Malcolm Subban

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tuckerw3. Show Tuckerw3's posts

    Malcolm Subban

    In his mock draft, Mike G. Morreale picks Subban to go to the Bruins late in the first round.  He is as many of you may know, the younger brother of Hab's defenseman PK Subban.  Ironic.  Anyway here is the link:
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    I don't ever support using a top round pick on a goalie, so I don't like it.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tuckerw3. Show Tuckerw3's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]I don't ever support using a top round pick on a goalie, so I don't like it.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]
    Rask was second to only Price in his draft year I believe

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    Wow, things are slow for this writer!  No one has a clue who will pick where, or who will rise or fall between now and then.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban : Rask was second to only Price in his draft year I believe
    Posted by Tuckerw3[/QUOTE]

    And he was obtained by the Bruins via trade.  Not the draft.  Thomas wasn't drafted by the B's either.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban : And he was obtained by the Bruins via trade .  Not the draft.  Thomas wasn't drafted by the B's either.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    Evgeny Ryabchikov was!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]I don't ever support using a top round pick on a goalie, so I don't like it.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]


    I don't know why you would think that. 1st of all, regardless of position, hitting on legit talent is difficult in the 1st round. When 50% of the picks pan out it's a great year (on second thought, I don't even think 50% has ever happened).

    Just browsing through the 44 goaltenders taken in 1st round from 1981-2006 (ignoring the most recent/young kids), There seems to be a couple hall-of-famers, several regular all-stars, many serviceable starters, and a few of the more promising young goaltenders in the league. Yes there are More misses than hits, but that's the same with other positions as well. In my opinion, more goalies taken in the 1st round turn out to have long careers than any other position.

    To cherry pick 16 of the 44 names (36%):

    Grant Fuhr
    Tom Barrasso
    Martin Brodeur
    Olie Kolzig
    Jean-Sebastien Giguere
    Roberto Luongo
    Kari Lehtonen
    Marc-Andre Fleury
    Jocelyn Thibault
    Carey Price
    Tuukka Rask
    Jonathan Bernier
    Cory Schneider
    Cam Ward
    Semyon Varlamov
    Rick DiPietro (clearly woulda been a stud had he not been made of glass)

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    Yeah Ols, I never said you can't draft a goalie in the 1st round and win the lottery.  You can.

    But, I believe that predicting future goalie talent in an 18-year old is harder than predicting talent in any other position.  Goalies, even good ones, also take a long time to develop.  So even the good ones are usually dropped by the team that drafted them before they make it (Rask, Thomas, many on your list above).  I think it is much easier (although not easy) to predict the output of fowards and defensmen in the first two or three rounds.

    So I love what the Bruins have done in picking up talented goalies that are deep on other teams depth charts or otherwise available (Thomas, Rask, Khubodin), while taking a long shot chance on under-the-radar 18-year old goalies during the 5-7 rounds of the draft (Gothberg, Volden). If all that doesn't work out, you sign an FA goalie to bridge the gap.

    Stick with the better known commodities in the first two rounds of the draft.  Forwards usually.

    Just my opinion.


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    I hope they draft Slater Koekkoek. Wouldn't be upset to see them draft Subban though.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]Yeah Ols, I never said you can't draft a goalie in the 1st round and win the lottery.  You can. But, I believe that predicting future goalie talent in an 18-year old is harder than predicting talent in any other position.  Goalies, even good ones, also take a long time to develop.  So even the good ones are usually dropped by the team that drafted them before they make it (Rask, Thomas, many on your list above).  I think it is much easier (although not easy) to predict the output of fowards and defensmen in the first two or three rounds. So I love what the Bruins have done in picking up talented goalies that are deep on other teams depth charts or otherwise available (Thomas, Rask, Khubodin), while taking a long shot chance on under-the-radar 18-year old goalies during the 5-7 rounds of the draft (Gothberg, Volden). If all that doesn't work out, you sign an FA goalie to bridge the gap. Stick with the better known commodities in the first two rounds of the draft.  Forwards usually. Just my opinion.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]


    wait, i just said at least 16 of 44 total goalies taken in the 1st round since 1981 are at minimum serviceable starters that have long careers in the NHL, and are at maximum hall of famers or perennial all-stars. That's 38%, a much higher rate than any other position. You have to admit Fletch, comparing it to the lottery is really unfair.

    Seriously, I was going through the past 20 years of the draft when I was researching how utterly brutal the Columbus Blue Jackets have been, and it is apparently much more difficult, percentage-wise, to judge forwards and defensemen than it is goalies. So many 1st round skaters never make the NHL, and people just blame the GM's and act like it's an anomoly or a sign that they didn't do due-diligence. Unfortunately, It's much more of a crap-shoot  at the forward and defense position than people realize.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    And how many of those 16 achieved stardom for the teams that drafted them?  That is clearly a big part of the argument here.  The Bruins have Tuukka Rask and they did not draft him, just as I would prefer.

    And putting Varlamov and Dipietro in there is quite an enormous stretch.  One is a backup goalie on a bad team after being a backup goalie on another team.  The other has never been a decent goalie and is considered a total bust as a #1 overall pick (just before Heatley and Gaborik...).  Even Schnieder has never been a starting goalie.

    So your 16 is reduced to a small handful if we're looking at actual success, and success for the team that drafted them.

    What's more, a high number of the 44 were complete busts.

    So, I respect your opinion on this, but I am sticking with mine that you don't draft goalies in the first few rounds.  Again, just my personal perferance.  Some teams draft goalies high, and some succeed.  Many don't.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from shaunk. Show shaunk's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban : I don't know why you would think that. 1st of all, regardless of position, hitting on legit talent is difficult in the 1st round. When 50% of the picks pan out it's a great  year (on second thought, I don't even think 50% has ever happened).
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    I'd say the 2003 draft produced well over 50 percent of nhl talent. that seems like an anomaly, though.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]And how many of those 16 achieved stardom for the teams that drafted them?  That is clearly a big part of the argument here.  The Bruins have Tuukka Rask and they did not draft him, just as I would prefer. And putting Varlamov and Dipietro in there is quite an enormous stretch.  One is a backup goalie on a bad team after being a backup goalie on another team.  The other has never been a decent goalie and is considered a total bust as a #1 overall pick (just before Heatley and Gaborik...).  Even Schnieder has never been a starting goalie. So your 16 is reduced to a small handful if we're looking at actual success, and success for the team that drafted them. What's more, a high number of the 44 were complete busts. So, I respect your opinion on this, but I am sticking with mine that you don't draft goalies in the first few rounds.  Again, just my personal perferance.  Some teams draft goalies high, and some succeed.  Many don't.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    I regret putting Dipietro and Varlamov in there, because I could have made my point without them. But truth be told I don't think it's an enormous stretch at all. Again, this is a spectrum. Varlamov and Dipietro (who is a fabulous goalie when healthy) are clearly on the lower end--but one is a starter (not on a bad team, just a young team--fighting for a playoff spot too) and the other would be if he was healthy.. Even if I grant you that they shouldn't be on the list, that just brings the percentage down to 32%, not down to a hand-full as you may instinctively think. 

    There are a few other holes in your stance that I would like to apply some pressure to. First, noting that many teams that draft 1st round-goaltenders do not maintain them in the organization is a non-sequitur to your position that young goalies are tougher to evaluate than other position players. Because there is only one goalie allowed per-game, many organizations are willing to part ways with a young asset (like toronto was) when they feel they are stable in net. This could be because of a solid veteran buying the club a few more years, or because another young prospect also looks to have a bright future.

    Nothing in this process makes the talent evaluation process tougher for a goalie, it just means that teams are willing to move them because they are valuable, and because teams don't want a commodity sitting on the bench or in the minors that could otherwise make the NHL team (the money making team) better.

    I put the number of quality 1st round draft picks at 38%, but let me just be skeptical (or delusional) and put the number at 25%. Even that number would allow me to pick 11 goalies, all long-time starters, several hall-of famers, Vezina trophy winners, several stanley cup MVPs:

    Martin Brodeur
    Grant Fuhr
    Roberto Luongo
    Tom Barrasso
    Marc-Andre Fleury
    Olie Kolzig
    Carey Price
    Cam Ward
    Kari Lehtonen
    Jean-Sebastien Giguere
    Jocelyn Thibault

    Which notably leaves out the budding young goalies that you say, "are only backups" (which is another complete non-sequitur to the statement that you shouldn't draft goalies because it's tougher to evaluate them):

    Tuukka Rask
    Jonathan Bernier
    Corey Schnieder

    Each of these young goalies has looked so good that their respective teams could EASILY part with Tim Thomas, Jonathan Quick, and Roberto Luongo... tell me another team that could suffer that loss? 

    Come on fletch, look at this objectively man. The actual numbers really matter.


    @Shaunk  yeah, the 2003 draft was an absolute smoke show. Loaded with talent. That was a serious outlier. NHL.com ranked it as one of the top-3 draft classes EVER. Here's the quote: "The first round of that draft could go down as the most productive in the history of the League -- 29 of the 30 players have played in the NHL; 13 have played at least 300 games; nine have been All-Stars, including Eric Staal (No. 2, Carolina) three times and Dion Phaneuf (No. 9, Calgary) and Ryan Getzlaf (No. 19, Anaheim) twice."
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hockguy0818. Show Hockguy0818's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    Tanner Pearson!
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from orr4neely8. Show orr4neely8's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    The way I see it for the Bruins draft picks so far we have our elite future forward tyler seguin hopefully dougie hamilton our next elite d man and if Subban has the hockey know how like his brother but less attitude then why not a goalie.
    Thomas is on way to retirement eventually, Rask future at the moment is RFA and getting a top pick goalie is worth the shot if not then work on getting a d man.

    I really not been looking at draft picks recently but thanx for the info. Tucker.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    6 of those 11 also made it to impact-goalie status with their drafting team - Fuhr, Brodeur, Fleury, Kolzig, Price and Ward.

    I've been vocal about the Rutherford strategy of not draft D with a top pick just because they take so long to develop.  I think this is a bit of the same.  Just look around this board and you can see from kelvana, nite, SoxFan...goalies are weird.  Back in the day when you didn't have a dedicated goalie coach because people treated the cage as the place where the crazy fat guy played, there wasn't the same science to evaluating players. So few teams picked goalies early - though there were always a few picked up in the top of the draft.  Things have changed with four goalies picked at the very top of the draft in recent memory - Luongo, Fleury, DiPietro, and Lehtonen.

    Someone needs to do the intertubes a service and do a 1967-2007 breakdown of the draft that you can search.  I want to be able to plug in: forwards drafted in the first round who scored more than .75 points/game; defensemen drafted in rounds 4-7 who played more than 300 NHL games.  I think if you did have that tool, you might find that there's a pretty stable ratio of players who succeed by position and draft round.  That is forwards:defenseman might be 10:6 in the first round, 5:3 in the second 2.5:1.5 in the third....but basically you get 60% fewer successes out of the D than the F.  That could mean teams have been more successful drafting D given that you have 50% fewer defensemen on the roster.

    Before this turns into too much of a novel - I think the historical numbers to support a hard and fast rule about drafting any position are more complicated than the list of guys here, and I think they'd ultimately tell us squat.  Draft the best hockey player.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    Why should trends and percentages from past drafts matter when you are drafting in the present ? Pick the best player available . If it's a goalie then so be it.

    The Bruins don't have a top end goalie prospect. It would be nice if they addressed this. Malcom Subban is a very athletic and talented goalie.

    It will be slim pickings in this years draft with the Bruins picking lower and the draft reportedly being not as deep. I would be thrilled with Subban's name being called by the B's in the first round.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hockguy0818. Show Hockguy0818's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    Ya, Subban's pretty good, I like that Russian guy too. That kid can play. Craig Button has 6 Goalies ranked in his top 50 prospects.

    Also, did any of you hear that Columbus might trade their own 1st rounder?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    Thanks Ols.  First off, I'm not sure how I can be more 'objective'.  I mean, I don't have a horse in this race or some bias that is warping my opinion.  I am telling you that if I were a GM, I would prefer (like Chiarelli) to not draft goalies in the first two rounds and seek my goalies via other routes.  You've presented some evidence that good goalies are sometimes drafted in the early rounds and some teams have succeeded with this.  I still don't like it and don't think it is the best way to go.  I couldn't really be more objective in having this opinion.  The evidence is inconclusive at best.

    Like it or not, this really has been the Bruins system that they utilized to win a Cup -- draft and develop talent at forward (Bergeron, Krejci, Marchard, Lucic, Seguin) then sign and/or trade for goalies and defensmen.  Because goalies and defensmen take longer to develop and are harder to predict future returns on at the draft, I like this system.  I'm not really saying 'don't ever draft D-men or goalies', I'm just saying that if the prospects are comparable, I'd prefer to draft the faster developing and less complicated forwards.  If some great talent falls into our draft spot then go ahead and take them.  Like Hamilton.  But otherwise, let the next team deal with developing a goalie for five years -- we'll take the Bergeron, Marchand, Lucic types that pay quick dividends.  Goalies almost never do.

    As you point out, goalies are just harder to develop and most of them move from the team that drafted them anyhow.  I look at the three finalists for the Vezina last year (to make a point, not to suggest this is a telling sample size) and I see Thomas, Luongo, and Rinne -- two guys who were traded around and one guy who was drafted in the 8th round.  There seems to be ample opportunities to find decent goalies, developed by others, without using a top draft pick and waiting five years.

    The other argument is what BB mentioned and is purely anecdotal -- goalies are head cases ;).  Picking them at 18 for a possible starting role at 23 seems crazy with these guys.

    I say let someone else draft and develop our D-men and goalies, while we use our top two picks on promising forwards (I know, Zach Hamill, I know).  I realize there are other perfectly valid, and contrasting, opinions on this.  But if I were a GM, that would be my approach.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    This kid barely turned 18 and everyone is already "Pumping his Tires " (goalie reference from now on thanks Lou). Just to name a couple Bob McKenzie ans yes all your favorite Pierre McGuire.
    I'm with Chowdah and Ols on this one.   The Bruins 1st pick this year will be something like a 2nd round pick from the past couple of drafts. It's a weak one once you get past the 10th ? 
    Might aswell take a chance on a goalie.
    I bet that Russian goalie that played in the Juniors (pulled in Canada's game) will go before Subban in this draft.
    Besides I like this, Malcolm in black will look meaner than his brother PK in Red.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from golden9x2. Show golden9x2's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    No thanks!...dont want any Subbans in black and gold!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban : I don't know why you would think that. 1st of all, regardless of position, hitting on legit talent is difficult in the 1st round. When 50% of the picks pan out it's a great  year (on second thought, I don't even think 50% has ever happened). Just browsing through the 44 goaltenders taken in 1st round from 1981-2006 (ignoring the most recent/young kids), There seems to be a couple hall-of-famers, several regular all-stars, many serviceable starters, and a few of the more promising young goaltenders in the league. Yes there are More misses than hits, but that's the same with other positions as well. In my opinion, more goalies taken in the 1st round turn out to have long careers than any other position. To cherry pick 16 of the 44 names (36%): Grant Fuhr Tom Barrasso Martin Brodeur Olie Kolzig Jean-Sebastien Giguere Roberto Luongo Kari Lehtonen Marc-Andre Fleury Jocelyn Thibault Carey Price Tuukka Rask Jonathan Bernier Cory Schneider Cam Ward Semyon Varlamov Rick DiPietro (clearly woulda been a stud had he not been made of glass)
    Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    What's your definition of panned out? 90 per cent on 2003's first rounders have played at least 200 games so far - I know it's the super draft year, but you did say "ever". (66 per cent have played over 400)
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonic. Show Olsonic's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Malcolm Subban : What's your definition of panned out? 90 per cent on 2003's first rounders have played at least 200 games so far - I know it's the super draft year, but you did say "ever". (66 per cent have played over 400)
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]


    my argument is a bit deeper than that. but if 2003 happened every year, clearly I wouldn't be advocating picking a goaltender.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Malcolm Subban

    This has turned into the best thread we've had in a long time.  Thank you to all for intelligent thoughts backed with quality stats.

    And for the record, I hate the idea of anything but a forward being taken in the first round.
     

Share