Kobrakay wrote:My main problem with the draft classes was not the PA across the draft but the CA of the players...it was on the low side (still is). It is discouraging to draft an early 1st rounder with mostly orange or red attributes.
I think if you actually looked at data/testing results you'd see it differently....only a couple/few 1st rounders can play in the NHL right away (this past season it was just 3 players, and only 8 of 210 players even played a game in the NHL)
Kobrakay wrote:At least, from my experience the latter part of your post does not always happen and there are a lot of players developing quite nicely after being drafted
Not sure what you're referring to, but as I never said anything always happened a particular way I know I wasn't saying what you think I was...
Kobrakay wrote:otherwise with such low CA values as junior players (even for very top end talent juniors) the NHL would be decreasing rapidly in quality on average.
I'm not sure at all what you're saying here.....what "low" CA values are you referring too?
The regen system in general maintains the overall talent pool.....adding 50-100 top players to the database can only increase the CA/PA average...
And adding a few new/recent draftees to a talent pool of 600+ players (many/most who are seeing a CA increase or staying the same) isn't going to affect the CA average (and the testing done has shown this)...
Only three players from the 2015 NHL Draft have played regularly this past season.
Only four players from the 2014 NHL Draft have played more than a season worth of NHL games.
Players take time to develop, and I think some people's talent/performance expectations of recent draftees can be unrealistic.....
Kobrakay wrote:There is not one formula I think, since for a few players junior seems to work better, others benefit from NHL time, others require several years (thus AHL for some time) and others simply never get there.
I didn't think anyone was implying in any way that there was a "formula"