Probability of draft player playing 100 NHL games

[Cranky]

I like to put this here for reference.

The graphs are what i thought they would be. It slides down fast after the top 5-10 but not in a straight line. More of a curve with diminishing probabilities.

Us getting late 1st is not what it is cracked out to be. In the 25-32 range it's about 25-27% that we get an NHL caliber player and even then, likely a low scoring bottom player.

Piling draft picks sounds like a great strategy, but there again, much like our current state, we got no pending stars and more like barrels of hopium.

dobberprospects.com/2020/05/16/nhl-draft-pick-probabilities/

[folatre]

For sure, this is not the NFL with teams picking 21-22 year olds who are physically developed and battle hardened in NCAA football. This is the nature of picking 18 year old kids who are way better at ice hockey than 95+ percent of their peers in the respective leagues they play in.

I would posit that spending big on the right people to operate your amateur scouting will help those odds. Obviously the simple math of having a lot of picks in the 25-60 range over a five year period should increase the odds of finding a couple of gold nuggets (maybe Hutson will be one thanks to the Oilers' pick).

I think Hughes is looking for talented 20-23 year olds that other clubs are growing impatient with. But you have to be careful there too.

[Cranky]

The older 'youngsters" is better then picks because you know what you are getting and they already played in the NHL so it's not just based on unproven "potential".

Players like Kakko come to mind but he may not be better then what we have. But like everything, it's based on price. Our late 2nd is fine as a risk. Our late 1st, NO.

Laffy for our lst? Yes.

Zoograss for our 6-10 first? Yes. ( I HAD to do that!)

Morgan frost for our late 1st. Yes. But at 24, we need signing certainty

Kaliyev for late 1st? If Hughes does his due diligence, yes.

Guys whose shine has worn off but still have a high probability of a top 6. I'm good with a top 6 filled with Toffoli's were no one accused them of being stars, while they score 50-60 points every year. Heck, top 9 filled with him would be annual contenders for a long time with a few cups in-between.

We have a lot of picks and I rather we stop "building" with more picks and trading them for young guys who can perform NOW.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

Feb 8, 2024 19:11:38 GMT -5 folatre said:

For sure, this is not the NFL with teams picking 21-22 year olds who are physically developed and battle hardened in NCAA football. This is the nature of picking 18 year old kids who are way better at ice hockey than 95+ percent of their peers in the respective leagues they play in.

I would posit that spending big on the right people to operate your amateur scouting will help those odds. Obviously the simple math of having a lot of picks in the 25-60 range over a five year period should increase the odds of finding a couple of gold nuggets (maybe Hutson will be one thanks to the Oilers' pick).

I think Hughes is looking for talented 20-23 year olds that other clubs are growing impatient with. But you have to be careful there too.

While I agree that you have a much better knowledge of what to expect from a 22 year old than an 18 year old player so do the other 31 GMs According to Keynesian economics if someone is trading the value they expect is also known. Furthermore they know much more about the player on their team, attitude motivations weaknesses etc. why do GMs always think that they expect a turnaround. It’s like getting married and expecting to change your partner. Still it’s better than saying trading is hard.