAs.

Hmmm, Czech it out; the best bet seems to be the 3rd round, 71st overall pick. The 3 H's were all first rounders.