The drafting differences of East Side vs West Side

by bkblades on Jan 27, 2010 12:54 AM EST

I understand TSN's point here when they're comparing the two teams, which is the noticeable discrepancy of draft picks accumulated from 2003 to 2011. Basically, the author illustrates that Toronto will have only drafted 16 players in the first three rounds of the draft since 2003, while Los Angeles will have drafted 38 players during the same time. Never mind, the author is being very presumptuous that both Los Angeles and Toronto will stay the course for both the 2010 and 2011 drafts, but this evaluation is only one aspect of how a team evaluates draft picks.

Despite Toronto's low draft pick numbers, the amount of games who have played with Toronto or with another NHL team doesn't make it as disastrous as the article indicates. The LA Kings have a bevy of drafted players, but about half of these players have yet to play in the NHL. Furthermore, the Leafs have made a marking, significant or not, in the rounds beyond the third. The numbers also don't add up, since the author doesn't consider getting back a first round pick to choose Luke Schenn as a wash either. Manipulating the data to prove one's point, despite being technically incorrect? Nah, that never happens!

In fact, since 2003, players drafted by the LA Kings beyond the third round have played in a total of 66 games with the Kings. The Maple Leafs in contrast have drafted players in rounds fourth and beyond who have played a total of 230 games so far with the Leafs. If you include games not with the Leafs, the total jumps to 294 games. In addition, the totals for the Leafs doesn't even include the games played by Viktor Stalberg and Carl Gunnarsson (17 and 14 games so far respectively).

Either way, I understand the study in contrast is an intriguing one to further emphasize the whole notion of Toronto failing in the rebuild through the draft. That can't be argued. But it's not as clearcut as analysts make it out to be, considering the context of both teams being far different when NHL hockey resumed after the lockout. One team made the playoffs for six straight seasons before badly miscalculating the team's overall makeup after the lockout. The other team out West missed the playoffs for two straight seasons immediately preceding the lockout, and are still seeking out their first berth since the 2001-2002 season.

PensionPlanPuppets.com is a fan community that allows members to post their own thoughts and opinions on the Toronto Maple Leafs and hockey in general. These views and thoughts may not be shared by the editor of PensionPlanPuppets.com.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Manipulating statistics in a way that misrepresents the truth in order to make your point?

No one does that, do they?

\sarcasm

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

Albert Einstein

by Say *plan the parade one more time*... on Jan 27, 2010 4:00 PM EST reply actions

Great post, I appreciate the effort that it took to bring those numbers together. I’m also surprised at the amount of work that went into that TSN piece, that isn’t something you see every day from a group with deadlines as stringent and, I hate to say it, little emphasis on factual work. Though the author makes a throwaway comment of Detroit making a living off of late-round picks, which I think has been debunked pretty well.

But I think I have to disagree with your conclusion, at the end of it all. The point of the article is that one team has had an emphasis on keeping their early round draft picks while the other has placed their emphasis on moving multiples of those picks for players, and now the teams are moving in opposite directions. That’s pretty clear cut. Even though the Leafs have found depth from their later round picks, it’s obvious that if there’s one thing this team needed from it’s picks it wasn’t simply depth NHLers.

While the team’s situations have obviously not been the same throughout the history surveyed, one can make the argument that in terms of laying the bedrock for a post-lockout environment one team did well and the other appears to have not learned it’s lesson. And even though the argument can be made that time has not told all yet, when you trade picks for roster players I’d say it’s easier to evaluate where a team is going to go sooner.

Old Guys in Blue and White

by koopa kid on Jan 28, 2010 5:47 AM EST reply actions

Like you, I was surprised as well TSN allowed an article of this breadth considering their emphasis on breaking stories. I would love to see more of this, but I understand why that’s not always possible.

Even though the Leafs have found depth from their later round picks, it’s obvious that if there’s one thing this team needed from it’s picks it wasn’t simply depth NHLers.

Not after the lockout. The Leafs were coming off six straight playoff seasons. The team still had Mats Sundin in his prime. While hindsight allows the benefit of saying the Leafs should have been more prudent with their early draft picks, at the time JFJ and MLSE believed their time of opportunity wasn’t closed yet. The problem with the Leafs was it took them several unsuccessful attempts to find their goalie of the future after Ed Belfour’s demise mainly because of Mats Sundin. If he fell off the map just as the other veterans left over from the playoff years, I doubt even JFJ would trade early picks (something he vowed not to do when hired) for those goalies. I will relent, however, that this is JFJ we’re talking about, so my hypothetical point is probably moot.

And even though the argument can be made that time has not told all yet, when you trade picks for roster players I’d say it’s easier to evaluate where a team is going to go sooner.

As a predictive measure, of course. And I guess that was the point of the article. Clearly, the problem for the Leafs wasn’t necessarily trading away those early picks, but rather not replenishing some of those picks. Whether they obtained another second round pick or whatever, the Leafs stayed put. But again, for the picks the Leafs traded recently, they were for the purpose of young, potential high impact players. Luke Schenn, Phil Kessel, and even Andrew Raycroft, since he was only 26 years old (of suckage, but hear me out) didn’t fit the usual profile of trading early picks for old, washed out players. Simply looking at the numbers is fine. The Leafs traded away a lot of draft picks, and in this case, they mostly resulted in a net-loss.

But if the Leafs choose to trade early picks for young impact players and continue their late draft pick prowess, then the end result isn’t as horrid. Is it an ideal method? Time will tell.

Supporter of the Sergei Berezin "Give and Go" - You give me puck, then you go to hell

by bkblades on Jan 29, 2010 12:49 AM EST up reply actions