Jump to content

Thanks to Triumph I want to Fire Conte +Staff


Recommended Posts

I think you need a little math lesson.

In 4 drafts, there were a total of 88 players who developed outside the 1st round.

You think, on par, a team should be able to draft 1 NHL'er a season outside the 2nd round...

30 (teams) x 4 (Drafts) = 120 players. You're missing 32 players for that to work out.

Really, it should be 88/120 = .73. So there is a 73% chance we should have an NHLer past the first round.

.73*4 = 2.92 players. We currently have 2, to follow the average, we are due for another....

Its a crapshoot to be honest. I value our scouting, we make good picks when we can and can see value (we move up if we think we can steal someone). While we may have been sub-par getting role players in the draft, we have been great getting role-players outside the draft.

Oduya, Rafalski, Madden, Greene, Clarkson.... it seems every year we get a new role player.

Actually those odds are high. The years quoted were 9 round drafts, and he was considering all players outside the 1st round. So 8 rounds x 30 teams = 240. That number is a little low as it does not consider compensation picks for UFA's or unsigned 1st rounders. Multiply that 240 by the 4 years of drafts and you get roughly 960 players picked. 88 of them made it to the nhl. 88/960 = .091 so teams have roughly 9% percent chance of finding and nhl player outside the 1st round in these years. This includes overagers, some of whom were on CMONBRENT's list, who have a better chance of making the NHL due to them being a more known quantity and further developed. Nor does it include redrafted players who are much the same. At a Glance i counted 6 such guys with Jarret Stoll and Matt Lombardi counted twice and Nathan Paetsch as a former first rounder.

But the one thing that none of that explains is teams that ended up with multiple players like Dallas Minnesota, and Boston, and those who ended up with none

But the one thing that none of these stats will show is which draft years are weak on their own or strong, 2003 is widely regarded as a strong draft with almost all teams getting a 1st round player and at least 1 after that, 99;2002; and 2001 were not regarded as such and when one looks at the list of players and asks who on that list are more then role players the number gets much smaller. I dont have the numbers present, but i remember someone brought it up a few years ago, the chance of finding NHL quality players past the 1st round, is really quite low. The second round was under 40% and it gets much worse from there.

EDIT

I didnt see CMON only talking about rounds 2-5, but that still only brings the % up to about 18 still not a very good chance of finding a player.

Edited by Sarge18
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Now im not going to defend our drafting record over those years as the results speak for themselves. But if you look at the ones we passed over that made the NHL, the list gets even smaller, and really anything after the 3rd round is a crapshoot anyway. Our strategy of taking risks on players who were known to be talented, but had other other issues that needed to be worked out, or taking risks on lesser known guys with the hope they would pan out came back to bite the team. It has created the situation of a lack of tradeable assets or young guys ready to fill holes the past 2 years.

However if you look at the drafts starting in 2003 to present, there seems to have been a shift in the teams strategy. They seem to be going back to the traditional leagues for talent, instead of being so college and unknown euro heavy. Thats not to say that they arent still looking there, as both are valuable talent pools. 2005 is a good reflection of this shift. It seemed to be the start of the shift of going back to the CHL, and starting next year, 5 of the 7 picks will be playing pro hockey. It would have been 6 if Alex Sundstrom wasnt full of himself, and very well could be 6/7 if Fayne keeps developing at Providence.

While it is still too early to judge 06 and 07, they show a similar trend of going back to traditional talent pools with the occasional risk thrown in. In 06 1 Tulupov looks to have payed off and 1 Romano doesnt, but thats the draft for you, there are a reason those guys arent 1st round picks.

At the end of the day i think our last 3 drafts so far reflect well on Conte and the Staff, holding things that happened 9 to 5 years ago against them, when the recent history looks much better does not make much sense to me.

Edited by Sarge18
Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/NJD/draft.html

Thanks for the website Triumph....

2007: Jury still out, looks like Halischuk, Palmieri and Hoeffel MAY contribute one day... Jury is still out

2006: Corrente and Tupulov look like they could contribute, The russians look like Busts (C+ Depending on how Corrente and Tupulov pan out this could be higher

2005: This is awful. Bergfors looks like a Suglobov. May play a few games for us but doesn't look very promising overall. Fraser could still be ok, but not many people are talking about them (D)

2004: Zajac and not much else. Zajac is good, but you are supposed to make good picks in the 1st round (D-)

2003: Parise is great, and Vrana looks like a late bloomer. (B)

2002: When Janssen is your success story of the draft it is really really sad (F)

2001: Your only NHL Player gets released 1 yr too soon in Voros. (F)

2000: Hale was a bust, Martin was probably our last GOOD find past the 2nd round. Rupp contributes a lilttle (B-)

1999: Again our only pick that made anything of himself was Commodore and we traded him shortly into his NHL Career (C-)

1998: This is our last really good draft. Gomez a star, Gionta has turned out very good, especially where we got him. Van Ryn was a good pick, we just couldnt sign him (A-)

1997: Garbage (F)

1996: Colin White in 2nd, Willie Mitchell in 8th (B-)

1995: Sykora good 1st rd Value, nothing much else (We traded McAuley for Gilmour) (B)

1994: Elias Souray and Sullivan all good NHL players (B+)

1993: Pandolfo and Morrison (B)

1992: J Smith, Brylin, Yelle Serviceable NHLers (B -)

1991: Niedermayer + Rolston (A-)

1990: Brodeur, Dunham, Bombardir, Modry, Schwab, Zelepukin (A)

Now to my point...... If you look at the years from 1999 on, We have had very little draft success. Our only great value pick was Paul Martin in the 3rd round. Zach was our best draft pick overall, and Zajac should continue to improve and be good. 2006 and 2007 are still open, but again nothing earth shattering coming up in my opinion.

If you look at 1990 - 1998 we drafted so many NHL players. If they didnt play on our team, we were able to trade players to get key players in our cup runs.

Maybe the problem Lou is having is that none of our players in the system are any good. Our drafts have been REALLY bad outside of the above mentioned players.

Just to give a nice little comparison....Lets look at the Wings. A team who has had 3 Cups over the same timeframe, but always seem to be good.

Detroit Red Wings

2004: Johan Franzen (97th overall)

2002: Valterri Fillpula (95th overall)

1999: Henrik Zetterberg (210 overall)

1998: Pavel Datsyuk (171st overall)

1994 Thomas Holmstrom (257 Overall)

Granted there early rounds havent been great, there ability to pick off talent late is amazing.

I think our well has dried up. Time to move Conte out and time to bring some new blood into our scouting department

CMON LOU... PULL THE TRIGGER

Some of these ratings are crazy. For example, Conte had one pick in the first 3 rounds of 2004 and it was in the bottom half of the 1st Round. He got us a 2nd line center who was in the NHL within 2 years. At worst, he should be given a B+ for that draft.

While you obviously state that 1998 was a great draft, how can Conte be given anything other than an A+ for that draft? His highest pick was 2nd to last in the 1st round yet managed to get 3 really good NHLers + Berglund who at least was valuable enough to get us Kozlov in a trade. If you factor in where his picks were, that has to go down as one of the best drafts ever by any GM, not an A-.

How about 2003? We got Parise in the 1st and he is now arguably our best player. Vrana is developing exactly how you would expect a 2nd rounder to develop. 5 years isn't really a late bloomer. If you can get 1 star + a guy who looks like he'll have a long servicable NHL career in the mold of a Sergei Brylin while going into a draft with no pick higher than 20, you should get an A.

In general, I think you're expectations are way to high and suggesting Conte needs to move on is absurd. Considering the crap picks Lou provided him with, 2007 may go down as an absolutly amazing draft and 2006 will look a lot better if the Russians get signed by Lowell and actually start getting some playing time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When did Detroit draft Zetterberg and Datsyuk... I dont remember them having many early draft picks this past decade and a half. But lets face it what they do isn't easy. We can all play GM for past drafts, tougher to predict talent on the fly.

Edited by njdevils783
Link to post
Share on other sites
When did Detroit draft Zetterberg and Datsyuk... I dont remember them having many early draft picks this past decade and a half. But lets face it what they do isn't easy. We can all play GM for past drafts, tougher to predict talent on the fly.

98 & 99.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether you agree with CB or not, there was absolutely no mention in his post of who he would replace Conte (and the staff) with. I'm not sure he realizes this, but there would be no turning back, Conte is very highly regarded around the league and would be hired by another team, immediately. Since CB suggested this, and seems very serious about it, I'd like him to please give us replacements for Conte, and the entire scouting staff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarge as usual makes some great points - just as a minor note, Romano is the kind of late-round pick that people love. However, it looks like there's a good chance that Tony Romano won't even be a viable AHL player after his absolute collapse in the OHL.

it's also not fair to judge 2004 as eckford and perkovich have yet to play a game of pro hockey. eckford is at least good enough to get a pro contract from new jersey, which is pretty damn good for a 7th rounder.

Edited by Triumph
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK... everyone is getting on me.... fine..... but very few of you are willing to step up and say that the reason we are in the position we are in is because our lousy drafting.....

Bash the Rangers....

2001 -- Tyutin 40th overall, Zdlicky 176th overall, Hollweg 238th

2002 -- Prucha 240th overall

2003 -- Dawes 149th overall

2004 -- Dubinsky 60th overall, Callahan 127th overall

Artem Anisimov 2006 54th overall looks real good.

Thats not even including Marc Staal.

to Sue -- I wont be the first one to say who should replace Conte and Staff... when i said we should fire him... its just me stating we have done a HORRIBLE job in the last 7 yrs.. no matter what anyone says i still believe it.

Something needs to happen..... again... not undrafted free agents from Europe.. but draft scouting.

It's funny I keep bringing up example after example of other teams recent success and our failures but still no one wants to acknowledge that we have done a HORRID job drafting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brent, you would have given the Rangers D's or F's for the '02 and '03 drafts if I use your Devils draft grades as a guide but now they are an example of how to draft well? It's easy to cherry pick players from year to year and doing it a few times more doesn't make your point any better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to do better in the draft for sure, and we would probably do much better by not making the playoffs. But let's talk about that for a second. Since the Devils made the playoffs for the first time, they've only missed them twice. TWICE IN 20 YEARS! That's a remarkable accomplishment. Yeah, it'd be nice if the Devils could keep making the playoffs AND produce more stars, like Detroit, but I don't think keeping up with the uber-elite team in the NHL is a firable offense when the perhaps second-best team in the NHL over the past 20 years, the Devils, have done more than OK.

Perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the Devils haven't done a 'horrid' job in the last 7 years. They've done a subpar job, to be sure. What you're not acknowledging is that the draft is a ton of luck and that the Devils have not had a lot of picks to work with.

So go ahead and cite Hollweg and Prucha like these guys are anything but fringe NHLers while poo-pooing any Devils in the same boat. The Rangers drafted Hugh Jessiman while Steve Bernier, Zach Parise, Ryan Getzlaf and Dustin Brown were still on the board in 2003 - the Rangers could've been a Stanley Cup team had they drafted one of those guys, and picked someone worth a damn in 2004 - even someone like Olesz or Zajac, whose careers have been less than stellar so far, would be an improvement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CB - if you want to fire someone, and their staff one of the first rules if you want to be regarded as reasonable is you have to be able to provide actual suggestions as to their replacements. For example, if you decided that you wanted to fire Brent Sutter, you'd have to recommend a reasonable replacement and provide reasons why that person would be better (and, btw, in this case, you can't pick the head of scouting for another team, we'd owe compensation, and you can't say because they aren't Conte, because that's not a real reason).

Either provide reasonable alternatives or, quite frankly, this doesn't amount to anything but "I don't like the results but have no useful solutions", which simply isn't helpful. You'd scrap the entire staff and you don't have a single suggestion as to a replacement. And don't ask me for one, because I didn't suggest they be fired. I just asked you to provide the reasonble, logical end to your argument. And you don't have one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
CB - if you want to fire someone, and their staff one of the first rules if you want to be regarded as reasonable is you have to be able to provide actual suggestions as to their replacements. For example, if you decided that you wanted to fire Brent Sutter, you'd have to recommend a reasonable replacement and provide reasons why that person would be better (and, btw, in this case, you can't pick the head of scouting for another team, we'd owe compensation, and you can't say because they aren't Conte, because that's not a real reason).

Either provide reasonable alternatives or, quite frankly, this doesn't amount to anything but "I don't like the results but have no useful solutions", which simply isn't helpful. You'd scrap the entire staff and you don't have a single suggestion as to a replacement. And don't ask me for one, because I didn't suggest they be fired. I just asked you to provide the reasonble, logical end to your argument. And you don't have one.

OWNED.

I think this is just frustration boiling over and the thinking is that if these drafts are subpar then anyone capable could be plugged in and do a better job. I doubt CB has intimate knowledge of the scouting ranks and is just expressing his dissatisfaction with the job Conte and our staff has done.

If you're gonna bash the scouts' drafting record, you need to at least give them credit for their under the radar FA record. Oduya, Clarkson, Madden, and Greene were not just given to us. Scouts went out there and found these players and said "We could use them." That is good scouting my friend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OWNED.

I think this is just frustration boiling over and the thinking is that if these drafts are subpar then anyone capable could be plugged in and do a better job. I doubt CB has intimate knowledge of the scouting ranks and is just expressing his dissatisfaction with the job Conte and our staff has done.

If you're gonna bash the scouts' drafting record, you need to at least give them credit for their under the radar FA record. Oduya, Clarkson, Madden, and Greene were not just given to us. Scouts went out there and found these players and said "We could use them." That is good scouting my friend.

Actually, I understand the frustration. I'm not sure firings would do any good. I noticed that one of the complaints was the choice of some Europeans (Russians) who haven't yet panned out, however, when NJ chose them, I seem to remember that most of us were actually somewhat cheered, it was something different and we thought there might be some offensive upside, at last. As for actually favoring the European leagues, although there have been some picks there recently, if NJ loves anything, it is US college players and this, I firmly believe, is a Lamoriello bias and not a Conte bias and Lou, as anyone who knows the team, makes the final call at the drafts.

If they took any risk they didn't have to take, on a player who would have been there later, it was Adrian Foster. And that was truly out of character, as he was, well, neither a US college player nor a European. Do I wish the drafts had been better? Yes, especially since, well, with NJ's organizational philosophy, so much depends on it. However, good undrafted UFA signing can help a draft that wasn't what you'd like, and that is actually the job of the scouting staff as well, as you point out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OWNED.

I think this is just frustration boiling over and the thinking is that if these drafts are subpar then anyone capable could be plugged in and do a better job. I doubt CB has intimate knowledge of the scouting ranks and is just expressing his dissatisfaction with the job Conte and our staff has done.

If you're gonna bash the scouts' drafting record, you need to at least give them credit for their under the radar FA record. Oduya, Clarkson, Madden, and Greene were not just given to us. Scouts went out there and found these players and said "We could use them." That is good scouting my friend.

Again you are not understanding my frustrations..... many a times I have stated.. this has nothing to do with our record of signing undrafted free agents. I have said many a time that we have done a good job there. I also said that we have had to hunt these people out because of our lack of developing players through the draft. I mean.... for all of the Rafalski's it seems like there are 3 Malmivaara's. It goes both ways.

I will admit.. i do not have intimate knowledge of our scouting ranks. I just see results.

Pretty much we don't have the pieces to either develop, or make trades at the deadline to keep pace with the big boys. We aren't a free agent draw like Detroit, New York, Philly etc.

So if we continue down this path..... once Marty Retires..... We will be in the ranks of the Florida Panthers, Atlanta Thrashers, Columbus Blue Jackets of the NHL.

I love the team as much as anyone, been a fan since 1982....... and when it comes down to it... we were sucessful for our home grown talent.... that well has dried up... lets get it going again!

Link to post
Share on other sites
So if we continue down this path..... once Marty Retires..... We will be in the ranks of the Florida Panthers, Atlanta Thrashers, Columbus Blue Jackets of the NHL.

Look at what the high draft picks have done for those sorry franchises.

Seriously, it would be nice to get better without getting worse but that's probably not going to happen. We're going to have to take our lumps, hopefully in the way Pittsburgh did, by drafting high a few times --- well, at least once or twice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the original expectations are set crazily. A draft where the Devils get a guy that looks like a future all-star plus a guy who looks like an NHLer is only a B and a draft that nets you a guy who looks like a legit top #2 center is ranked a D-. The Devils really had only 2 real bad drafts, 01 and 02, but we're arguing like the Devils had gone 5 years without producing anything from the draft. The '07 draft is actually looking like it may be really good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's as much a case of 'the Devils can't draft anymore' as much as its a case of 'other teams can draft well, too.' If you look at Drafts from the late 80's and the 90's, the Devils churned out a LOT of NHL'ers. They were also the first to bring in Russians with, I believe Fetisov and Kasatonov. With the internet and better technology, the world, as we know, has gotten smaller. And the scouting game is now on a more level playing field. The Devils are by no means a sterling example of drafting excellence, but with nothing but late picks, its hard to come up with definite talent.

Hindsight is always 20/20, anyway.

Also, I refuse to call Bergfors and Frazee busts just yet. Bergfors made the team out of camp this year before getting injured. He finally began picking it up at the end of the year after 2 shoulder injuries. Plus, he is only, what? 21, 22? That is still very young.

Frazee also may have had a bad couple of years in college, but he has the talent to have been Team USA's goalie in the World Juniors. Now its up to the Devils system to see if they can develop that talent. He didn't do horrible in his lone AHL performance this year, either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Case is closed.... I am on an island... everyone disagrees with me... this is fine. The thread can die a slow and lazy death....

If I am wrong in the next few years... and our guys over the last 2-3 drafts work out i will eat my humble pie. But if we crash and burn.. you better damn believe i will bring this up again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Halischuk is tied for the lead in goals on what will almost certainly be the Memorial Cup winning team. Most scouts don't seem to think his scoring will translate to the NHL, but I think he's looked at in the Mike Keane vein of a 3rd/4th line guy who can contribute on a checking line.

Palmieri looks like a potential power forward.

Sopanen's crushing it in the Finnish League, 4th in goals at 19. I suspect he's another Ahren Nittel in the making, but he's at least got skill.

The Devils are still a top team at finding young talent and integrating it into their team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We could make the same argument for every team in the league. For every good player a team drafts there is this and that guy who sucked. It really is all about luck.

Agreed...how many first rounders turned out to be absolute busts...

Dont knock Frazee just yet...Marty's number were not all that impressive when he was in junior either and look how he turned out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.