Canucks vs. Bob McKenzie draft record

BingoTough · Post by **BingoTough** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:30 pm

When looking back at the past eight drafts, the canucks record in the first round is much better than TSN, by a wide margin.

For years the canucks drafting has driven me crazy, especially in the first round. As the canuck pick is announced, I take a peek at the tsn rankings of the player they picked and the pick tsn recommends. I'm usually unhappy as the canucks pick is way off the tsn ranking (usually much worse).

Consider the tsn recommended players from the mock drafts of years past (going back to 2000):

Only two points and 15 nhl games.

The actual canucks picks have 53 points in 186 games (excluding Grabner & Bourdon's games from this season).

While a comparison against the rest of the league will probably show we've not drafted in the top half of the league, at least we're better than Bob.

*Stats from http://www.hockeydb.com/
**Numbers wrong? Let me know.

=======================

Here's the details if you're keen.

2007
Draft position: 25
TSN Choice:Maxim Mayorov
TSNPTS: 0
TSNGames:0
Vancouver Choice:Patrick White
Pts:0
Games:0

2006
Draft position: 14
TSN Choice:Artem Anisimov
TSNPTS: 0
TSNGames:0
Vancouver Choice:Michael Grabner
Pts:0
Games:0

2005
Draft position: 10 (updated from momesso)
TSN Choice:Peter Mueller
TSNPTS: 2
TSNGames:11
Vancouver Choice:Luc Bourdon
Pts:0
Games:10

2004
Draft position: 26
TSN Choice:Lukas Kaspar
TSNPTS: 0
TSNGames:3
Vancouver Choice:Cory Schnieder
Pts:0
Games:0

2003
Draft position: 24
TSN Choice:KONSTANTIN GLAZACHEV
TSNPTS: 0
TSNGames:0
Vancouver Choice:Ryan Kesler
Pts:53
Games:172

2002
No canucks draft in 1st round

2001
Draft position: 16
TSN Choice:Alexander Polushin
TSNPTS: 0
TSNGames:0
Vancouver Choice:RJ Umberger
Pts:0(For the Canucks)
Games:0 (For the Canucks)

2000
Draft position: 23
TSN Choice:Mathieu Chouinard
TSNPTS: Goalie
TSNGames:1
Vancouver Choice:Nathan Smith
Pts:0
Games:4

puckhead · Post by **puckhead** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:07 pm

interesting analysis. good work.

I notice that ALL of the Canuck points are from Kesler. RJ would boost that # significantly, too).

Peter Mueller looks like he could catch up to Kesler in a hurry if he gets good minutes in Pho (or a better team).

BingoTough · Post by **BingoTough** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:34 pm

Yeah, I don't know who Umberger turned into, and since I live in the UK I don't really follow players on other teams. I reckon the people on this board could add some useful insights.

It would be interesting to see the team vs. team analysis.

jchockey · Post by **jchockey** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:33 pm

BingoTough wrote:Yeah, I don't know who Umberger turned into, and since I live in the UK I don't really follow players on other teams. I reckon the people on this board could add some useful insights.

It would be interesting to see the team vs. team analysis.

Traded to NY Rangers by Vancouver with Martin Grenier for Martin Rucinsky, March 9, 2004.

BingoTough · Post by **BingoTough** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:35 pm

RJ's got
164 games
38 goals
35 assists
73 points

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdis ... ?pid=54470

Momesso · Post by **Momesso** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:04 pm

In 2005 we drafted Bourdon #10....

jchockey · Post by **jchockey** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:29 am

Not to mention McKenzie's and Dreger's blogs on TSN are absolutely atrocious.

hoopsjunky · Post by **hoopsjunky** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 8:51 am

Interesting.

There's a definite advantage in 2001(Umberger), 2003 (Kesler) and 2004 (Schneider), but I think it's too early to tell WRT 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Bourdon has an advantage over Mueller right now but I wouldn't right Mueller off just yet. And well, Grabner and White certainly haven't proven anything yet.

Jyrki21 · Post by **Jyrki21** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:36 am

I'm surprised no one has mentioned this, but it's completely unfair to TSN to judge them on the guy who they had in the Canucks' numerical slot in the rankings before the draft started. The second any team deviates from their list (which usually happens by about pick 4), it changes everything. The Canucks choose from who's available at a given moment, so you'd have to see what TSN said at that moment too.

For example, in 2005, no way TSN would have said Peter Mueller was the best prospect available when the Canucks were picking at #10, because they hadn't expected Anze Kopitar or (I imagine) Marc Staal to be there when they made their pre-draft rankings. (Guys like Lee, Price and Setoguchi were surprise picks). As it is, I distinctly remember the broadcasters (it was TSN in 2005, right?) assuming that the Canucks were about to take either Staal or Kopitar, and then being quite surprised at Bourdon's name (but still liking it).

It's unfair to hold them to a ranking they draw up just as a theoretical order, not who they think a specific team will actually take, especially in circumstances which happen much later. You'd have to check who the highest player remaining on TSN's list was when the Canucks picked, and if that guy would be better than who they took. Slot Kopitar or Cory Perry (depending on where TSN ranked him in 2003) into this analysis, and suddenly TSN doesn't look so bad.

mr perfect · Post by **mr perfect** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:00 am

One of the things I've noticed about Big Head Bob is that while he maybe the most connected media person in what's happening in NHL circles, he doesn't really know that much about the game itself. So when he has news in his TSN columns or appearing on TV then I sit up and take notice. When he gives an opinion on talent or the state of the game I tune out. Works for me.
The Bourdon pick by the Canucks, I have been in a urinating match with some non Canucks fans over at James Mirtle's site. One of Mirtle's comments was a snicker at the Canucks picking Kopitar over Bourdon. I posted a response questioning whether Paul Kariya or Chris Pronger was a better draft pick, since many in 1995 thought Kariya was the better pick as Pronger (like most D-men) was slow to develop at first whereas Kariya lit it up almost immediately. I have yet to receive a response. The truth is, it's too early to judge the pick. Bourdon's only 20, we are being too harsh and too impatient with him. Let's see where this is at when Bourdon's 27 years old.

levelheaded · Post by **levelheaded** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:19 am

I've always defended the Bourdon pick, I think it's obvious now that Kopitar would've been better, but hindsight is 20-20.

Marc Staal is a player that everyone in New York was salivating over him 6 months ago, but they've suddenly gone quiet as he's had a very average start to his rookie season. (14gp 1a) Defenceman take far longer to reach their potential than forwards.

Bourdon has absolutely RIPPED up the AHL, and I think has proven me he's ready for the NHL. Injuries forced him into the lineup sooner than I would've wanted (I think another month or two would've been best), and I thought he was more than adequate in his first NHL game. I get the feeling that when he gets his first NHL point and goal he'll go on an absolute tear. In many ways he reminds me of Jovo, once he got revved up there was no stopping him, but he needed the confidence that the first goal of the season provided to get him going.

levelheaded · Post by **levelheaded** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:21 am

BingoTough wrote:RJ's got
164 games
38 goals
35 assists
73 points

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdis ... ?pid=54470

He also had the worst +/- in the league last year, but that's in part due to him playing on a terrible Philadelphia team. That coupled with Campbell absolutely destroying him a couple years ago in the playoffs has shot his confidence to shit. It'll be a few years before he's back on track, if ever.

mr perfect · Post by **mr perfect** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:34 am

Don't forget when the Canucks drafted Bourdon, he was just what the doctor ordered. The NHL was coming off the lockout and the Canucks had the high scoring WCE who had been in their prime and the Sedins were just coming on offensively with Carter. There was a shortage of defencemen in the Canucks system. Who would have guessed Bertuzzi and Naslund would have fallen off so badly?

jchockey · Post by **jchockey** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:43 am

mr perfect wrote:Don't forget when the Canucks drafted Bourdon, he was just what the doctor ordered. The NHL was coming off the lockout and the Canucks had the high scoring WCE who had been in their prime and the Sedins were just coming on offensively with Carter. There was a shortage of defencemen in the Canucks system. Who would have guessed Bertuzzi and Naslund would have fallen off so badly?

It also turns out that the Canucks felt that Bourdon was the best player available at the time.

BingoTough · Post by **BingoTough** » Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:37 pm

Jyrki21 wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned this, but it's completely unfair to TSN to judge them on the guy who they had in the Canucks' numerical slot in the rankings before the draft started.

You're right it is unfair, I did my best with the data available. My point was more that it bugged me the canucks were so far off the tsn rankings and still did quite well.

I think it's the case that the nucks normally draft somebody way down the rankings.