Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

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

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]NAS- what is it about Hamilton's game that you don't like?  Why do you think he will not be a good player?  Recent years have seen some solid 1st round d-men make some pretty immediate impact; Fowler, Hedman, Doughty, Bogosian, Pietrangelo, Schenn and Myers.  Is it unreasonable for fans to look positively on this deal, given where the pundits had him pegged? Who did you want the B's to select?
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]

    Obviously Doughty is a monster.  Bogosian has taken a step back.  Pietrangelo hasn't played 100 games yet.  Schenn has taken a beating around here until this thread.  Myers is going to be a good one...but will he stay in Buffalo?  Too soon to tell.  Will Hedman and Fowler stay with their current teams?  Too soon to tell.

    Let's talk about the last three after a few years.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : Much too lazy to put the time and effort you obviously have into this.  You must have started as soon as it was clear the Bruins were targeting a defenseman.  The stat I'd like to see, and I'm sure you have it in your notes somewhere, is how many players drafted in the top ten in the last ten years made an impact with the team they drafted.  Then see how many where forwards and defensemen.  If there is a statistically significant difference then there is something to this.  All I've seen so far from both sides of this is citing random examples.  Means nothing.  Since the only sane people in the world to do the above either work for central scouting or a NHL team, I'm going to assume they did that and Dougie Hamilton is a good pick.  For the record....I think this is a huge pick for the B's.  I liked him half way through last season, but as the Leaf's climbed and Hamilton's stock rose, I didn't think there was much chance.  Considering the Bruins depth at forward this is a great pick. 
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]

    I've been saying this for years. 

    And how is my info "random examples"?  I've given eight straigh years of data.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : I've been saying this for years.  And how is my info "random examples"?  I've given eight straigh years of data.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    Random because they aren't compared to anything.  They're just sitting our there naked.  Compare them to the forwards in the same draft classes and see how the numbers turn out.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    What's wrong with being traded if you bring back a big return?  Jack Johnson and Eric Johnson both brought back enough in the trade to make the pick worthwhile.  Bogosian will bring back a lot in a trade and you are dismissing Pietrangelo who had already worked his way onto the top pairing in St. Louis last year.  I agree it's hit or miss, but plenty of guys in Hamilton's spot have done well recently -- hopefully it works out. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]What's wrong with being traded if you bring back a big return?  Jack Johnson and Eric Johnson both brought back enough in the trade to make the pick worthwhile.  Bogosian will bring back a lot in a trade and you are dismissing Pietrangelo who had already worked his way onto the top pairing in St. Louis last year.  I agree it's hit or miss, but plenty of guys in Hamilton's spot have done well recently -- hopefully it works out. 
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    Tim Gleason?  Shattenkirk and Stewart? 

    The jury is still out on the two for Johnson, but Gleason is a second pairing stay at home guy.  Not really what teams are looking for when they hold the #3 pick overall.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    From thescoutingreport.org:

    Defensively, Hamilton is a pretty solid player with good upside. He’s fairly physical, although he needs to show some consistency with his physicality. I’ve seen him be a force in some games, while being fairly timid in others, so he likely needs to find a happy medium over the course of a long season. He’s learning how to position himself better and use his reach to his advantage, but is still guilty of over-committing at times.

         Against some of the stronger teams, he does struggle with opposing forechecks and can be thrown off his game. Teams like Mississauga utilize aggressive two-man forechecks which put a lot of pressure on the strong side defenseman, which is something I’ve seen Hamilton struggle with and force a bad pass. It seems like he also can get crossed up in man coverage and will chase players around instead of holding his area of the ice down.

         I’m not totally convinced that is going to be as good as some people think he is, but I will admit that I’m probably a little hard on him. He’s a very smart kid, just like his brother Freddie, and appears to be a great kid off the ice as well. He’s got the size, tools, and upside to be a top pairing defenseman at the NHL level, but I’m just not sure he’s going to get there. I think it will be very important for whoever drafts him to be very patient with Hamilton and avoid rushing him into a situation that he isn’t ready for.

    Pros: Size, Shot, Skating, High Ceiling
    Cons: Decision Making, Trying to do too much
    Skill-set Comparison: Alex Pietrangelo

    By the way, he is now 6'7" not 6'4".

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]From thescoutingreport.org: Defensively, Hamilton is a pretty solid player with good upside. He’s fairly physical, although he needs to show some consistency with his physicality. I’ve seen him be a force in some games, while being fairly timid in others, so he likely needs to find a happy medium over the course of a long season. He’s learning how to position himself better and use his reach to his advantage, but is still guilty of over-committing at times.      Against some of the stronger teams, he does struggle with opposing forechecks and can be thrown off his game. Teams like Mississauga utilize aggressive two-man forechecks which put a lot of pressure on the strong side defenseman, which is something I’ve seen Hamilton struggle with and force a bad pass. It seems like he also can get crossed up in man coverage and will chase players around instead of holding his area of the ice down.      I’m not totally convinced that Dougie Hamilton is going to be as good as some people think he is, but I will admit that I’m probably a little hard on him. He’s a very smart kid, just like his brother Freddie, and appears to be a great kid off the ice as well. He’s got the size, tools, and upside to be a top pairing defenseman at the NHL level, but I’m just not sure he’s going to get there. I think it will be very important for whoever drafts him to be very patient with Hamilton and avoid rushing him into a situation that he isn’t ready for. Pros: Size, Shot, Skating, High Ceiling Cons: Decision Making, Trying to do too much Skill-set Comparison: Alex Pietrangelo By the way, he is now 6'7" not 6'4".
    Posted by Wheatskins[/QUOTE]

    What? 6'7"? Where did you get that from?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from goodnewsbears. Show goodnewsbears's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]Because no one can seem to do their own research, here's another block of draft results: 2004:  #3 Cam Barker (traded), #9 Ladislav Smid (traded), #10 Boris Valabik (traded and awful) 2005:  #3 Jack Johnson (traded), #9 Brian Lee (not impressive), #10 Luc Bourdon (out of hockey) 2006:  #1 Erik Johnson (traded) 2007:  #4 Thomas Hickey (AHL), #5 Karl Alzner (no impact yet), #10 Keaton Ellerby (who?) 2008:  #2 Doughty (beast), #3 Bogosian (stock falling), #4 Alex Pietragnelo (no impact yet), #5 Luke Schenn (whipping boy here until this thread was created, I'm a fan of his, I think he'll turn into a hard hitting defensive d-man similar to Derian Hatcher). 2009 and 2010 are too soon to be judged. If we combine these years with the ones previous listed 2000:  #4 Rusty Klesla #7 Lars Jonsson 2001:  #8 Komisarek 2002:  #3 Bouwmeester, #4 Joni Pitkanen, #5 Ryan Whitney 2003:  7,8,9:  Suter, Coburn, Phaneuf we have 23 defensemen listed with only Suter and Doughty (and maybe Schenn, possibly Bogosian if he can fix his issues) playing for the team that drafted them and playing well. There are your facts, boys and girl.  You, too, can use the internet to do research.  Instead of attacking me, bring the facts.  That's what I do. 
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    that's an understatement.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : that's an understatement.
    Posted by goodnewsbears[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, I didn't want to make a big deal out of it, but wanted to make sure I included every player so I couldn't be accused of cherry picking.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton :  It's a terrible, terrible idea.  Please, go look at 10 years of defensemen drafted with high picks. Examples:   #3 Bouwmeester, #4 Joni Pitkanen, #5 Ryan Whitney 2003:  7,8,9:  Suter, Coburn, Phaneuf There's just a small sample of ALL defensemen drafted in the Top 10 for four years.  I didn't cherry pick or leave anyone outOf that group, only one player is still with his team and worth a Top 10 pick, Ryan Suter. The rest have been traded and stink or traded, or stink or stunk. Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    You have a valid point but becuase Florida, Carolina and Atlanta couldn't afford some of their original high picks doesn't mean they stink but it means Ryan Suter will take a pay cut to stay in a city he likes.

    PS. Change your sig line to Teddy KGB "I will splash de pot whenever the F___ I want!"
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : Obviously Doughty is a monster.  Bogosian has taken a step back.  Pietrangelo hasn't played 100 games yet.  Schenn has taken a beating around here until this thread.  Myers is going to be a good one...but will he stay in Buffalo?  Too soon to tell.  Will Hedman and Fowler stay with their current teams?  Too soon to tell. Let's talk about the last three after a few years.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    I guess the issue I continue to have with your "analysis/opinion" is that it sounds a little "1st Round D-Man Curse-ish".  Curses are for pink hats, PC and his team are confident in their board, and I have no reason to doubt them. 

    Get on board the "Dougie-Train" NAS, this looks like a pretty strong pick.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : Murphy's 5'10"...Can you teach him to be 6'4"? :-) Posted by biggskye[/QUOTE]

    Nope and if Murphy gains too much weight it will hurt his game.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : I guess the issue I continue to have with your "analysis/opinion" is that it sounds a little "1st Round D-Man Curse-ish".  Curses are for pink hats, PC and his team are confident in their board, and I have no reason to doubt them.  Get on board the "Dougie-Train" NAS, this looks like a pretty strong pick.
    Posted by Crowls2424[/QUOTE]

    I hope:

    1.  The kid is awesome and can make the team next year.

    2.  He chooses a defenseman's number, and not some stupid high number.

    3.  He quickly drops the "ie" at the end of Doug.  It's a man's game now.  "Dougie" is fourth grader.

    4.  He stays in Boston for 15 years and I am constantly reminded of how wrong I was about this.

    I don't think any of those things are going to happen, but I am sincere when I say that I want them to.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton :  So, we'll have to wait and see.  But, I think Murphy will be the better defensemen in the long run. Posted by bim09[/QUOTE]

    Offensively Bim I agree but I think Chowda mentioned Hamilton was voted best stick handling defenseman in the OHL this past season.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jmwalters. Show jmwalters's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    Murphy is a lot like Ryan Ellis, undersized but ridiculously talented (Ellis had 100 points last year in junior as a defenceman for god' sake, when was the last time that happened?). If they can translate their junior success to the NHL then size won't matter. Look at Dan Boyle. That is a big if though. Hamilton may be less skilled but has the size. It will be interesting to see who flourishes....
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : I hope: 1.  The kid is awesome and can make the team next year. 2.  He chooses a defenseman's number, and not some stupid high number. 3.  He quickly drops the "ie" at the end of Doug.  It's a man's game now.  "Dougie" is fourth grader. 4.  He stays in Boston for 15 years and I am constantly reminded of how wrong I was about this. I don't think any of those things are going to happen, but I am sincere when I say that I want them to.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    Completely agree with this...PC announced the pick as "Doug Hamilton".  Go Douglas if you want to be different, "Dougie" should be finger painting.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]Murphy is a lot like Ryan Ellis, undersized but ridiculously talented (Ellis had 100 points last year in junior as a defenceman for god' sake, when was the last time that happened?). If they can translate their junior success to the NHL then size won't matter. Look at Dan Boyle. That is a big if though. Hamilton may be less skilled but has the size. It will be interesting to see who flourishes....
    Posted by jmwalters[/QUOTE]
    Skill-wise, it's like asking if you'd prefer Pronger over Scott Neidermayer. Different players but both pretty good.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from biggskye. Show biggskye's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

       I have to admit that Not-A-Shot has a valid point on this issue.
    I looked at the years 2000-2007, and the stats look like this...
    TOTAL TOP 10 DRAFTED FORWARDS = 43
    FORWARDS STILL PLAYING ON ORIGINAL TEAM = 15
    A 35% rate

    TOTAL TOP 10 DRAFTED D-MEN = 18
    D-MEN STILL PLAYING ON ORIGINAL TEAM = 3
    A 17% rate

    This is all very subjective. It does not take into account what teams got in return for trading prospects, or what was available at the draft table, at the time a certain player was selected.
    It does, however, support Not-A-Shot's assertion, that a d-man has less of a chance to have a long-term future with the team drafting him, than a forward does.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonicator. Show Olsonicator's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    Pretty good blog post about Dougie Hamilton, written Jan 2011

    http://bruins2011draftwatch.blogspot.com/2011/01/bruins-2011-draft-case-for-dougie.html
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from LUCICmilan17. Show LUCICmilan17's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    Just got back from a few days of camping and fishing I am STUNNED hamilton fell to us at 9! I had a feeling we were getting murphy wich I wouldn't have been thrilled about I am just not much of a fan of Dmen like mike green who are basicly wingers on the blue line and don't provide much D. If Hamilton fills out sum and finds a mean streak man oh man this could be awsome!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from crono420. Show crono420's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    Best pick in the draft!!! Way to go B's
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    There are a lot of weaknesses in the argument against drafting a stud defenseman, the biggest of them being that the champion of the argument (not NAS) is the GM of a franchise that gave up early on Chris Pronger and Jack Johnson.  GMs who can't be patient while a stud prospect grows into his feet are not going to see the reward.

    The second problem is how you go about choosing a player to draft.  I could see putting a handicap on a D and saying he has to be 10 or 15% better than the next forward on your board, but eventually you hit that handicap and you have to take the best player available.  I don't see a forward left on that board who looks like 80% of what Hamilton could be, so I like the pick.

    You can extend this to looking at who was available when those other D were picked.  Look at the 2004 top ten and tell me, with the full benefit of hindsight, which of those forwards Chicago should have taken?  Blake Wheeler?  And even if you wanted to say that Ottawa shouldn't have taken Brian Lee, well, there are maybe four or five guys who they might have considered and that would only really push him down to the bottom of the first half of the first round.  2006 was a great year in a lot of ways, but after Johnson at #1, the only other D to have a career so far are McBain (Carolina), Peckham (Edm.) and MacDonald (NYI).  Not a murderers row.  So D talent is generally thin on the ground - no surprise it's thinner in the D that the forward ranks.

    Third problem is that it's apples and oranges before and after the Cap.  Before the cap, you had outrageous demands with no context, hold-outs and other garbage.  Now you have cap restrictions and early free agency pushing teams to make Cap motivated deals (e.g. Barker).  Before, you could sign a blank cheque for Lidstrom or Bourque. Now, you have to find ways to keep them in fold.  GMs have responded to the new reality by playing young D earlier and they're responding.  Pietrangelo was 5th on the Blues in scoring, third in TOI, and the two D who played more than he did both got traded.  You might not think he's made an impact yet, but he's now being tabbed as their top D.

    Last for now - there are half as many NHL level D jobs as forward jobs.  That's a factor in assessing who stays with the team that drafts him and who gets moved and who gets stuck in the minors.

    Too many variables to correct for to take the raw data as predictive.

    and yeah, enough of those -ie endings.  No one whose name ends like that y sound like Dougie, or Denny, or Bobby, or Larry, will ever be a good defenseman.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from RickyHussle. Show RickyHussle's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton : Random because they aren't compared to anything.  They're just sitting our there naked.  Compare them to the forwards in the same draft classes and see how the numbers turn out.
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]

    I agree I am convinced that all of these numbers will be distributed normally over a long period of time.  If NAS has indeed located a period in time where a defensemen is more likely to be traded or leave via free agency then I would believe nothing more then an outlier in time.  I won't go to look up these stats, because it takes a lot of time and effort to put together a dataset worthy of analyzing.  I would not be surprised even over he past ten years if there is a significant gap in the mean term drafted by position but I truly doubt this difference is more then a year and a half.

    Even if you do compare one to the other and find a significant difference, you would still need to compare return compensation at the time of departure to know the true value.  This is a futile analysis of a small sample set.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from paulyboy. Show paulyboy's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    With so much D on this team and so much structure you would think that Murphy would have been welcomed. Where else to better fit in than in a system where D is first priority and a team that was in need of offense throughout the year, not to mention a power play QB.. Like Hamilton and not upset about the pick. Just looking at it as a time to take a chance on a kid that could really break up the entire opponents game and give Bs another dimension..
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton

    In Response to Re: Welcome to the Bruins Dougie Hamilton:
    [QUOTE]With so much D on this team and so much structure you would think that Murphy would have been welcomed. Where else to better fit in than in a system where D is first priority and a team that was in need of offense throughout the year, not to mention a power play QB.. Like Hamilton and not upset about the pick. Just looking at it as a time to take a chance on a kid that could really break up the entire opponents game and give Bs another dimension..
    Posted by paulyboy[/QUOTE]
    Bruins just won the Cup. They have no reason "to take a chance" with their pick. I think Hamilton was a safe pick. My buddy is a scout with Dallas. He texted me last night with congratulations on Boston having made a solid pick at 9. Hamiltons skill set(size and skating) makes him almost a cant-miss prospect. Add to that, the kid is very smart and eager to learn, and I am thrilled with the pick. I wouldn't have minded if they picked Murphy at 9 but I do think he has more question marks than Hamilton does.
     

Share