Post by Buffalo Sabres on Mar 24, 2016 13:42:52 GMT -5
So,
we have seen a lot of input on a couple of different suggestions for what to do after the draft, or round three of the draft is complete. There is a lot of passion about this issue mostly sparked to a change last year to allow these players to be added with a waiver period where teams lower in standings to claim on prospects added during the first week after draft completion. This was deemed as many as a failure, however the intent of this was to bring parity to the league and allow teams that lacked depth(perceived depth based on standings) to have basically first shot. I'm not convinced it was a failure as I believe while frustrating, it did in fact benefit the teams that needed help. That said I am unsure if it were so bad mostly due to a few reasons.
1. there were a number of gm turnovers last year who appear for focused on their teams than previous gm's
2. many teams were no where near the 20 prospect limit
3. this system allowed a gm who previously did not put effort into this post draft for the free for all to have the work done by others attempting to claim them and then swooping in using their priority.
To me last years claims were an anomaly and here is why:
We all saw wolf's numbers on prospects added from the 2015 draft year.....
The current VHL prospect ownership from the 2015 NHL draft is as follows:
1st round: 30 of 30 prospects owned
2nd round: 30 of 30 prospects owned
3rd round: 29 of 30 prospects owned
4th round: 28 of 30 prospects owned
5th round: 15 of 30 prospects owned
6th round: 12 of 30 prospects owned
7th round: 12 of 30 prospects owned
that means that 67 prospects have been added post round 3 last year. Given the history of our league this is an anomoly of massive proportions.
Facts are that given every teams current prospect lists only 6 teams have room for more than 2 prospects and 18 teams are at 20 prospects. This is all before the draft has happened where teams have to make space for the first three rounds of players. That leaves a LOT of teams unable to add much in the way of “Lottery ticket” prospects.
Simply just sign more or add to the prospect list maximum you say?
Ten teams are already within easy reach of the 50 contract maximum. Bet you all forgot that rule. Expanding the prospect list simply will cause a contract logjam and another problem in about 2-3 years. This to me is not an option. Sure the nhl has 50 contracts and up to 90 prospects, however in the nhl you can only hold those prospects for 2 years before signing a contract using up both elc years and contract space. Here in the vhl you may hold players without 50 nhl games as prospects until age 26.
To show you previously how things were done, 2014 draft and back, teams were able to add prospects after the draft ended at a given start time in a first come first serve basis. Lets take a closer look:
2012 draft:
12 players from round 4 and beyond were added post draft within the initial two weeks.
Of those 12,
1 player was dropped
3 are now on Farm teams in the VHL
8 are still on prospect lists.
41 TOTAL nhl games amonst all of these players
549 TOTAL ahl games or 45/player average
they have attended 4 nhl camps
Noteable players:
Marek Mazanec 27 nhl games/115 ahl
Oskar Sundqvist 12 nhl games/44 ahl
Trevor Carrick 2 nhl games/136 ahl
Nick Ebert 79 ahl games
2013 Draft:
13 players added in initial two weeks post draft
Of those 13,
4 were dropped
4 are on vhl farm teams
5 remain on prospect lists
119 TOTAL nhl games
426 ahl game or 32/player
they have attended 3 nhl camps
we are pretty sure what these players are going to be
Noteable players:
Christian Folin 65 nhl games/36 ahl
Connor Carrick 49 nhl games/133 ahl
Danill Tarasov 5 nhl games/181 ahl
2014 Draft:
18 players added in initial two weeks post draft
Of those 18,
3 were dropped
ZERO on vhl farm
15 remain on prospect lists
53 TOTAL nhl games
198 ahl games or 11/player
they have attended 2 nhl camps
they still have time to develop into something useful but certainly not high end players.
Noteable players:
Viktor Arvidsson 53 nhl games/87 ahl
Austin Carroll 45 ahl games
Michael Bunting 51 ahl games
To me this is clear that we are making a very large and complicated issue that much more so for little to no reason. This is much ado about nothing. If we were to add 2 more rounds to our draft given the limited prospect space, would have to also include a bump in prospect list size, however this would cause a further issue down the road for teams number of contracts especially with so many signing long term. This is NOT an option.
We did a waiver week last year and I also think that it is not the best option even though the likelyhood is that it wouldn't be anywhere near it was last year.
Perhaps going back to a free for all at a set time is the best option. But with restrictions. When doing these adds in previous years, teams also had to post signings or drops to stay compliant to 20 prospects. This needs to be fully enforced and then there will not be issues.
I'm willing to look at the list idea as well, but I don't see the need for the extra work for very little end result. Teams have the ability all year round to add and drop from the prospect list thus allowing tough decisions and also helps with parity.
My thought really is that this a non issue and should be simplified as it was previously but I welcome the leagues input on these findings and in no way is this a final decision.
we have seen a lot of input on a couple of different suggestions for what to do after the draft, or round three of the draft is complete. There is a lot of passion about this issue mostly sparked to a change last year to allow these players to be added with a waiver period where teams lower in standings to claim on prospects added during the first week after draft completion. This was deemed as many as a failure, however the intent of this was to bring parity to the league and allow teams that lacked depth(perceived depth based on standings) to have basically first shot. I'm not convinced it was a failure as I believe while frustrating, it did in fact benefit the teams that needed help. That said I am unsure if it were so bad mostly due to a few reasons.
1. there were a number of gm turnovers last year who appear for focused on their teams than previous gm's
2. many teams were no where near the 20 prospect limit
3. this system allowed a gm who previously did not put effort into this post draft for the free for all to have the work done by others attempting to claim them and then swooping in using their priority.
To me last years claims were an anomaly and here is why:
We all saw wolf's numbers on prospects added from the 2015 draft year.....
The current VHL prospect ownership from the 2015 NHL draft is as follows:
1st round: 30 of 30 prospects owned
2nd round: 30 of 30 prospects owned
3rd round: 29 of 30 prospects owned
4th round: 28 of 30 prospects owned
5th round: 15 of 30 prospects owned
6th round: 12 of 30 prospects owned
7th round: 12 of 30 prospects owned
that means that 67 prospects have been added post round 3 last year. Given the history of our league this is an anomoly of massive proportions.
Facts are that given every teams current prospect lists only 6 teams have room for more than 2 prospects and 18 teams are at 20 prospects. This is all before the draft has happened where teams have to make space for the first three rounds of players. That leaves a LOT of teams unable to add much in the way of “Lottery ticket” prospects.
Simply just sign more or add to the prospect list maximum you say?
Ten teams are already within easy reach of the 50 contract maximum. Bet you all forgot that rule. Expanding the prospect list simply will cause a contract logjam and another problem in about 2-3 years. This to me is not an option. Sure the nhl has 50 contracts and up to 90 prospects, however in the nhl you can only hold those prospects for 2 years before signing a contract using up both elc years and contract space. Here in the vhl you may hold players without 50 nhl games as prospects until age 26.
To show you previously how things were done, 2014 draft and back, teams were able to add prospects after the draft ended at a given start time in a first come first serve basis. Lets take a closer look:
2012 draft:
12 players from round 4 and beyond were added post draft within the initial two weeks.
Of those 12,
1 player was dropped
3 are now on Farm teams in the VHL
8 are still on prospect lists.
41 TOTAL nhl games amonst all of these players
549 TOTAL ahl games or 45/player average
they have attended 4 nhl camps
Noteable players:
Marek Mazanec 27 nhl games/115 ahl
Oskar Sundqvist 12 nhl games/44 ahl
Trevor Carrick 2 nhl games/136 ahl
Nick Ebert 79 ahl games
2013 Draft:
13 players added in initial two weeks post draft
Of those 13,
4 were dropped
4 are on vhl farm teams
5 remain on prospect lists
119 TOTAL nhl games
426 ahl game or 32/player
they have attended 3 nhl camps
we are pretty sure what these players are going to be
Noteable players:
Christian Folin 65 nhl games/36 ahl
Connor Carrick 49 nhl games/133 ahl
Danill Tarasov 5 nhl games/181 ahl
2014 Draft:
18 players added in initial two weeks post draft
Of those 18,
3 were dropped
ZERO on vhl farm
15 remain on prospect lists
53 TOTAL nhl games
198 ahl games or 11/player
they have attended 2 nhl camps
they still have time to develop into something useful but certainly not high end players.
Noteable players:
Viktor Arvidsson 53 nhl games/87 ahl
Austin Carroll 45 ahl games
Michael Bunting 51 ahl games
To me this is clear that we are making a very large and complicated issue that much more so for little to no reason. This is much ado about nothing. If we were to add 2 more rounds to our draft given the limited prospect space, would have to also include a bump in prospect list size, however this would cause a further issue down the road for teams number of contracts especially with so many signing long term. This is NOT an option.
We did a waiver week last year and I also think that it is not the best option even though the likelyhood is that it wouldn't be anywhere near it was last year.
Perhaps going back to a free for all at a set time is the best option. But with restrictions. When doing these adds in previous years, teams also had to post signings or drops to stay compliant to 20 prospects. This needs to be fully enforced and then there will not be issues.
I'm willing to look at the list idea as well, but I don't see the need for the extra work for very little end result. Teams have the ability all year round to add and drop from the prospect list thus allowing tough decisions and also helps with parity.
My thought really is that this a non issue and should be simplified as it was previously but I welcome the leagues input on these findings and in no way is this a final decision.
