2018-19 Iowa Wild and other Wild Prospects Discussion

[IllaZilla]

10 hours ago, rottenrefs said:

Well that's sad. Wonder if they'll work harder? That's a rhetorical question but one wonders.

 

I don't think it's so much a matter of working harder. I think it's the direction they are getting from the higher ups in the scouting department. If the higher ups value safer two-way players, then that is who the scouts are going to focus on. Especially if the Wild are constantly drafting in that 15-25 range. So until that direction changes, that's who scouts are going to look at...

[sweetshot]

Quote

 

According to Russo, head of amateur scouting Guy Lapointe will be back but 2 North American scouts, one European scout and their director of pro scouting, Blair MacKasey, won't be back, as well as several part-timers. Fenton's son, P.J., will be joining the Wild as an amateur scout well as a number of other scouts to be named soon. Scouting and decision-making is a group effort run by VP of hockey ops Brent Flahr, who will be primarily doing amateur scouting this year and will likely run the draft table again and assistant GM Andrew Brunette will mostly be doing pro scouting. Tom Kurvers will run the show.

Sweeping changes likely next season. This from the Athletic 2 weeks ago.

 

 

[IllaZilla]

More fun with numbers!

 

I did this a while back, so I'm probably going to have to update it here. Maybe using a different parameter of 100 games or 164 games. Not sure yet. 

 

But I took a look at drafting players in the NHL from 2000-2010. It's based on players playing 200+ games in the NHL. the first seven columns are the first round, broken down by sets of five picks. The eighth column is all of Round 2, the ninth columns is all of Round 3 and the tenth columns is Rounds 4-7 combined.

 

Year	Pick 1 to 5	Pick 6 to 10	Pick 11 to 15	Pick 16 to 20	Pick 21 to 25	Pick 26 to 30	Round 2	Round 3	Rounds 4 to 7	Total
2000	5	1	1	3	4	3	12	3	14	46
2001	3	3	4	4	3	2	8	6	26	59
2002	5	4	4	3	5	1	9	5	14	50
2003	5	5	4	5	4	4	13	6	23	69
2004	5	2	3	4	2	4	9	9	23	61
2005	5	4	2	2	3	2	8	6	18	50
2006	5	5	4	2	3	1	9	5	8	42
2007	5	4	4	1	3	2	4	4	13	40
2008	5	4	2	4	1	2	7	5	14	44
2009	5	4	5	3	2	1	8	5	12	45
2010	5	4	2	2	3	3	7	2	5	33
Total	53	40	35	33	33	25	94	56	170
%	96%	73%	64%	60%	60%	45%	28%	17%	13%

 

Drafting successfully really drops off after the top ten. Anything after the first round is like @Fargocase usually says, a crapshoot...maybe even worse...

Edited August 23, 2018 by IllaZilla

[EmptyShelf]

Many years ago I heard LN say that the draft is sometimes 0, or 1-3 'sure things.'  He mentioned that 'tanking' is a reality if you truly want a Kane, Ovechkin, Toews, or Crosby.  Even then, you have to target the right draft.  Otherwise, he argued, you are always 'playing to make the playoffs' and looking for all things to just magically line up to win it all.  I am not a huge fan of his, but to Zilla's point, the drafts just aren't deep enough to plan on a 'difference maker' later than the top handful - and that's in a great draft.  So, do you tank, or do you strive to make the playoffs?  We know who has done the former, and we know the home team does the latter.

[CreaseAndAssist]

11 hours ago, EmptyShelf said:

Many years ago I heard LN say that the draft is sometimes 0, or 1-3 'sure things.'  He mentioned that 'tanking' is a reality if you truly want a Kane, Ovechkin, Toews, or Crosby.  Even then, you have to target the right draft.  Otherwise, he argued, you are always 'playing to make the playoffs' and looking for all things to just magically line up to win it all.  I am not a huge fan of his, but to Zilla's point, the drafts just aren't deep enough to plan on a 'difference maker' later than the top handful - and that's in a great draft.  So, do you tank, or do you strive to make the playoffs?  We know who has done the former, and we know the home team does the latter.

 

(shrugs)  I think in any draft there is good talent to be found beyond the top 15 if your scouting group is really doing their job and perhaps maybe willing to take a risk.  

 

Sure, some draft classes are better than others.  No doubt about it.  I think the Wild's drafting strategy clearly demonstrates how they overvalue certain traits and they often look for the safe pick.  They have also undervalued skating and speed and I think that has hurt this team.  IMO, its a speed league now.  We used to prioritize speed, but look at how many of our prospects have skating / speed concerns and collectively that's pretty disturbing.  

 

Guy LaPointe has been a key part of the Wild's draft virtually from Day 1.  So he's been there for that giant line of bust years with gems like A.J. Thelen, Tyler Cuma, Colton Gillies, and James Sheppard but he's been teflon with this organization through TWO GM's.  And there are other scouts who have been there for most of those same drafts as well (Paul Charles). 

 

The 'new' eyes this team really needed is in its drafting and development model.  What scares me a bit is Tom Kurvers.  Kurvers has watched the Wild a lot as a scout.  I realize its just the Minnesota Wild Town Hall show, but he seemed to think we have lots of great players in our system.  Beyond Kaprizov, who really seems to have a good chance of being a GREAT player?  Greenway?  No.  Kunin, not with a bum knee.  Filip Johansson?    So maybe Kurvers has seen this group TOO much and has unfortunately developed that same inflated sentimentality that has plagued this organization throughout its history.    

[IllaZilla]

Those Wild Town Halls are a joke. I used to go to them when I was a STH, and all the questions were asked by 12 year olds or they were idiotic like "When are the seats going to get cup holders?" I stopped going to them because it was a waste of time.

 

They're just "Rah, Rah" sessions to make season ticket holders feel like they've got a voice in the direction of the team. They're not going to say anything that would cause an impact on ticket sales. So they're not going to say anything negative about the team like "Well, the farm system needs some work. Not a lot of talent there and we need to do better scouting." or "Yeah, those Parise and Suter deals are really handcuffing us right now."

[sweetshot]

1 hour ago, IllaZilla said:

Those Wild Town Halls are a joke. I used to go to them when I was a STH, and all the questions were asked by 12 year olds or they were idiotic like "When are the seats going to get cup holders?" I stopped going to them because it was a waste of time.

 

They're just "Rah, Rah" sessions to make season ticket holders feel like they've got a voice in the direction of the team. They're not going to say anything that would cause an impact on ticket sales. So they're not going to say anything negative about the team like "Well, the farm system needs some work. Not a lot of talent there and we need to do better scouting." or "Yeah, those Parise and Suter deals are really handcuffing us right now."

You're right, there is a lack of any real thoughts given--seemed like a bunch of canned answers to known questions.

IMO the production of the program is really terribly done as well. Very boring. The lighting sucks, sound is bad, the layout is weird, looks like they only had about 5 minutes to put the "set" together.  

[IllaZilla]

1 hour ago, sweetshot said:

You're right, there is a lack of any real thoughts given--seemed like a bunch of canned answers to known questions.

IMO the production of the program is really terribly done as well. Very boring. The lighting sucks, sound is bad, the layout is weird, looks like they only had about 5 minutes to put the "set" together.  

 

If I remember right, when I went you had to submit your question in writing before the Town Hall, and then you were contacted if your question was chosen...so yeah, that's why everything seems scripted. They pick the questions they want to answer.Or just grab some kid out of the audience that will ask the players what their favorite food is...

[bbgarnett]

Agreed these Town Halls are just a feel-good session for fans who blindly follow the team. I forget if it was a question asked or how it was brought up but they were talking to Fenton I think and a player was brought up and Lapanta or someone said that he's one of us. He said that we've always got to have one of those guys or some dumb thing and I just shook my head because that's how a lot of fans are. I mean they always want us to take the hometown guy regardless it seems and if we don't they get upset even if he's no good they don't care they just see he's from Minnesota or something so that's all that matters.

[IllaZilla]

6 hours ago, bbgarnett said:

Agreed these Town Halls are just a feel-good session for fans who blindly follow the team. I forget if it was a question asked or how it was brought up but they were talking to Fenton I think and a player was brought up and Lapanta or someone said that he's one of us. He said that we've always got to have one of those guys or some dumb thing and I just shook my head because that's how a lot of fans are. I mean they always want us to take the hometown guy regardless it seems and if we don't they get upset even if he's no good they don't care they just see he's from Minnesota or something so that's all that matters.

 

That’s hilarious considering they drafted Erickson-Ek over Boeser.

[bbgarnett]

7 minutes ago, IllaZilla said:

 

That’s hilarious considering they drafted Erickson-Ek over Boeser.

 

yeah I know, it gets frustrating but hopefully they can make some sweeping changes to the scouts, sucks that they were recently given new contracts by Fletcher so the changes might have to wait but it'll be nice to have scouts who know what they're doing.

[CreaseAndAssist]

12 hours ago, IllaZilla said:

 

That’s hilarious considering they drafted Erickson-Ek over Boeser.

 

18 hours ago, bbgarnett said:

Agreed these Town Halls are just a feel-good session for fans who blindly follow the team. I forget if it was a question asked or how it was brought up but they were talking to Fenton I think and a player was brought up and Lapanta or someone said that he's one of us. He said that we've always got to have one of those guys or some dumb thing and I just shook my head because that's how a lot of fans are. I mean they always want us to take the hometown guy regardless it seems and if we don't they get upset even if he's no good they don't care they just see he's from Minnesota or something so that's all that matters.

 

That may have been when they made a big deal about Hendricks and J.T. Brown being Minnesotans.  Or the guy that just had to mention Nate Prosser.  I think they went out of their way to remind everyone about Kurvers too as if anyone didn't know.  I agree, I  everytime I hear such crap out of this organization.  Pure cheese...

[CreaseAndAssist]

Boeser is a bit different.  I don't care that he's from Burnsville.  While he has a pretty interesting (and tragic) personal story on his road to being an NHL'er, I don't really care about that too much.  The kid can score...that's why I felt he'd really be a help to the team.  That's all that matters to me.  

 

Eriksson Ek gives me more hope than Kunin for all of the hype they keep saturating us with.  I felt Eriksson Ek actually looked pretty reasonable in his first full NHL season.  Far more physical than I expected and you could see that he has real skill and good instincts.  I liked what I saw.  But Kunin...seemed like a lot of hype to me.  Kind of like Casey Wellman 2.0.  

[rottenrefs]

24 minutes ago, CreaseAndAssist said:

Boeser is a bit different.  I don't care that he's from Burnsville.  While he has a pretty interesting (and tragic) personal story on his road to being an NHL'er, I don't really care about that too much.  The kid can score...that's why I felt he'd really be a help to the team.  That's all that matters to me.  

 

Eriksson Ek gives me more hope than Kunin for all of the hype they keep saturating us with.  I felt Eriksson Ek actually looked pretty reasonable in his first full NHL season.  Far more physical than I expected and you could see that he has real skill and good instincts.  I liked what I saw.  But Kunin...seemed like a lot of hype to me.  Kind of like Casey Wellman 2.0.  

Same here. But will the team give him a proper opportunity? The Wild IMO fail miserably at allowing young talent to stand on their own two feet without somehow curtailing it by throwing far too conservative veterans in their path.

[sweetshot]

1 hour ago, rottenrefs said:

Same here. But will the team give him a proper opportunity? The Wild IMO fail miserably at allowing young talent to stand on their own two feet without somehow curtailing it by throwing far too conservative veterans in their path.

If he's healthy he'll get a chance. Kunin I mean. If the injury bug hits(likely at some point) or they are playing terribly, they don't really have too many other options available.

[rottenrefs]

27 minutes ago, sweetshot said:

If he's healthy he'll get a chance. Kunin I mean. If the injury bug hits(likely at some point) or they are playing terribly, they don't really have too many other options available.

Well, I was more so hoping the team would plant Ek in on line 2 where he deserves to be (as it should have been with Haula before him - in the same boat but never given the opportunity) then leave him alone short of giving him two line 2 wingers and let the chips fall where they may.

 

This team NEEDS to stop anchoring and hand-cuffing their young talent with has-been vets laying back not doing their own hard work.

[IllaZilla]

1 hour ago, sweetshot said:

If he's healthy he'll get a chance. Kunin I mean. If the injury bug hits(likely at some point) or they are playing terribly, they don't really have too many other options available.

 

Actually, Sam Anas had a far better season than Kunin did. And at the point Kunin got his call up, Anas had twice as many goals and points as Kunin did. IMO Anas deserved the call up, not Kunin. But once again, the Wild feel their #1 picks deserve a roster spot over players who are actually performing...

[IllaZilla]

3 hours ago, CreaseAndAssist said:

 

 

That may have been when they made a big deal about Hendricks and J.T. Brown being Minnesotans.  Or the guy that just had to mention Nate Prosser.  I think they went out of their way to remind everyone about Kurvers too as if anyone didn't know.  I agree, I  everytime I hear such crap out of this organization.  Pure cheese...

 

I've often wondered if the Red Wings make a big deal over drafting or signing players from Michigan, or if Boston goes out of their way to sign Massachusetts born players (I know the Habs do, but they don't count because they're nuts). Just seems to me that in this area it's a big damn deal. Rather have a crappy Minnesota player on the team than a really good player from somewhere else...

 

[IllaZilla]

16 hours ago, bbgarnett said:

 

yeah I know, it gets frustrating but hopefully they can make some sweeping changes to the scouts, sucks that they were recently given new contracts by Fletcher so the changes might have to wait but it'll be nice to have scouts who know what they're doing.

 

Well, the Wild drafting and development was fairly successful (using our parameters), coming in slightly above the league average. But maybe the philosophy needs to change. Seems right now the philosophy is to take the safe player in the first round no matter what.

[sweetshot]

7 hours ago, IllaZilla said:

 

Actually, Sam Anas had a far better season than Kunin did. And at the point Kunin got his call up, Anas had twice as many goals and points as Kunin did. IMO Anas deserved the call up, not Kunin. But once again, the Wild feel their #1 picks deserve a roster spot over players who are actually performing...

I forgot about Anas. Maybe because he's so small. Size notwithstanding, if he has anywhere near the year he had last year, he should definitely be given an opportunity this season IMO. And if the Wild is that concerned about his size, well, why the hell did they sign him?  He can look Spurgeon in the eye.

[sweetshot]

7 hours ago, IllaZilla said:

 

I've often wondered if the Red Wings make a big deal over drafting or signing players from Michigan, or if Boston goes out of their way to sign Massachusetts born players (I know the Habs do, but they don't count because they're nuts). Just seems to me that in this area it's a big damn deal. Rather have a crappy Minnesota player on the team than a really good player from somewhere else...

 

IMO it's fairly common across the Hockey world compared to other sports. And it's sometimes annoying how often it happens here. Maybe some of that is due to the fact there is a fair amount of good Hockey players from Minnesota.

I don't think teams necessarily go out of their way to sign the home grown talent, but given an equal choice the home town boy will get the nod. Especially here.

[Razblo]

On 8/23/2018 at 7:16 PM, EmptyShelf said:

Many years ago I heard LN say that the draft is sometimes 0, or 1-3 'sure things.'  He mentioned that 'tanking' is a reality if you truly want a Kane, Ovechkin, Toews, or Crosby.  Even then, you have to target the right draft.  Otherwise, he argued, you are always 'playing to make the playoffs' and looking for all things to just magically line up to win it all.  I am not a huge fan of his, but to Zilla's point, the drafts just aren't deep enough to plan on a 'difference maker' later than the top handful - and that's in a great draft.  So, do you tank, or do you strive to make the playoffs?  We know who has done the former, and we know the home team does the latter.

 

From my quick research, the last team to win a Stanley Cup that DID NOT have a 'home grown' top-3 overall draft pick on their roster was the 2008 Red Wings. It is up for debate how much each player contributed to their team's success (Seguin). It is also worth noting that in the past 10 years, 3 teams account for 8 of those championships, but that doesn't change the fact that high draft picks are major contributors to the teams that are regularly contending for a Stanley Cup.

 

2018 - Capitals; Ovechkin (drafted #1)

2017 - Pens; Crosby (#1), Fleury (#1), Malkin (#2)

2016 - Pens; Crosby (#1), Fleury (#1), Malkin (#2)

2015 - Blackhawks; Kane (#1), Toews (#3)

2014 - Kings; Doughty (#2)

2013 - Blackhawks; Kane (#1), Toews (#3)

2012 - Kings; Doughty (#2)

2011 - Bruins; Seguin (#2)

2010 - Blackhawks; Kane (#1), Toews (#3)

2009 - Pens; Crosby (#1), Fleury (#1), Malkin (#2)

Edited August 26, 2018 by Razblo

[IllaZilla]

8 hours ago, Razblo said:

 

From my quick research, the last team to win a Stanley Cup that DID NOT have a 'home grown' top-3 overall draft pick on their roster was the 2008 Red Wings. It is up for debate how much each player contributed to their team's success (Seguin). It is also worth noting that in the past 10 years, 3 teams account for 8 of those championships, but that doesn't change the fact that high draft picks are major contributors to the teams that are regularly contending for a Stanley Cup.

 

2018 - Capitals; Ovechkin (drafted #1)

2017 - Pens; Crosby (#1), Fleury (#1), Malkin (#2)

2016 - Pens; Crosby (#1), Fleury (#1), Malkin (#2)

2015 - Blackhawks; Kane (#1), Toews (#3)

2014 - Kings; Doughty (#2)

2013 - Blackhawks; Kane (#1), Toews (#3)

2012 - Kings; Doughty (#2)

2011 - Bruins; Seguin (#2)

2010 - Blackhawks; Kane (#1), Toews (#3)

2009 - Pens; Crosby (#1), Fleury (#1), Malkin (#2)

 

You're probably going to hear the argument now about if tanking and getting top three draft picks is the answer, why hasn't Edmonton won a Cup recently? They've had five Top Three picks in the last ten drafts (Hall #1, Nugent-Hopkins #1, Yakupov #1, Draisaitl #3, McDavid #1).

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I do think having a game breaker is key to a Cup winning team, something the Wild lack. But there are other pieces that need to be in place too. Look at Chicago. Not only did they have the scoring with Kane and Toewes, they had the defending with Keith and Seabrook. Same with Pittsburgh. Malkin and Crosby for scoring and Fleury for goaltending.

 

I don't think there is one formula for Cup success, otherwise every team would be following it. Draft Player type-A, add Free agent types B, C and D, hire coach E, and Presto! You'll get the Cup!

 

The Wild are not a bad team, but I think what needs to be answered is why do they disappear in the Playoffs every year? Where are their leaders? Where is that player that will single-handedly pick up the team and carry it across the finish line? I think until those questions are answered, the Wild are going to be a team that has a great regular season but melts in the pressure cooker of the Playoffs...

[hf101]

5 minutes ago, IllaZilla said:

The Wild are not a bad team, but I think what needs to be answered is why do they disappear in the Playoffs every year? Where are their leaders? Where is that player that will single-handedly pick up the team and carry it across the finish line? I think until those questions are answered, the Wild are going to be a team that has a great regular season but melts in the pressure cooker of the Playoffs...

 

Injuries play a key roll in playoff success. The Wild haven't been a healthy team the last three years come playoff time.  The two years prior to that they enjoyed a decent playoff run.   Like it or not Zach Parise has been the major factor for the team's success and failures.  Without a healthy Parise in the playoffs, the Wild have exited quickly.   If you look at any of those teams that have won the Cup in the last decade, remove their star player's contributions and there is no-way their respective teams win a cup.

 

To win a cup these days a team needs a healthy line-up, they need speed, size, and scoring from all 4 lines.  And let us not forget the defense needs to block a lot of shots and superior goaltending.

[sweetshot]

16 hours ago, IllaZilla said:

 

You're probably going to hear the argument now about if tanking and getting top three draft picks is the answer, why hasn't Edmonton won a Cup recently? They've had five Top Three picks in the last ten drafts (Hall #1, Nugent-Hopkins #1, Yakupov #1, Draisaitl #3, McDavid #1).

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I do think having a game breaker is key to a Cup winning team, something the Wild lack. But there are other pieces that need to be in place too. Look at Chicago. Not only did they have the scoring with Kane and Toewes, they had the defending with Keith and Seabrook. Same with Pittsburgh. Malkin and Crosby for scoring and Fleury for goaltending.

 

I don't think there is one formula for Cup success, otherwise every team would be following it. Draft Player type-A, add Free agent types B, C and D, hire coach E, and Presto! You'll get the Cup!

 

The Wild are not a bad team, but I think what needs to be answered is why do they disappear in the Playoffs every year? Where are their leaders? Where is that player that will single-handedly pick up the team and carry it across the finish line? I think until those questions are answered, the Wild are going to be a team that has a great regular season but melts in the pressure cooker of the Playoffs...

I believe I've heard more than a couple of posters on this board say probably the main reason the Wild has had limited playoff success is because they don't have enough players(almost none) willing to get their nose into tough places in order to create scoring chances or to simply score. And I agree with you. Come playoff time, the majority of the scoring chances the Wild get are from the perimeter. You can be pretty successful during the regular season playing this way but we all know the playoffs are a different animal. That's probably the reason Parise has had some success scoring in the playoffs--he's willing to get his nose into those tough areas more than his teammates.