Drafts

[Powerslave]

I'm up to the 2011 mark in my Rangers season and have found that the prospect quality has steadily been getting better and better through each draft, to the point where I'm scrambling at the end of the last few seasons to get high draft picks. The top 10 players have been ridiculously good, just about straight A+'s on the report cards, and their projections are phenomenal. It's a matter of choosing whether I want a more talented Rob Neidermeyer, Martin Brodeur, or Evgeni Malkin (I been trying lately to bag the 2 or 3 in the top 10 and they don't come cheap). Has anyone else had this experience?

I've been having some trouble with my prospect development. I have a 19-yr-old second line winger that has top line potential but his attributes have been declining with ample ice time and great coaching under various practice schemes. He's above average determination and great work rate, so I guess my question is "what the hell?"

[Shadd666]

Prospects are overrated IMO. I took a look at the stats in canadian juniors after my first season, and i found around 5 players in each of the 3 juniors leagues who had over 200 points!!!

[Kekkonen]

Do you have the newest patch? In the previous version, the first three drafts were pretty horrible as far as talent goes (now, it looks like only the 2009 draft is a dry well -- apart from John Tavares, who's about as sure 1st overall pick as Crosby was), and it also apparently had some problems with prospect development.

And don't forget, not all of those high-ranked prospects pan out. I did a test run all the way to the early 2020s with 3.0.1, and there were some very memorable busts among high 1st round picks -- including top-5 guys who only saw NHL games on television. On the other end, in 2023 (or whenever it was the test run ended) there was a guy who at 27 was a 2-time Vezina candidate but he wasn't drafted until he was 20, and then he went 8th overall -- from the bottom.

[Powerslave]

It does seem prospects are overrated at draft time. I drafted Karamnov with the projection of with first line potential/a more talented version of Olli Jokinen He's turned out to be a mediocre AHLer. How much stock do you put in your scouting staff's assessments on draft day? Usually if the opinions are mixed I'll take their opnions and look over some players myself. However, when EVERY coach/scout/ass. GM/janitor/zamboni driver recommend a certain player, I use it as a deciding factor when it's a toss up between equally impressive prospects. From what I understand, there are hidden player attributes that I assume only scouts and coaches with high abilities in judging player potential and ability can take into account. For example, in 2010 draft, the first round top 10 basically had all straight A prospects that only really differed in size and position. I ended up going with the consensus pick and now he's playing on my second as a 19-yr-old and is leading my team in goals (he is also the prospect I mentioned above that is having the attribute trouble, so I guess the jury is still out). In the most recent draft, I had the no.2 and 3 picks (cost an arm and a leg, respectively) and, again, I picked the prospects that the coaches/scouts unanimously recommended since the top 10 had all awesome prospects. They did great in training camp and are tearing up the U20 worlds. As before, the jury is still out, but they are looking very good. I try not to rely too much on their recommendations but when they insist heavily on the same player, make sure to give him a good look.

[Kekkonen]

What I always do is look what the coach says, then look at the attributes and how the guy is doing wherever he plays now. If several/all of my scouts say that a guy who's doing 'merely' OK in the OHL and has low attributes couldn't make the team now but could be a 1st-liner in the future, I'll tag him as a possible prospect. However, if they say that the same guy would now be a depth player even though he obviously isn't, or that he's a power forward when his aggression/bravery/size makes that unlikely, or that he's a great scorer even though he's only managed 2+4 in 30+ games, I'll take the rest of the scouting report with a pinch of salt.

[Thundercleese]

I think this is much better than the alternative. In the 3.0.1 days (so long ago, they were) I drafted Tavares first overall. He had no attribute higher than a 10 (other than speed, stamina, etc) and after two years he didn't improve one iota. Same with Jimmy Hayes. When you don't have young talent coming up it kinda makes the game boring, one of my favourite parts of EHM is trying to figure out how best to turn each prospect into the kind of NHL player they can be. Guys like Tavares come into the draft NHL ready now, which is more realistic than in the previous version--almost every draft has someone who's ready for the game if not out of the gate then immediately after juniors. I might actually pass on Tavares because I'm so deep at center but if I do pick him (I traded for Detroit's first rounder, my odds are pretty good) I'm going to keep him in juniors until he's done there and let him develop. He might be ready for the NHL but he could be better....

[Minstrel]

Prospects are always just that until they prove it in the NHL... and no matter the stats they can still choke big time once they get to The Big Dance. They still need to have veteran leadership/mentoring and still need to be given tiem to develop. Some can pull it off some can't, no matter their stats or dominance at lower levels. The game just isn't as easy as "He's got great stats he'll be a great player" and the road to the NHL is littered with the corpses of big name busts or players that dominated for a year or part of a year until the league caught up to them and EHM is much the same. There's a lot behind the numbers and dependant on how their careers are treated by you or the AI in the equation of what players can make it from potential for greatness to actual NHL stardom.

[Powerslave]

I really like the fact that this game isn't cut and dry with prospects, some of them make it and some of them don't. I think it's one of the reasons I find this game so much more fun than other hockey games, its very true to life. It would suck if every first rounder turned out to be an all-star. But for every Alexander Daigle or Jason Ward there is the can't miss Crosby, Ovechkin, or Malkin. From your experience, can a top notch scouting/coaching staff sort the booms from the busts if not all the time, then a good percentage?

[inSTAALed]

Prospects are always just that until they prove it in the NHL... and no matter the stats they can still choke big time once they get to The Big Dance.

See Chad Larose.

[Thundercleese]

I've found that in the first couple rounds the scout/AGM/coach aren't too much help. The top guys are usually pretty obvious and if you've done a good job scouting prior to the draft you're probably going to know who you're after beforehand. I always look at the draft months before it's held and pick the player that's most suitable for my team...I'll pass on the number one ranked goalie if I already have Miikka Kiprusoff and need a left wing, for example. Once you get to the deeper rounds, though, those guys can be great. They often pick out 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc rounders who appear to have a legitimate base from which to develop into strong NHL players. More often than not, after the first round, maybe two, I pick almost exclusively based on their recommendations.

[bruins72]

It does seem prospects are overrated at draft time. I drafted Karamnov with the projection of with first line potential/a more talented version of Olli Jokinen He's turned out to be a mediocre AHLer. How much stock do you put in your scouting staff's assessments on draft day? Usually if the opinions are mixed I'll take their opnions and look over some players myself. However, when EVERY coach/scout/ass. GM/janitor/zamboni driver recommend a certain player, I use it as a deciding factor when it's a toss up between equally impressive prospects. From what I understand, there are hidden player attributes that I assume only scouts and coaches with high abilities in judging player potential and ability can take into account. For example, in 2010 draft, the first round top 10 basically had all straight A prospects that only really differed in size and position. I ended up going with the consensus pick and now he's playing on my second as a 19-yr-old and is leading my team in goals (he is also the prospect I mentioned above that is having the attribute trouble, so I guess the jury is still out). In the most recent draft, I had the no.2 and 3 picks (cost an arm and a leg, respectively) and, again, I picked the prospects that the coaches/scouts unanimously recommended since the top 10 had all awesome prospects. They did great in training camp and are tearing up the U20 worlds. As before, the jury is still out, but they are looking very good. I try not to rely too much on their recommendations but when they insist heavily on the same player, make sure to give him a good look.

I just drafted Karamnov too. He's got amazing skating abilities and he's got a good shot, plus he's good on faceoffs. My scouts predicted him to be a 2nd line guy but did compare him to Jokinen. The thing is, I decided to sign him right after the draft because he didn't seem to be doing much in Russia. As soon as I did, I got offers from other teams (they did the same when I went to sign Ryan Wilson after the draft too. Even though several teams passed him over, he seems to have very high trade value. I'm thinking I might be able to use him to land a hard to get player.

[bruins72]

Just a quick update on that. So one of the teams that inquired about Karamnov was the Ducks. I responded by asking for Getzlaf. They accepted! I'm am sooooo taking that deal! He was an early second round pick (#34 overall)! I've offered them waaaay more than that for Getzlaf in the past.

I also got an inquiry about Ryan Wilson from the Capitals. I decide to shoot for the moon. I offered Modin (who I hate to part with but he's 32 and you should see who I'm getting in return!), Garlock, Pineault, and the rights to Kyle Wilson for Ovechkin and Eminger! WOW! I never thought I'd be able to acquire Ovechkin in a trade.

Is this a glitch or am I just getting lucky?

EDIT:

So I accepted both deals. Can you believe the fans were angry after the Ovechkin deal? How? Any deal to bring him to your team should be bowed down to! The funny thing is, in the next news item the fans celebrate getting Ovechkin. Go figure! Fickle fans.

Now I've got to decide if I want to have either Nash or Ovechkin play RW (which they're both just "acceptable" at) on a line together or have one on the top line playing LW and the other on the 2nd line playing LW.