Jump to content

Your 2020 - 2021 Toronto Maple Leafs


Recommended Posts

 

2 hours ago, NotCool said:

BPA doesn't apply at later rounds IMO. Fucking nobody knows the BPA. It's up to your scouts. If BPA was even remotely known we'd be able to assign players to their exact round better in the later rounds, but we don't. 

Picking BPA as a philosophy is about not passing up a player because you have a hole on your current team in one area. You don't pass up on Stutzle to pick Drysdale or Sanderson because you need a d man on your team. It's pretty much unanimously clear at that high that Stutzle is a better player to pick than Sanderson or Drysdale. Nobody could tell you the definitive BPA available at pick 78. 

Great, but I was speaking to the entire draft.  

 

And if we're being honest, BPA doesn't apply after the first handful of picks.  

It's splitting the difference.  

If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a question.   

 

So anyway, was it best player available, not an illusive term btw, or was it BPA that we think will be playing, as you suggested?  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

i dont understand why everyone keeps saying arimov is a small soft winger.   he's 170, 6' at 18.... he'll be 195-200 by 22 easily, and not a single scouting reports that he avoids contact...

An N’Sync fanboy?

Lets drop the personal attacks please. This is the Leafs section not the bitch to/about each other section.

Posted Images

12 hours ago, NotCool said:

We have to start hitting something on later picks. Look at this.

 

From 2014 to 2018, we've drafted one "impact player" (Dermott) outside the first round. 2018 and 2017 might be too soon to call but do you see anyone realistically stepping up from there and being a top 9 f or top 4 d?

This can't continue

i miss timashov......

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Doc J said:

 

Great, but I was speaking to the entire draft.  

 

And if we're being honest, BPA doesn't apply after the first handful of picks.  

It's splitting the difference.  

If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a question.   

 

So anyway, was it best player available, not an illusive term btw, or was it BPA that we think will be playing, as you suggested?  

 

 

You said it yourself BPA doesn't apply after the first round. 

Being able to watch them play and know they're playing is a clear advantage to the pick. Pick who your scouts like. Scouts clearly liked picking players they've watched more of. They also have the added bonus of holding their rights for 4 years. We could see some older players on ELCs.

The point being there was a clear advantage that the team saw in picking players currently playing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NotCool said:

You said it yourself BPA doesn't apply after the first round. 

Being able to watch them play and know they're playing is a clear advantage to the pick. Pick who your scouts like. Scouts clearly liked picking players they've watched more of. They also have the added bonus of holding their rights for 4 years. We could see some older players on ELCs.

The point being there was a clear advantage that the team saw in picking players currently playing.

I did say that.  

That's why the whole "taking the best player available" spiel is comedic.  

You agree?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dog Taker said:

i dont understand why everyone keeps saying arimov is a small soft winger.

 

he's 170, 6' at 18.... he'll be 195-200 by 22 easily, and not a single scouting reports that he avoids contact....

In fact, he likes contact. He likes the dirty areas.

 

He might become your future favourite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Doc J said:

I did say that.  

That's why the whole "taking the best player available" spiel is comedic.  

You agree?

 

Yeah, just not at the beginning of the draft. Listen to your scouts. There's definitely tiers to players. If you're reaching down a tier in the first round to pick a defenseman because you need one, it's not the right move. That's all BPA is to me. Don't skip out on a player because of positional needs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, NotCool said:

 

The first round is nothing like the later rounds. There's a reason the percentage of first round picks making it is much higher than later rounds. There's also a reason why it's much easier to guess where players are going in round 1 than rounds 2-7. It's easier to define the "BPA" in the first round than the later rounds. The later rounds end up being, who do your scouts like the best. Teams lists are most likely very very different as you get out of the 2nd round. There's not as much separating each player at round 3-7, if one of the things that separate the player is you're watching them play right now, and you know they're playing hockey this season thats a pretty big advantage IMO.

A player with first round pick talent has a better chance of finding another club that would take them on. A player with first round talent would be slightly hampered by the missing season but not as much as a player that is just starting to put the tools together like a later round pick. There's a lot of players that need that extra time to develop in juniors. 

 

BPA doesn't apply at later rounds IMO. Fucking nobody knows the BPA. It's up to your scouts. If BPA was even remotely known we'd be able to assign players to their exact round better in the later rounds, but we don't. 

Picking BPA as a philosophy is about not passing up a player because you have a hole on your current team in one area. You don't pass up on Stutzle to pick Drysdale or Sanderson because you need a d man on your team. It's pretty much unanimously clear at that high that Stutzle is a better player to pick than Sanderson or Drysdale. Nobody could tell you the definitive BPA available at pick 78. 

and at the same time. the difference between a player at #15 or a player at #16 or #17... I think there is enough similarity in overall skill between these players that a positional consideration could be warranted.

 

Edited by Wilma Fingerdo
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Wilma Fingerdo said:

and at the same time. the difference between a player at #15 or a player at #16 or #17... I think there is enough similarity in overall skill between these players that a positional consideration could be warranted.

 

Ya i am sure they could have gotten Amirov if they traded down to 16th or 18th and picked up an extra 4-7th rounder pick...but i think they still would have gotten Amirov.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many so called BPAs outside of the top 10 or so. This is the most rudimentary of discussions. Seriously.

An example of a reach was Tyler Biggs because Burke was paranoid and had himself convinced everyone wanted Biggs in the first round.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JockDent said:

Why don't you go back 10 years and give me those stats.

Aren't you the one who says it takes longer to develop a D?

2017 is 3 years ago.

BTW, I'm not pouting over lottery tickets, I'm appalled at the poor judgement of our GM.

Lots of reasons why it may be a smarter strategy to go for a forward with an early pick: they're more likely to pan out.  Don't believe me? The numbers bear it out. 

 

https://theathletic.com/1828498/2020/05/21/why-nhl-teams-should-gamble-on-defencemen-over-forwards-later-in-the-draft/

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting take I just read in Jonas Siegel's article in the Athletic is that, because we only picked one guy from the CHL, we generally have control over the guys' rights that we picked for longer. That's very helpful when we may lose a season of measurable development on which to decide if we're going to sign players. 

Perhaps it's giving Dubas too much credit, but it sounds like he's playing a game of 3D chess. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Leaf said:

An interesting take I just read in Jonas Siegel's article in the Athletic is that, because we only picked one guy from the CHL, we generally have control over the guys' rights that we picked for longer. That's very helpful when we may lose a season of measurable development on which to decide if we're going to sign players. 

Perhaps it's giving Dubas too much credit, but it sounds like he's playing a game of 3D chess. 

And that's exactly what he should be doing. FULL TIME.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Leaf said:

Lots of reasons why it may be a smarter strategy to go for a forward with an early pick: they're more likely to pan out.  Don't believe me? The numbers bear it out. 

 

https://theathletic.com/1828498/2020/05/21/why-nhl-teams-should-gamble-on-defencemen-over-forwards-later-in-the-draft/

This makes sense. Defensemen are much more difficult to predict.  Longer developmental curves, etc.  Plus they aren't as exciting as skilled forwards lighting up whatever leagues they play in. Not as difficult as goalies mind you. But you still have to stockpile and build a healthy pool of defenseman too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, brocto said:

Meh, Goat's like.... 6.5? And plays like he's tinier than Marner? I mean, can always use him at league minimum as a filler, to play so the starts can rest, but I mean..... he should be a friggin' beast and he's like an extra large kitten?

"extra large kitten" is a great way of putting it. Admittedly, due to his skating I never had high hopes for Gauthier, but his lack of physicality for his size and the fact that he's a bottom six player are far too apparent. I don't expect him to excel with any team at the NHL level.

17 hours ago, 1_new_name said:

Bigger and stronger skilled players are great.  That's also why they get drafted in the top 15 often. Crouse was massively overrated bc of his size. His shortcomings were very evident in retrospect 

Yes, yes he was. I'm a Kingston fan and saw a lot of him and he was never anything special.

16 hours ago, Morrison7 said:

Nice, they got a goalie.

Well RIP me, I'll never be able to spell or pronounce that.

15 hours ago, JockDent said:

It's Dubas' modus operandi.

Pick small skilled forwards, and don't do anything risky.

Totally expected.

To be fair, there have been some pretty amazing smaller, skilled players. St. Louis being one of the most noticeable ones with one of the better careers.

With that said, St. Louis was an absolute beast that worked his tail off. His legs were unbelievably strong. 

14 hours ago, Morrison7 said:

Very dumb that the Leafs took a high ceiling winger who may not be ready for 2-3 years when they could have a defenceman who also won’t be ready for 2-3 years... forgetting there’s more than 1 round in the draft.

What rounds were Josi, Letang, and Klingberg drafted in again?

When did the Leafs last draft a Josi, Letang or Klingberg? Are you really telling me that Leafs fans have no reason or excuse to be doubtful of this team's ability to do so? If so, wake up. This team has done nothing BUT fill us with doubt and cynicism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • n0nsense locked and unlocked this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...