Backdraft: Is McPhee Really Blowing Away the Competition?
by Stephen Pepper on Jun 25, 2009 7:00 AM EDT
35 comments
Oh, we love the bad puns around here.
For sure, recent Capitals draftees have made an indelible mark on the franchise, most notably the "Young Guns" of Alex Ovechkin, Alex Semin, Nicklas Backstrom, and Mike Green. And several other draftee actors in supporting roles have shined, like Simeon Varlamov, Karl Alzner, and Jeff Schultz. So given all of that, and coupled with the dearth of prospects and hopefuls which emerged from Capitals draft classes throughout the late 90's and into this decade, it's tempting to overrate the Capitals' recent draft success relative to the rest of the league. Great strides in Capitals drafting have been made of late, which can be fairly documented. But, in fact, GM George McPhee & Co. still have a ways to go before we can say that they're blowing away the competition.
McPhee didn't arrive on the Caps scene in the best of drafting circumstances. SI summarized the state of the franchise, following the team's improbable run to the SCF in the spring of 1998, thusly:
NEEDS: The Capitals need to find the Fountain of Youth but without a first-round selection, they will be hard-pressed to get the young, punishing defenseman they sorely need. Five of their top seven rearguards are 31 or older and their age showed in the Stanley Cup Finals against Detroit. Hopefully, Washington can find a defenseman who can stay healthy, as the injury bug has bitten the Caps’ defense many times over the last few years. A playmaking center also is needed, since Adam Oates, Dale Hunter and Michal Pivonka are all over 32.
But he gradually increased the odds for himself on the draft board by dealing for, and retaining, an abundance of selections, particularly first-rounders. This weekend's draft will be the fifth draft since 1998 in which the team has had less than 10 total selections. And should McPhee retain the team's first-round pick on Friday, it will be the club's 15th first-rounder in the last eight years (2002-09). No other team has had more than 12 first-round selections in that time (not even Pittsburgh -- they've only had six to date during that span).
The early returns, however, were not good. Of all of those picks, the only pre-lockout (i.e., pre-2004 entry draft) Caps draftees on the 2008-09 season roster were Eric Fehr, Boyd Gordon, and Semin -- all three first-round selections. However, fourteen players who wore a Capitals sweater in at least one game during the 2008-09 campaign were originally drafted by Washington, one indication of draft improvement.
As we all hope, McPhee, supported by a staff which has remained relatively intact throughout most of his tenure, may be reaching his drafting zenith. But he still has significant ground to make up in draft success compared to his peers. And, of course, most of his post-lockout selections have not yet run their development course. Simply willing John Carlson, or Alzner, to be a top-pair defenseman in 2010-11 will not make him so.
So let's try to better quantify his progress. How much has McPhee really improved post-lockout, and where does he rank amongst the competition? Two common objective measures of draft success are (i) number and % of players drafted who have reached the NHL and (ii) number and % of players drafted who have played in 200+ NHL contests.
Looking at Caps draftees from 2002 through 2006, the % of those draftees reaching the NHL is still below the league average, even during this recent period when McPhee might be said to be hitting his drafting stride. Fifteen of McPhee's 49 draftees (30.6%), from the 2002 through the 2006 draft, have reached the show to date. The league average during that same span is 33.2% (438 of 1317) reaching the NHL. And that's where I would submit, given a small and recent window of draft history, one might find the best indicator of improvement, especially on a contending team, when cracking an active roster is especially difficult.
Focusing on just first-round picks, McPhee and staff have converted seven of 11 such selections from that 2002-2006 time period into solid NHL contributors -- Schultz, Gordon, and, perhaps, Steve Eminger -- if not elite talent -- the "Young Guns" -- with the jury out on Varlamov. (By the way, for those still not particularly high on Schultz: might McPhee have "missed" on Green, by selecting Schultz first and risking that Green would be selected by Dallas, instead of D Mark Fistric?) Nine of those 11 picks (81.8%) have reached the big show to date, and five (45.5%) of those had already played in > 200 NHL games to date. By comparison, from 2002 to 2006, first-round draftees league-wide have made it to the NHL 86.7% (130 of 150) of the time, and 52.7% (79 of 150) of them have exceeded 200 NHL GP to date.
So even looking at more recent trends, McPhee's success rate falls just below the league average. We can speculate on whether that rate will ultimately increase on account of 2007 and 2008 draft classes, but it's still far too early to tell.
If you crave more of this type of analysis, daoust over at PPP put together an enormous spreadsheet of draft data compiling statistics through the 2007-08 season from the NHL careers of draftees, at any round, from 1996-2006. In addition to providing data on % of draftees to reach the show and % of those who have played > 200 NHL games, the spreadsheet provides two other useful metrics for evaluating a franchise's draft success: NHL GP per draftee and NHL points earned per draftee. (We might provide an update along the lines of this post once 2008-09 season data is incorporated into the PPP spreadsheet.)
But a couple of interesting observations from the PPP data: Ottawa is near the top in drafting in all four of those metrics from 96-06, and yet, as we pointed out recently, not a single Sens draftee has won a Stanley Cup. Conversely, Detroit is apparently dismal overall at drafting, ranking dead last in three of these four metrics, and 27th in the fourth, during 1996-2006, yet has won multiple Cups in that time frame. Plucking a few late-round gems notwithstanding (or just getting lucky?).
Which leads to our final point: the name of the Stanley Cup winning game is really more the success that a franchise has with developing the players that they draft, in whichever round they draft them -- coaching, molding, motivating, honing their talents -- rather than mystical prescience at the draft table. Thank goodness that the Caps have an exemplary American league organization straight up I-83 to help do just that.
1 recs |
35 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
From a drafting perspective, I’d say it appears his shoots for the home run early, then tends to be flaccid in subsequent attempts.
by Bald Pollack on Jun 25, 2009 7:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Seriously though, Falconer over at BWA put together an interesting chart of impact players relative to draft position that is a good accompaniment to this.
by Bald Pollack on Jun 25, 2009 8:08 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Perhaps the Caps relative better success at the draft table may have to do with an improved scouting staff? Afterall its doubtful that GM’s in general ever see any but the top prospects play, but rely heavily on their scouting staffs to make the decision on whom to draft. For that, one could give GMGM credit.
I find sometimes it's easy to be myself
sometimes I find it's better to be somebody else
by Fauxrumors on Jun 25, 2009 8:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There’s really two separate eras of McPhee drafts—pre- and post-firesale. One of the first moves McPhee made after the firesale was blostering the Caps’ scouting staff to the point where it’s one of the biggest in the NHL, and the organizational philosophy shifted to rebuilding the system and player development, something that need to be done every since before McPhee took over.
I’ve always been a bit of a prospect geek, but I can’t remember the Caps system having the amount of talent they’ve built to the last couple of years. I’d be interested to see this review done again in a few years. The mostly desert of the first seven years (where there where two drafts without a first round pick) help tip the balance against the past five (from which there are still prospects in the system).
by Forsch31 on Jun 25, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
(By the way, for those still not particularly high on Schultz: might McPhee have “missed” on Green, by selecting Schultz first and risking that Green would be selected by Dallas, instead of D Mark Fistric?)
I shudder when I think of this and I’m the biggest Jeff Schultz defender out there.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 8:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Also consider that Green might not be the player he is under any coach other than Boudreau. So it works both ways, both the team and the player may have lucked out.
by gfcaps fan on Jun 25, 2009 8:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But even if Green were, say, 85% of the player he is he’d be one of the best offensive defensemen in the NHL significantly better than Schultz.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolute agree. But compare 06-07 to 07-08 for where I get my point.
by gfcaps fan on Jun 25, 2009 9:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
However, you’d have to remember that Mike Green was a late riser in the 2004 draft. If I’m remembering correctly, he wasn’t even projected to go in the first round until the weeks running up to Draft Day. Meanwhile, Schultz was always seen as a mid- to late-first rounder.
Part of the problem was that Green played for a bad team in juniors, so scouts really didn’t start to get a handle on his potential until later. Also Green was not known for his offense then—he was projected as a two-way defenseman with some scoring ability as well as being a great open-ice hitter. His offense didn’t really take off until after he got drafted.
by Forsch31 on Jun 25, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Green was more luck than anything else. I don’t think anyone saw this coming given his WHL stats- good but not the Mike Green of today. Backstrom was a far more astute pick IMO.
You can't reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into.
by ChrisAm on Jun 25, 2009 8:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think there was some luck allowed but I also think McPhee put himself in a position to be lucky by acquiring so many high draft picks. Going in to the 2004 draft Green was regarded as a something of a gamble: he’d played well in Saskatoon and seemed to have a lot of promise but he was also an absolutely awful team that went 7-52-11-2 and was outscored 279-140; every single player on the team who played more than ten games had a negative plus-minus rating, so people didn’t quite know what to think of him. Maybe if he’d been on a better team he would have had more of an opportunity to jump in to the play or work on the powerplay unit.
Anyhow, I think McPhee having four of the first 33 picks (and being able to take Ovechkin) let himself be in a position where he could take the risk.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I recall, a lot of scouts praised Green for sticking with that awful team in Saskatoon when he could have forced his way to a better junior team. And then they were doubly impressed when he led Saskatoon to a 59 point improvement in his final year. The word character and leadership came up quite a bit when scouts evaluated Green and we all know how McPhee loves those qualities.
by b.orr4 on Jun 25, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Backstrom was an easy pick, not all that astute. There was a group of 5 “can’t miss” guys in that draft, 3 were gone before GMGM picked, and one (Kessel) wasn’t a true C. I’m not sure where else GMGM would have gone with that pick.
by Fehr and Balanced on Jun 26, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think the Dallas fans scream about how they could have had Green instead of Fistric the way we scream we could have drafted Getzlaf instead of Fehr?
by b.orr4 on Jun 25, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is that they scream about it less. A lot of the time you hear a Capitals fan complain about it’s in the context of “McPhee sucks and doesn’t know what he’s doing!” and Dallas is on their third GM/GM team since that draft.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
NHL.com recently had an article naming 2003 as the third best draft of all time, so it goes a bit more past “could have had Getzlaf.”
Fehr put up huge numbers in juniors to justify that pick and has really been unlucky with early career injuries, but given the names in the first round that came after Fehr, that might be the one pick that McPhee would really want back.
Of course, the Rangers picking Hugh Jessiman at 12 that year are probably saying – “we could have had Fehr.”
by Stormblue on Jun 25, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My heart sinks whenever I look at that list and see “Mike Richards” sitting at 24.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
who says #24 is a slouch pick?!
/goes back to figuring out how deal it
from the house that Red Jesus built
by bigonetimer on Jun 25, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On the bright side fewer cap headaches with Fehr.
by red army line on Jun 25, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But if the team picks Richards, Nylander’s not here.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you say that like it’s a bad thing! : 0
from the house that Red Jesus built
by bigonetimer on Jun 25, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s no skill in picking what to scratch off on a scratch off lottery card. But if you get more cards, you’ll win more often.
Credit McPhee with hoarding a high volume of picks. Those 15 first rounders in eight years are themselves good drafting. Even if he had just followed the ISS rankings, he’d have done pretty well because he put himself in a position to succeed. I don’t think you can separate this from the choices he’s made.
by Gould Old Days on Jun 25, 2009 9:24 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
What about winning % for those players who’ve played at least a game and those playing at least 200? Who cares how many games they play if their stats and the winning % aren’t any good?
by jeffmal on Jun 25, 2009 9:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure where the value is in winning percentage. Ilya Kovalchuk has a much worse winning percentage than Milan Jurcina, but there’s no doubt who the better of those two players is.
by David M. Getz on Jun 25, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And then there are the Islanders, who really should have everyone in the AHL.
by red army line on Jun 25, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hopefully Della Rover, Osala, Kugryshev, Holtby, Perrault, Bouchard etc prove that the later round drafting has improved in the past couple seasons.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
by Sombrero Guy on Jun 25, 2009 9:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that was the first thing that went through my mind, too. And if they do, I think GMGM’s probably no longer overrated, huh?
by DrinkingPartner on Jun 25, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if they do, I think GMGM’s probably no longer overrated, huh?
If they do, that means that GMGM finally knows how to completely draft.
by Bald Pollack on Jun 25, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, A. Gordon even making it to the point where he’s played in the NHL is pretty amazing.
by red army line on Jun 25, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d say since the Kelly Cup and the Calder Cup are in our organizations’ pockets right now, then it would be jumping the gun a little to be judging McPhee on post-lockout results. Lets see what happens in the next 3-5 years.
by bigmac1124 on Jun 25, 2009 10:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
the mcphee-centered draft day profile by comcast a few years ago was the greatest caps-related TV show i’ve ever seen. worth watching if you haven’t seen. anyone know whether they’re considering doing it again?
by Natty Bumppo on Jun 25, 2009 11:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
One problem with the 200 games breakdown—very few players would have reached that benchmark in the drafts since 2004 outside of elite prospects, especially with the lost lockout year. Only Ovechkin and Green have gotten to that number of games, and Green has 242. Ovechkin jumped to the NHL as soon as they were open for business, while Green had one year in Hershey before making the transition to DC. Jeff Schultz, who some have said has been rushed a bit, has 174 games, while Calder nominee Nicklas Backstrom has 164 (and he was the most NHL ready of the 2006 top 5). Different kinds of players have different development curves, and many organizations still have viable prospects taken in the 2004 draft and onward. Considering 2004 is the year McPhee started to show some big improvement in his drafting, that’s going to throw off a statistical analysis of draft success when you include two years where there has been enough time to do a proper evaluation. Those two years consititute a small sample that skews the findings.
For instance, although you compared the Caps’ 2002 through 2006 drafts through to the league average, it should be noted that the 2003 draft only featured 6 picks, with one first rounder and their next pick a 3rd rounder, and every review of league draft success (Mirtle did one about a year ago) shows that the number of NHLers found in the later rounds drops is significantly smaller than the first two.
I’d also like to know how you came up with the league average number. Is it on a team-by-team basis (figuring out how individual teams do on average), or are you comparing one team’s performance against the average overall performance of 29 other teams? For instance—all three Caps first round picks in 2002 have reached the 200-game level. However, 14 of the 30 picks have not reached that level, and four of those players haven’t even reached the NHL.
In 2003—10 of the 30 first round picks have not reached 200 games, including Fehr, who lost a season and developmental time to a mysterious back ailment.
In 2004—20 of the 30 first round picks have not reached 200 games, while the Caps are 1-1 in that respect.
by Forsch31 on Jun 25, 2009 12:42 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm not a Schultz defender or fan
It’s time to move him and get something for him – he can’t hold his own in front of the net duriong the playoffs which is surprising for a guy with his physical size….
by markbona-capsfan99 on Jun 26, 2009 9:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Why would you want to move the team’s youngest defenseman, a guy who plays sound positional hockey, doesn’t turn the puck over, frequently plays against the opposition’s top scorers and doesn’t commit stupid penalties?
by Bald Pollack on Jun 26, 2009 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
he can’t hold his own in front of the net duriong the playoffs which is surprising for a guy with his physical size….
He also only played 12 minutes in one game and was playing with a broken rib. I don’t think that undoes all the good he’s done over the last two seasons.
by David M. Getz on Jun 26, 2009 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
22 | 13 | 5 | 4 | 30 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
19 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 23 |
|
Atlanta
|
18 | 10 | 6 | 2 | 22 |
|
Florida
|
20 | 9 | 9 | 2 | 20 |
|
Carolina
|
21 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 13 |
(updated 11.21.2009 at 8:36 AM EST)
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
