Welcome to the first edition of “What to Project When You’re Expecting”, a new feature where we breakdown the top 20 prospects in an organization, and determine how many successful NHL players at different levels a team can expect to pull from that pipeline.

This is not meant to be a crystal ball or an actual prognostication of the future of your franchise, this is merely done to determine what a “reasonable” expectation could be in terms of how much talent a teams pipeline could produce.

Since we’ll be doing this for a number of articles, here’s a brief breakdown of our methodology:Skip To Article

1. First we pull the cohorts of all players in the prospect pipeline for which we have data. (+/- 2″ in height, cumulative NHLE production for all years available, players drafted between 2011-2015)

2.We then break down the percentage chance each player has to be an NHL player, and at what level (Elite, 1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line, 4th line, Elite D, 1st pair, 2nd pair, third pair, depth,).

3. Once all players are loaded, we sum the total percentages for each  level of success.

4. Starting at the highest level (Elite) we determine whether or not the total sum of probability reaches a designated threshold (100% for Safe, 75% for Possible, 50% for Best Case Scenario). If the threshold is met, that means we will assume one of the players on this list will “make it” and become a player within that that bracket.

5. To determine which player “made it” we select the player with highest probability of success at that specific level.

6. We record that player, tally what quality of player he is, and remove him from the list and data set.

7. We repeat the process again (now minus the percentages of the player who has “made it”) until no fields break the designated threshold.

The purpose of this exercise is to determine how many players a team can expect to succeed, without accidentally including a player’s chances for success more than once (hence why we select a player to represent each success and remove them from the data pool).

While there are obvious limitations (such as assuming the most likely player to succeed always will) this should provide a decent handle on what your pipeline may produce.

But enough with the boring stuff, on to the numbers!

The chart above shows the number of success’s possible within the Jet’s pipeline at various thresholds.

As you can see, the  Jets can “safely” assume 6 players will graduate from the current crop (2 1st line forwards, 1 second line forward, 2 third line forwards, and 1 first pairing dman), there’s a reasonable possibility of graduating 9 players, and if everything worked out perfectly they could potentially pull 12 skaters.

While these numbers are obviously rudimentary, the “safe” projection is probably the most accurate. While pulling 9 skaters from 4 drafts (Mark Scheifele, Adam Lowry, Jacob Trouba, and the 6 listed here) is extremely favorable, it is not completely unheard of.

For Example: From the 03-04-05-06 Drafts,  the Chicago Blackhawks generated 8 successful NHL players.

We’ll go into more detail on each of the projections and the players listed below.

As mentioned, the safe projection is the most likely outcome of these possibilities.

Nik Ehlers, and Kyle Connor represent the most likely players to become true impact skaters at the NHL level, while Josh Morrissey holds a reasonable level of potential to become a top point producing defender.

The diminutive Nic Petan has the best chance of becoming a second line forward for the big club with a shot at being a top line player (as we’ll see later).

Recent 2nd round pick Jansen Harkins and the Finnish Joel Armia (part of the Evander Kane trade) round out the most likely players to achieve success, becoming third line contributors.

For a “safe” projection the Jets definitely still have a lot in the pipeline, and this is not including already graduated Mark Scheifele, Jacob Trouba, Adam Lowry, and highly touted goaltender Connor Hellebuyck.

If these projections are correct, the Jets could “reasonably” expect to have found 10 quality NHL players (9 w/o Joel Armia) in 4 drafts- a sure sign that the oft-preached “draft and develop” game plan may be on track and ahead of schedule.

Reducing the threshold for success to 75% probability grows the Jet’s pipeline by an additional 3 skaters and sees some players achieve higher levels of success.

With this threshold in play, we can see that Nik Ehlers has a very strong chance to become an elite level player, while Nic Petan is definitely capable of reaching his ceiling as a first line player.

Additionally, we see recent 1st round pick Jack Roslovic and the undersized Chase De leo have reasonable chances of becoming second line contributors.

A sleeper pick unknown to most outside of Winnipeg, UND’s Tucker Poolman shows that he could also pan out as a potential second pairing offensive defender.

Reducing the threshold of success down to 50% or better creates what we would call a blindly optimistic view of the future of the Jet’s franchise.

That being said, this could be used to help determine the ceiling of many of these players, or at least provide us with an expanded list of who may be the ones to fill the respective roles identified in safer projections.

We see a number of lower ranked forwards jump into the First Line catagory (a testament to the forward depth the Jets have amassed), as well as the inclusions of Jack Glover on the defenders list and Erik Foley to the third line.

While no team would ever be fortunate enough to produce an astounding 16 players over four drafts (Why? this is approximately 4 per draft. Currently 2 player per draft is above average) the fact that the Jets have acquired this many prospects with exceptional ceilings is worth noting.

Again, we would put little stock in projecting the Jets to successfully graduate all of these players.

On the other hand, the margins of difference between these players is often very small. Thus increasing the list of names gives us a better chance of recognizing a future player, one that may likely succeed over those ranked as “safer”.

Conclusions

The Jets have a very, VERY,  deep prospect pool.

While we won’t know where they stand relative to the rest of league until we’ve completed our comparisons, it’s hard to believe that many teams will be able to match the depth and quality of players the Jets have acquired.

Still, it’s important to remember that even our “safe” projections would put the Jets at a near record-setting pace for drafting and development. Few teams have successfully graduated 8 or more prospects in 4-5 year span, and none have done so continuously.

While this exercise is meant to show a “reasonable” projection of the future it is by no means set in stone nor a scientific certainty.

Probability states that the Jets will likely end up with numbers similar to our Safe projection, but it’s important to note that our system does not account for the outliers, and that some data is missing.

For example, Scott Kosmachuk has had a significant down year, and it is a near certainty he never becomes a first line winger, but due to the depth of the Jets pool, and Kosmachuk having the highest 1st line probability of the remaining wingers, the system selected him.

On the other hand, there’s no mention of forward Andrew Copp or JC Lipon, two prospects whom many expect to see on the club as soon as this fall in bottom six roles.

Again, a study like this should not be taken as gospel, but should be used to adjust expectations when discussing the future of the Jets franchise, and the players they have in the pipeline.

It will be interesting to track the success of these pipelines going forward to compare against these study’s in the future.

Over the course of the summer we’ll be working on two large initiatives: Top 20 Prospects for all teams, as well as What to Expect When Your Expecting.

The first will simply be a collection of top 20 prospects in a teams pipeline, while the second will provide a total breakdown of what a team can realistically expect (numbers wise) as a production of their prospect pipeline.

Welcome to the First Top 20 Prospects: The Winnipeg Jets.

Over the last few weeks the Winnipeg Jets (among other teams) wrapped up their annual summer development camp and the 2015 draft, making it a perfect time to review what’s in the pipeline for the Winnipeg jets.

Since the team moved to Winnipeg just prior to the 2011 draft, GM Kevin Cheveldayoff and co. have implemented a draft and development strategy: acquiring picks and pacing the implementation of their prospects as opposed to rushing players into the line up.

To review their success, we’ve compiled the data on all prospects acquired since the 2011 draft, and sorted them by likelihood of success in the NHL to get a better feel on what the Jets can expect in the future.

To start, we’ll look at the top 10 players via some prospect projection cards, highlighting their chances of success, their most likely roles in the NHL, and the closes NHL comparable players we could find.

Full List at Bottom of Article.

Methodology: Players are sorted by cumulative NHLE and within 2 inches in height for all data available. Some data may be missing. Again, this is a practice for interests sake, not to be taken as a “one true ranking” but to provide  reasonable expectations for the Jets prospects.

1. Kyle Connor

When Kyle Connor fell to the Jets at #17 this last season, the members of this site (and a few others) could barely contain their glee. The high scoring winger/center from the USHL has astounding comparables, and surprisingly even edged out Nik Ehlers for the number one spot on our list.

While at least another year away from even approaching the NHL, Connor seems likely to have a long and fruitful career in the NHL- made even more valuable if he can develop as a center.

Kyle Connor’s closes NHL comparables were Dustin Brown (LW) and Sean Monahan (C)

2. Nikolaj Ehlers

Nik Ehlers fell to the Jets at #9 Overall in the 2014 NHL entry draft. The Dynamic winger from the Q has put up 2 astounding offensive seasons and is fully expected to be on the NHL roster this fall by both managements and fans alike. With 64% chance of success, and with all comparable players being top line wingers or better, it was  a tough call for determining who should be first on this list.

The Argument can easily be made that Ehlers 9% better chance at being a top six NHL player should outweigh the 6% edge in having an NHL career that Kyle Connor holds, it just depends on how you want to split the hairs.  Either way, both Ehlers and Connor are fantastic prospects likely to become high level NHL players.

His closest NHL comparable player was Jason Pominville who had a long and effective career as an offensive winger.

3.  Josh Morrissey

Continuing the trend of recent first round picks, 2013 First rounder (14th overall) Josh Morrissey slides into number 3. with a  46% chance of NHL success based on his last 3 seasons, Morrissey looks primed to have a long and fruitful career in the NHL. He has a 42% chance of being at least top 4 defender and a healthy 30% of being capable of playing top 2 minutes.

After a strong development camp, Morrissey appears that he might be ready to push for a roster spot this fall, though with the number of Defense contracts the Jets currently carry, he may be starting his pro career in the AHL.

Josh Morrissey’s closest NHL comparable was Dennis Wideman.

4. Nic Petan

Nic Petan has spent the last three seasons racking up the points with the WHL’s Portaland Winter Hawks. The 2nd round pick from the 2013 draft is looking like a steal for the Winnipeg Jets and is expected to push for a roster spot with the big club, or lead the offense for the Jets farm team this fall. with a 25% of being a top-line or better player, and most likely being a 1st liner, Petan represents the Jets 4th best skating prospect, edging out the slightly “safer” Jack Roslovic due to high end potential.

Petan fans do have some cause for concern though, as his closest comparable was Center Mike Richards who, after a productive 5 years, appears to be all but done as an NHL player.

5. Jack Roslovic

Acquired with the 25th overall pick in the 2015 draft, Jack Roslovic is an extremely high scoring center for the USHL. Concerns arise about his potential due to playing with American phenom Austin Mathews but his 43% success rate puts him in our top 5. Jack represents a fairly even spread of success levels logging: 6%, 8%, 10%, 11%, and 8% chances of Elite, First, Second, Third, and Fourth line success respectively. Roslovic is most likely to pan out a second line center for the Winnipeg Jets.

Roslovic’s closes comparable NHL player was Left winger Nick Foligno, though Jets fans hope Roslovic pan’s out at the center position.

6. Jansen Harkins

The third entrant from the 2015 draft, center Jansen Harkins represents a 40% chance of success with the jets. The WHL center put up a productive season, and though his most likely outcome is as a third line center, he represents an extremely valuable selection for a 2nd round pick. Jansen’s 20% chance of top 6 success also signals that a couple of strong offensive seasons could see him climb into the top 5.

Harkins closes NHL comparable is the effective two way center Brandon Dubinsky.

7.  Scott Kosmachuk

The lone entrant onto our list from the 2012 draft, Scott Kosmachuk  shows a 38% of NHL success based on his junior scoring (note: due to unavailable data, Kosmachuks 14-15 AHL season was not included. It is likely he will be lower on this list when the data is available). While a reasonably safe player due to his high scoring in the OHL, Kosmachuk does have limited upside, being most likely to become a third line player. That being said, he does maintain a 20% chance of top six success if he can find his scoring touch at the pro level.

A dose of lowered expectations may be necessary: Kosmachuk’s closes NHL comparable was bottom six player Tom Pyatt (Interesting note: Pyatt recieved a significant drop in his DY+3 production as well, much like Kosmachuk)

8. Erik Foley

Erik Foley, the fourth pick of the Jets int he 2015 draft creeps onto number 8, with a 32% chance of success in the NHL. The third round pick represents a likely third liner, and is primarily viewed as a bottom six player going forward.  Foley scored well for a winger in the USHL in  his draft year and plays a big game, but his average size may limit his ability to play the same way at the next level.

That being said, the big wingers closest NHL comparable was first line winger Kyle Okposo.

9. Brendan Lemieux

One of the main pieces in the Evander Kane and Zach Bogosian block buster, Brendan Lemieux hits the number 9 spot on our list. A pure goal scorer and agitator at the junior level, Lemieux represents a 30% chance of NHL success, though it should be noted that he is most likely a 4th line player.

Lemieux represents an interesting case due to the high volume of goals he created on the power play and his reputation as an agitator and pest on the ice. It remains to be seen whether he can develop into a meaningful NHL player or if he become a career bottom sixer, playing limited minutes and getting under his opponents skin.

Lemieux’s closest NHL comparable is also the previously mentioned Tom Pyatt.

10. Brenden Kichton*

The re-drafted Brenden Kichton’s place at number 10 on this list comes with a massive caveat. While Kichton’s number should put him in the top 3 it’s important to note that Kichton was an overage player, originally eligible to be drafted in 2010. He was drafted as an overage player by the New York Islanders in 2011, failed to sign a contract with them, and was redrafted by the Winnipeg Jets in 2013.

Though using his first 3 years of production shows Kichton to be highly likely to achieve success in the NHL, he has started to level off in the following two years. He may still be  a high probability of becoming an NHL player, but we include him with the caveat that he is much older then the other players on this list, and that the projections may not be entirely accurate about his likelihood of success as it has already been 5 years since his original draft eligibility.

Kichton’s closest NHL comparable has been the Colorado Avalanche’s Tyson Barrie.

The Obvious Exclusions:

As mentioned, this ranking is strictly off the probability that our projections give us. They do not work for goal tending prospects at all and seem to struggle accurately projecting players from European leagues as well. With that, there’s a couple of names we felt necessary to include:

G – Connor Hellebuyck

If an accurate projection measurement based on stat’s existed for goaltenders, we are almost certain Hellebuyck would make this list. After a record setting NCAA career Connor had a fantastic rookie season as the #1 goalie on a terrible St John’s Ice Caps team. Many fans of the Jets expect  Hellebuyck to push for a job this fall, and the question no longer seems to be if he can be an NHL goal tender, but when.

G – Eric Comrie

For all the same reasons as Hellebyuck, Comrie has also been left off this list. Though not quite as impressive and Hellebyuck, Eric Comrie has had a very strong junior career and is expected to either be sharing the crease with Connor on the Ice Caps or taking the starters job in the ECHL this fall.

Joel Armia

Former first round pick and another key piece in the Winnipeg-Buffalo trade is Finish Joel Armia. Left off this list due to the issues with translating Euro league success to the NHL Armia compares quite favorable to many NHL players. Fans and management seem to agree that he is likely to push for a roster spot this fall, and we would be remiss to exclude him completely.

Andrew Copp

While the projections are usually fine for NCAA and USHL players, Copp is on this list as he has already had 1 game in the NHL at the end of last season. Based on the current jets roster, many expect Copp to walk into the 4th line center role this fall.

Michael Spacek

Like Armia, Spacek’s numbers take a hit due to him playing in a mens pro league during his draft year. Our friends at www.canucksarmy.com really like Spacek’s skill-set, and his PCS% would catapult him very nicely into our top ten list.

The Other 10 :

This is a top 20 afterall, so we have included table breakdown of  the prospects we ranked from 10-20 (note: some top 10 HM are included here).

Conclusions:

The Winnipeg Jets Have amassed a very healthy, very deep group of NHL prospects. The top 5 looks to house a lot of potential first line players, and a strong group of potential middle six and role players rounds out the top ten.

In the later ranks we see more projects, though with a total of 17 players over a 20% chance of NHL success, the math quickly adds up to a high probability of pulling quite a few legitimate NHL players from the pipeline.

While there’s a lot of ink spilled on players like Connor and Ehlers, having project forwards like Jimmy Lodge, JC Lipon, and Chase De Leo outside of your top 10 spells good news for the organization.  Meanwhile, Tucker Poolman, Jack Glover, and Jan Kostalek all provide decent odds for NHL success on the blue-line.

When you factor in the success already achieved by Mark Scheifele, Adam Lowry, and Jacob Trouba, it’s easy to see why fan’s are starting to buy into Kevin Cheveldayoff’s slow and steady approach.

Next week we’ll be posting our “what to expect when you’re expecting: Winnipeg Jets Pipeline” where we determine just how many of these players Jets Fans can expect to see playing for their team in the coming years.

Total List:

With the 2015 NHL entry draft all wrapped up we’re gearing up for a couple of busy weeks of articles and breakdowns.

We’re also working on a major update that will fix some of the issues we have and give us completely updated numbers. Once we’ve updated, we’ll be giving you a complete breakdown and ranking of the 2015 NHL entry draft and how your favorite teams did.

In the meantime, we decided to take a look at some of our favorite players that did not hear their name called on draft day.

As Dev Camps open and teams look towards training camps in September, we’ve compiled a list of some of the top players left untouched at the entry draft that could provide some very valuable “free” talent to NHL teams looking to improve their prospect depth.

A number of these players you may recognize from our previous articles, but we thought hey were interesting enough to bare repeating.

Cohort Criteria: Within 2 inches of height and +/- 4 Cumulative NHLE scoring for Draft Years seasons up to and including the 2015. EX: A player who was in DY +2 for the 14-15 season, will be compared based on Cumulative NHLE’s for  their DRAFT YEAR, DRAFT YEAR +1, and DRAFT YEAR +2, provided the data is available.

10. Ethan Spaxman D

Cohort size:149
NA rank: 181
NHL %: 26%
Third Pair/Depth %: 6%
Top Four %: 18%
Top Pair %: 7%

We mentioned Spaxman in our “Top Players over 6’3″ article (Spaxman in 6’4″ 193 lbs) and we were mildly surprised when he went undrafted on draft day. As a large defender who managed to put up a decent number of points, he does not look like the usual type of player that NHLE’s and PCS’s identify but are ignored by traditional scouts and GM’s. Either way, Spaxman is a big defender who represents a 26% chance of NHL success, which would be a great value add for any team’s training camp and prospect roster.

9. Rihard Bukarts LW

Cohort size:149
NA rank: unranked
NHL %: 26%
Bottom Six %: 14%
Top Six %: 12%
Top Line %: 3%

Rihards Bukarts was featured in our top 10 over-age player article as well, and makes this list at #9 (tied with Spaxman and another familiar face at #8). Bukarts is a small skilled winger who played for the Brandon Wheat Kings and pulled himself 26% success rate in the NHL. While top-line potential is nearly non-existent, he has an even split chance of being a top six player, or a bottom six player and would be a great free addition by an astute GM come training camp.

8. Luke Philp C

Cohort size:77
NA rank: 172
NHL %: 26%
Bottom Six %: 16%
Top Six %: 10%
Top Line %: 4%

Luke Philp rounds out the three way tie with a similar, though slightly more low end, chances of success as Rihard Bukarts.  The slightly taller though still undersized center, Luke Philp represents a 26% chance of NHL success with a 16% chance of being a bottom six player.  With a similar projection setup to Bukarts, Philp could be a good gamble for a team not afraid to forgo size for the sake of skill with a free prospect.

7.  Garrett McFadden D

Cohort: 37
NARank: unranked
NHL %: 30%
Third Pair: 3%
Top 4: 27%
First pair: 19%

Garrett McFadden was an unranked defender in CSS’s final scouting that pulled a 30% success rate in the NHL. The undersized defender (5’10”) had a 27% likelihood of becoming a top four quality player. Those are odds generally reserved for players taken in the top 3 rounds of the draft, not passed over by every team in the league. A team in need of some additional defense prospects and ones not afraid to gamble on scoring would be wise to extend an invitation to Garrett in the fall.

6. Tim McGauley

Cohort: 284
NA rank: 165
NHL %: 30%
Bottom six: 18%
Top six: 12%
First line: 6%

Another name we’ve seen before, over-age Tim McGauley represents a 30% chance of success in the NHL and the #6 spot on this list. While more likely a bottom six player then a top six, McGauley is the tallest forward to make our list at 6’0″. He has skill, and while size isn’t exactly a plus for McGauley, he’s not as big of a wild card as some of the smaller players that have made our lists. McGauley’s 12% likelihood of top 6 success is nothing to sniff at and he’s the first forward on our list to break the 5% first line likelihood barrier with a 6% rating.

5. Casey Fitzgerald

Cohort: 38
NA rank: 148
NHL %: 32 %
Third pairing: 3%
Top Four: 29%
Top Pairing: 21%

Casey Fitzgerald represents a 32% chance of success and an impressive 21% chance of being a first pairing defender. Like most players on this list, he’s small, but his comparisons are really impressive. A this point of our list, all the players mentioned would not have looked out of place as 3rd round picks on draft day. Fitzgerald is not an over-age player, and with a 1/3 chance of playing in the NHL at some capacity, he really should see an invite to a camp.

4. Vladimir Tkachev

Cohort: 134
NA rank: 159
NHL %: 33%
Bottom six: 16%
Top six: 17%
First line: 9%

Vladimir Tkachev hits the list again after appearing in our top over-age class. Tkachev is likely the biggest surprise to go undrafted as he was offered a contract by the Edmonton Oilers in the off season of last year but it was ruled ineligible. Many were surprised to see the Oilers pass on Tkachev as he had another decent year for his development and still has a healthy projection of being an NHL forward at 33% with 9% chance of being a first line player. Do not be surprised if Tkachev gets a contract offer from the Oilers or another club this off-season- one that will be legal.

3. Sebastian Aho

Cohort: 27
EU rank: 13
NHL %: 33 %
Third Pair: 4%
Top Four: 19%
Top Pair: 11%

Sebastian Aho (the Swedish one) is an over-age European defender who we thought quite highly of. He appeared on our over-age list and while ranked by the EU branch of CSS he did not hear his name called for the second year in a row. Aho is small for a defender(as so many of these players are) but his scoring says he could still be a very useful offensive player. with a 33% chance of success, a 19% chance of being a top four defender, and the fact that he’s a 19 year old euro that could step onto any AHL team, Aho could be a very savvy free agent pickup for any team looking for defensive depth.

2. Dante Salituro

Cohort: 21
NA rank: 109
NHL %: 33%
Bottom six: 14%
Top six: 19%
First line: 10%

Dante Salituro was the highest ranked skate by CSS on our list that did not get drafted. The diminutive center (5’8″) was a high scoring dynamo but was passed over due to obvious size concerns. In the new NHL though, he could prove to be an excellent gamble and addition to a teams roster. Not only is a he a 1/3 chance of making the NHL, he has 19% chance of being a top six player, and 10% chance of being a first line player. Salituro is the most likely forward on our list to be a high performing NHL forward and we look forward to tracking his progress, wherever he lands.

1. Loik Levellie

Cohort: 52
EU rank: 25
NHL %: 46 %
Third Pair: 4%
Top Four: 42%
Top Pair: 25%

Loik Leveille is the #1 undrafted player by NHLE ranking*. Leveille is small for a defender (6’0″) but not dramatically undersized, and his recorded weight of 223 lbs’ means he’s thick enough to play the mans game. That being said, scouts must have seen something as his 46% NHL success rate, 42% top 4 success rate, and 1 in 4 chance of being a top pairing defender wasn’t enough to get him noticed on draft day. On the other hand, Leveille has already been invited to the Canadian’s development camp and, if signed, will be a great addition to their prospect depth.  We had Leveille ranked at 25th overall in our rankings, and his projections are inline with many 1st round draft picks.

The Caveat *:

There was one  player whom we left off this list that did  place higher then Loik Leveille. If you checked out our initial draft ranking you’ll know who we are talking about.

Gabe Bast is an extremely small defender (5’8″) who put up 40 points the BCHL in his draft year. That converts to an NHLE of 9, which gives him a cohort success rate of 67%, a top 4 floor for success(67%), and a 33% chance of being a high scoring first pairing defender. 

The catch? He had a cohort of only 6 players and was an unranked prospect by CSS. This is one time where we simply could not just trust in the numbers, especially when dealing with a sample size  that was so small not due to extreme talent, but just an unusual collection of statistics.

That being said, we felt we would be remiss to exclude him completely.

Honorable Mentions:

Two players who were just barely on the outside looking in on our list are the Left Winger Dryden Hunt, and the big center Hayden McCool.  Both 24% chances to become NHL players and both more probable bottom  sixers then top sixers (12% for Hunt, 15% for McCool) these two had appeared on our over-age list (Hunt) and our 6’3″+ list (McCool) respectively. Though the odds are slightly longer then those listed in the article, neither player is small, (McCool is in fact quite big) and both could be great additions and worth contract offers in training camp from an astute GM.

Conclusions:

The three main things that stand out to us when reviewing this list are :

1. Over-age Players
2. Small Scorers
3. Defensemen

Five players on our list were previously profiled as over-agers to watch. This remains to be a potential area of great inefficiency by NHL gm’s and the NHL scouting community in general. All 5 of these over-age players offer odds far better then what most teams are receiving with picks from the 4th round and on, and should be seen as excellent value signing’s if they are given contracts over the off-season.

Size continues to be a concerning factor for the scouting community at large. The group of forwards on this list are exclusively under 6’0″ tall (except for HM Hayden McCool) but still generated a lot of offense in their respective leagues. As the NHL moves towards a more skill game and players like Tyler Johnson and Johnny Gaudreau it will be interesting to see how long this trend continues.

Finally, and most surprisingly, was the apparent ignoring of defenders. While most of these defenders were what teams would call undersized, both Loik Leveille and Ethan Spaxman offered average to plus size while providing very good success rates.  This leaves us wondering what potential issues may have been identified by these players to keep scouts away. On the other hand, McFadden, Fitzgerald, and Aho are all small relative to their NHL peers and may have less opportunity to succeed at the next level.

All in all, it will be interesting to see if any of these players receive camp invitations or contract offers in the coming months, as they all look to be legitimate NHL prospects, regardless of whether the scouting community at large has recognized yet, or not.

Our favorites: For Fun, if we had 4 contracts to give out to camp invites they would be Loik Leveille, Dante Salituro, Ethan Spaxman, and Hayden McCool.

Well the first round of the 2015 NHL entry draft is wrapped up.

It was an exciting day in which the Boston Bruins shook up the draft order (and projections) all day long and with more pick for pick trades then we’ve seen in a while. The Toronto Maple Leafs and Tampa Bay lightning appeared to get into an arms race of trading back for more picks, while the NY Islanders entered the draft with no picks, and left with two (two really good ones we might add).

So without further ado, here are our 2015 NHL entry draft draft cards to give you a brief snapshot of how the draft went.

NOTE: Picks #8 (Zach Werenski-Columbu) #12(Guryanov – Dallas) #20 (Joel Erikson Ek – Minnesota) #29 (Gabriel Carlson) have insufficient data in our system for projections.

Winners of highest % chance of NHL players: (outside of Edmonton and Buffalo)

Arizona:  142% NHL (127% top six) – Dylan Strome, and Nathan Merkley
Philadelphia: 111% NHL (86% top six) Ivan Provorov, and Tyler Konecny
Winnipeg:  113% NHL ( 79% top six) – Kyle Connor, and Jack Roslovic

Honorable mentions: Boston Bruins and NYI (102% NHL total each)

Note: Boston could have done much, MUCH better. Though they win the %’s, they severely under-performed for their pick location. On the other hand, NYI performed very well relative to pick location.

We have run the numbers on all players ranked by CSS and sorted by liklihood of success.

This is that list.

We will be posting 4 other listings as well (NA only, Euro Only, Dmen Only, Forwards Only).

Our purpose  for this exercise is to help identify area’s where our methods are weak and/or lacking. Through discussion with the boys over at www.canucksarmy.com we know that we are pulling similar cohorts to them regarding North American Skaters, but have a ways to go in accurately projecting euros.

No scouting has been taken into account with this list. Some players have been removed completely due to an inability to pull any comparables or a simple lack of data on our end.

But enough chit chat, here’s the list.

The Big List  – All CSS 2015 Draft Eligible Players Ranked by Probability of Success

Cohort Methodology: Within 2” Of Height, Within  +/- 4 NHLE scored in draft season (NHLE’s are normalized over an 82 game season to account for limited games played etc). Overage Player values are determined by cumulative NHLE over all seasons available (+/- 4) and within 2 inches of height.

Download the The Big List – CSV-Complete .CSV file for more detail here

That being said, most overage players do not become meaningful NHL players, while sometimes diamonds in the rough like Tanner Pearson or David Perron can be found.

Historically, the most successful overage player are those that were high scorers but were generally passed over due to size, or players who were playing in a tier 2 junior league before making the jump in their DY+1.

With all this in mind, lets take a look at this years most likely Overage success stories.

Cohort Criteria: Within 2 inches of height and +/- 4 Cumulative NHLE scoring for Draft Years seasons up to and including the 2015. EX: A player who was in DY +2 for the 14-15 season, will be compared based on Cumulative NHLE’s for  their DRAFT YEAR, DRAFT YEAR +1, and DRAFT YEAR +2, provided the data is available.

10. Michael Fora

Cohort size: 238
NA rank: 205
NHL %: 21%
Third Pair/Depth %: 5%
Top Four %: 16%
Top Pair %: 7%
Elite %:1%

Michael Fora is a single season overage player (2014 was his draft year) who had decent NHLE production after going undrafted. 50 of his 238 Cohort’s became NHL players, with the majority of them becoming 2nd pairing or better defenders (based on scoring alone.). The 6’2″ defender has adequate size, and with a 21% success rate presents a very PLUS value pick for his CSS rank of 205. His highest historical NHL comparable is Erik Karlsson.

9. Jiri Fronk

Cohort: 303
NA Rank: 151
NHL %: 24%
Bottom Six %: 16%
Third Line: 14%
Top Six %: 7%
Top line %: 3%
Elite %:1%

Jiri Fronk has already been passed over 3 times prior to this draft year. That being said, he still represents a 24% chance of NHL success based on his latest scoring and moderate size (6’2″).  This is great value for a player ranked at 151 by CSS and likely to go outside of the top 4 rounds.

The most likely individual level of success for the big right winger was as a 4th line player (9%) though he had similar chances of success (8%) in a third line role. Fronk holds an outside chance (2%) at becoming an elite comparable. His highest historical comparable player is James Neal.

8. Dryden Hunt

Cohort: 297
NA rank: 111
NHL %: 24%
Bottom Six: 12%
Third line: 16%
Top six: 1%
First line: 5%
Elite %: 2%

Dryden Hunt is a 6’0″ Left winger ranked at number 111 by CSS. At 199 lbs he’s essentially a pro-ready build, and his 24% success rate is quite good for his projected pick location of 4th round plus. He is most likely a 4th line player (7%) though he shows a fairly even distribution (4% chance of 1st line, 5% chance of 2nd line, 5% chance of third line, 7% chance of fourth line) with an outside shot at elite upside (2%).

Alexander Semin is the highest scoring comparable player to Dryden Hunt.

7.  Sebastian Aho (DEFENDER)

Cohort: 24
EUrank: 13
NHL %: 25%
Third Pair: 25%
Top 4: 21%
First pair: 13%
Elite %: 0%

Sebastian Aho is the highest ranked player on our list (13 of all Euro’s by CSS). The overage defender put together an impressive season and has pulled a cohort success rate of 25%. While decent for an overage player, his high ranking leaves some questions as to whether he truly provides exceptional value in the first 3 rounds of the draft.  That being said, 13% of his cohort became first pairing scoring Dmen, the highest high-end success rate of this list.

Mark Streit was his highest scoring NHL comparable.

6. Brett Seney

Cohort: 78
NA rank: 198
NHL %: 26%
Bottom six: 13%
Third line: 15%
Top six: 12%
First line: 3%
Elite %: 1%

The 5’9″ Left Winger, Brett Seney, marks the start of a three way tie of overage forwards  at 26%. The diminutive scorer was passed over his first year (2014) and holds a depth CSS rank of 198 but represents immense value for a 6th-7th round pick, and would not be out of place in the 3rd-5th rounds either.

His most likely outcomes are as a second line scorer (9%) or as 4th line utility forward (9%).  Joe Pavelski is his highest scoring NHL Comparable.

5. Luke Phil

Cohort: 77
NA rank: 172
NHL %: 26 %
Bottom six: 14%
Third line: 17%
Top six: 10%
First line: 4%
Elite %: 3%

Luke Phil is a 5’9″ center who pulled a 26% chance of NHL success while being ranked 172 overall by CSS. The second of the three-way tie, Phil also represent great value for a pick anywhere in the back half of the draft. His most likely level of success is as a 4th line player (8%) though he has a combined 12% chance of being a useful middle six player as well.

Interestingly he ties for the highest chance of elite success at 3%. As with Seney, Joe Pavelski is his highest scoring comparable.

4. Richard Bukarts

Cohort:34
NA rank: UN-RANKED
NHL %: 26 %
Bottom six: 14%
Third line: 15%
Top six: 12%
First line: 13%
Elite %: 0%

The first un-ranked player to crack our lists, Richard Bukarts tops off the 3-way tie for success at 26%.

He is small. REALLY SMALL. At 5’9″ it’s no wonder why he hasn’t been ranked. That being said, 26% chance flyer in the 7th round is better then any team can regularly hope for. Furthermore, he has a 12% chance of being a top six player- nothing to sniff at outside the first 3 rounds of a regular draft.

His highest NHL scoring comparable was Ryan Callahan.

3. Tim McGauley

Cohort: 284
NA rank: 165
NHL %: 30 %
Bottom six: 18%
Third line: 21%
Top six: 12%
First line: 6%
Elite %: 2%

6′ Center Tim McGauley pulled an impressive 30% success rate in a very large cohort. This is especially impressive given his modest ranking of 165 by CSS- expected to go in the last three rounds of the draft, if at all.

Tim’s 30% success rate would be at home in the back of the 2nd round, and as  double-overage player, McGauley could step on to a teams AHL roster this fall if he so chose.

His 12% chance of top six success shows he has some decent upside, while his 18% chance of bottom six success shows he’s quite “safe” in the traditional sense. His highest scoring NHL Comparable was Alexander Semin.

2. Vladimir Tkachev

Cohort: 134
NA rank: 159
NHL %: 33%
Bottom six: 16%
Third line: 23%
Top six: 16%
First line: 9%
Elite %: 3%

Most draft fans will be familiar with Vladimir Tkachev after he received an illegal contract offer last fall from the Edmonton Oilers. The Russian winger had another impressive scoring season and is currently projecting at a 33% likelihood of success. Though CSS has him ranked as a late pick, it should be no surprise if the Oilers decide to draft him within the first 4 rounds.

Tkachev’s 16% top six upside is impressive, and his 9% chance of becoming a first line talent even more so, though it should be noted, his most common individual level of success was as a 4th line player (8%). Joe Pavelski was his highest comparable.

1. Andrew Mangiapane

Cohort: 99
NA rank: 85
NHL %: 37 %
Bottom six: 13%
Third line: 32%
Top six: 24%
First line: 13%
Elite %: 3%

And the number 1 spot for an overage player goes to Andrew Mangiapane. Another undersized scorer, Mangiapane had a very successful DY+1 season after a relatively unremarkable performance in his original draft year.  His 37% success rate is very impressive  for a player ranked outside of the top 50 (for example, #5 ranked Lawson Crouse holds a similar statistical projection).

His most likely level of success was as a 2nd line player (11%) though he has very good first line upside as well (10%). In short, getting a player with 1/4 chance of being at minimum a top 6 performer is great value, even in the second round.

It will remain to be seen as to whether he can maintain his production, or if GM’s were right in passing him over the first time around.

Honorable Mentions:

3 Players just missed the cut off for our top 10 list.

Alexandre Goulet is a 6′, 195 lbs Overage Center ranked 166 by CSS yet holds a 19% chance of NHL success.

Next is the very large double overage Mark Simpson who is a 6’5″ center ranked 160 by CSS. Despite his NHL success rate (19%) Simpson’s counting stats do leave some questions about his ultimate upside, and is likely a middle 6 player even under the best of circumstances.

Pius Suter is one of the highest ranked skaters on this list but just missed the top 10. The 5’11” center is small but still holds a 20% chance of success. Ranked at 74 in NA by CSS, he wouldn’t be a bad pick in the third round, but does not represent the value most players on this list show.

Conclusions:

The common thread for the most successful overage players appears to be small(ish) players who continued scoring or broke out after their first season.  Not a single skater in the top 5 was over 6 feet tall, though many represent immensely high value given their projected draft location.

Teams could potentially do very well to mine overage player’s in the last two rounds of the draft, to not only strengthen their farm teams immediately, but to gain a considerable advantage verse the traditional success of late round picks.

Overage players allow GM’s to hedge their bets as well as the more seasons of success a player has, the more likely he is to succeed in the NHL.

With the draft right around the corner our last article (The Big List) will be going up on Thursday!

Be sure to follow us on twitter as we’ll be live tweeting the draft and keeping you updated with every teams 1st round picks and their projections.

Scouts love size. Every year we see small skilled players passed over at the draft table for behemoths who may or may not be able to play hockey.

While drafting for size has resulted in its fair share of busts, getting a player who has both size and skill remains a home run at the draft table.

To this end, we broke down the draft list into only players 6’3” or taller, ran the comparisons on them and crunched the numbers. The following are the 10 safest players 6’3” or tallerin CSS’s ranking.

Cohort Criteria: +/- 4 NHLE’s in their DRAFT YEAR ONLY(excluding DY-1, projected upon an 82 game schedule). +/- 2 inches in height.

10. Brandon Carlo

Cohort size: 101
NA rank: 25
NHL %: 29%
Third Pair/Depth %: 9%
Top Four %: 20%
Top Pair %: 9%
Elite %: 3%

Every traditionalist’s favorite safe d-man, Brandon Carlo starts off our list as the 10^th safest Big Boy. While you may think “hey, that’s not bad!” or “that makes sense!” Know this: there are 6 skaters on the list ahead ranked below Carlo by ISS. Still, getting a big Defenseman that isn’t incapable of scoring is always a good move.

9. Gabriel Gagne

Cohort: 44
NA Rank: 34
NHL %: 30%
bottom siz/Depth %: 14%
Top Four %: 16%
Top Pair %: 7%
Elite %: 5%

The big 6’4” winger comes in at number nine. Considering he’s ranked a full 10 slots behind Brandon Carlo, Gabriel Gagne could represent decent value for a second round draft pick. Big wingers are hard to come by, and Gagne’s comparable put him at 1/3 chance of becoming an NHL player (about par for the course for a 2^nd round draft selection).

8. Nikita Pavlychev

Cohort: 10
NA rank: 153
NHL %: 30%
Bottom Six/Depth %: 30%
Third line: 30%
Top Six%: 0%)

Nikita who? Pavlychev is a giant man. At 6’6” the big Russian has had a mediocre scoring season in the USHL (16 points in 42 games). That being said, 30% of Pavlychev’s comparable did become career NHLers. NOTE: there was an extremely small sample size for Pavlychev, and furthermore: all but one of the successful NHLers was a career face puncher. If Pavlychev is going to make the NHL, he’s probably not going to be doing it with his goal scoring. Still, ranked at 153 in North America, Pavlychev’s probability of success is extremely high for a skate ranked to go in the last two rounds of the draft.

7.  Chris Martinet

Cohort: 23
NA rank: 81
NHL %: 30%
Third Pair: 30%
Top 4: 22%
First pair: 17%
Elite %: 4%

Ranked 81 In North America, the 6’6” defender is the 7^th safest player over 6’3”. At a 30% success rate and projected to go around the 4^th round, Chris Martinet could represent really good value for a depth pick. Most defenders like Martinet panned out as 3^rd-2^nd pairing defensemen. Though a 17% probability of being a top pairing defenseman is nothing to sniff at for a 4^th round pick.

6. Jordan Greenway

Cohort: 45
NA rank: 47
NHL %: 31%
Bottom six: 22%
Third line: 18%
Top six: 9%
First line: 7%
Elite %: 4%

At 6^th on our list is expected 2^nd round draft-pick-to-be Jordan Greenway. Ranked 47 in NA he’s likely to go in the back half of the 2^nd round, and offering a 31% success rate is about par for the course in that slot. Interesting to note: Greenway represents a very similar success rate to previously mentioned Gabriel Gagne, but is ranked 10 slots later in the draft.

5. Lawson Crouse

Cohort: 71
NA rank: 5
NHL %: 37 %
Bottom six: 21%
Third line: 23%
Top six: 15%
First line: 10%
Elite %: 4%

Lawson Crouse is likely the most contentious player in this year’s draft. Having great size, a good WJC tournament, and “not terrible” scoring has caused Crouse to skyrocket up draft rankings, finishing the season at NA 5. Unfortunately, Crouse’s scoring puts his comparable at only a 37% success rate. While a respectable rate, and a decent prospect, according to the projection Crouse should be much lower than his CSS rank of 5.

4. Paul Bittner

Cohort:62
NA rank: 26
NHL %: 40 %
Bottom six: 23%
Third line: 26%
Top six: 18%
First line: 11%
Elite %: 5%

All that separates Paul Bittner from Lawson Crouse is 10 lbs and 20 slots on the CSS draft ranking. With identical height and similar production, Paul Bittner represents a higher chance of success then Lawson Crouse, though their cohorts are very similar. This may be a situation where the scouts are right: while their statistical performances were similar, Bittner played with far superior line mates, playing third wheel to Nicolas Petan and Oliver Bjorkstrand in Portland. It will be interesting to compare the development of Bittner and Crouse over their careers.

3. Pavel Zacha

Cohort: 90
NA rank: 8
NHL %: 46 %
Bottom six: 24%
Third line: 36%
Top six: 21%
First line: 13%
Elite %: 6%

8^th ranked Pavel Zacha is the third safest of the giants. At 46% likelihood of NHL success, Zacha is a legitimately safe prospect, with decent top six upside and first line potential. Furthermore, Zacha’s transition to the NA game has scouts thinking his offense could be much higher.

2. Thomas Schemitsch

Cohort: 40
NA rank: 91
NHL %: 58%
Bottom six: 8%
Third line: 58%
Top six: 50%
First line: 25%
Elite %: 10%

The most surprising player on the list goes to #2, Thomas Schemitsch. At 6’3” and with a very decent scoring pace Schemitsch may be one of the most underrated prospects by CSS in this year’s draft. Ranked as a third-fourth round pick, Schemitsch’s 58% NHL success rate would put him in a 3 way tie for third on our top 10 defensemen draft list. You simply don’t find odds like Schemitsch outside of the 2^ndround and any team would be lucky to land him.

1. Dylan Strome

Cohort: 3
NA rank: 4
NHL %: 100 %
Bottom six: 0%
Third line: 0%
Top six: 100%
First line: 67%
Elite %: 67%

And the number 1 spot for a player over 6’3” goes to Dylan Strome. It’s no surprise as the consensus top 5 pick offers up an elite blend of size and skill that teams drool over. His production marks him as a near lock to succeed in the NHL as a top six player with reasonable elite level upside.

Honorable Mentions:

Ethan Spaxxman ranked number 12 on this list, but holds a CSS scouting rank of just 181. With a 24% success rate, those are odds usually reserved for 2^nd round picks, and he could be a sleeper to watch.

Another notable is Hayden McCool. Other then having the best last name, McCool pulled a similar 24% success rate and would represent great value with where he’s projected to go at #147.

Conclusions:

While some players receive an unwarranted boost in draft ranking due to their height, this study revealed a number of players undervalued by CSS. The question will remain wether a player like Crouse or Carlo is worth their CSS projection and wether or not teams agree with that. It will also be interesting to keep an eye on the mid to late round selections that this study uncovered as being good value players such as: Pavlychev, Martinet, Schemitsche, Spaxxman, McCool, overager Mark Simpson (19%), and the previously unmentioned Philippe Myers (19%).

AMMENDMENT: Thanks to Tiranis for noticing a discrepency. Noah Hannifin was incorrectly unlisted due to a transcription error. This article has been updated to reflect this.

Last week we outlined the top 10 safest forwards expected to go in the first round of the 2015 draft. This week we’ll be doing the same exercise with defensemen.

The idea of “safe” is even more heavily applied to defensemen than forwards by the scouting community. So let’s see how many “sure bets” crack the list from a statistical perspective…

MASSIVE CAVEAT: Scoring should be held at a lower standard for defensemen than for forwards. That being said, it has been proven to be a good indicator of future success. Please keep in mind that our “tiers” of NHL defensemen are based on scoring. This is obviously not the best way to do this but does give a decent picture of what a player could be expected to become.

Cohort Criteria: +/- 4 NHLE’s in their DRAFT YEAR ONLY(excluding DY-1, projected upon an 82 game schedule). +/- 2 inches in height.

1. Mitchell Vande Sompel

CSS NA RANK: 34
Cohort size: 3
NHL %: 100% (3)
Third Pair/Depth %: 0%
Top Four or better %: 100% (3)
Top Pair or better %: 100 % (3)
Elite %: 0%

The small high scoring Vande Sompel makes for a very interesting case this year. While his scoring was off the charts, he was also sometimes used as a center. From a statistical standpoint though, Vande Sompel’s comparables all became top pairing (via point production) defensemen.

2. Ivan Provorov

CSS NA RANK: 7
Cohort size: 27
NHL %: 67% (18)
Third Pair/Depth %: 7%(2)
Top Four or Better: 59% (16)
Top Pair or Better: 33 % (9)
Elite: 7% (2)

Ivan Provorov has been one of the highest rated defensemen in this years draft and with good reason. At 67% success rate including Elite potential, there’s a lot to like about Provorov. To boot, scouts are in love with his defensive game and he could actually be the “safest” defenseman in the draft.

3. Jeremy Roy

CSS NA RANK: 21
Cohort size: 36
NHL %: 58% (21)
Third Pair/Depth %: 6% (2)
Top Four or Better: 53% (19)
Top Pair or Better: 31% (11)
Elite %: 15% (4)

Projected to go in the back half of the first round, Jeremy Roy represents a 58% chance of becoming an NHL player from statistical standpoint. With a 53% chance of being a strong top 4 defensemen Roy could represent great value in the late first.

4. Vince Dunn

CSS NA RANK: 32
Cohort size: 36
NHL %: 58% (21)
Third Pair/Depth %: 6% (2)
Top Four or Better: 53% (19)
Top Pair or Better: 31% (11)
Elite %: 15% (4)

Vince Dunn’s statistical production catapults him from unlikely first round pick to one of the safest defensemen ranked in the top 40. Dunn pulled an identical cohort to the higher ranked Jeremy Roy. With both being seen as late first/second round talents it will be interesting to see how many picks separate these two defenders.

5. Noah Hanifin (AMMENDMENT)

CSS NA RANK: 3
Cohort size: 44
NHL %: 55% (24)
Third Pair/Depth %: 9% (4)
Top Four or better: 45% (32)
Top Pair or better: 23% (17)
Elite %: 7% (6)

The highest ranked defensemen in this years draft drops to number five (much better then the previous omission). Hannifin DOES in fact project as a likely NHL caliber defensemen at 55% success. Whether or not he provides more value then some of the forwards available will be the question come draft day.

6. Jakub Zboril

CSS NA RANK: 12
Cohort size: 64
NHL %: 42% (27)
Third Pair/Depth %: 3% (2)
Top Four or Better: 39% (25)
Top Pair or Better: 20% (13)
Elite %: 8% (5)

Jakub Zboril’s statistical production puts him as the 6^th safest defenseman, behind 3 skaters CSS ranked far after him. Zboril represents a 20% chance of becoming a top pairing defenseman and is the first on the list to show a below 50-50 shot at being a top 4 defender. Scouts see a lot to like in his game, and his statistics are not low enough to raise serious concerns about his viability as mid 1^st round pick.

7. Noah Juulson

CSS NA RANK: 22
Cohort size: 67
NHL %: 39% (26)
Third Pair/Depth: 6% (4)
Top Four or Better: 33% (22)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (11)
Elite : 8% (4)

Ranked to go in the top half of the second round, Noah Juulson is in a three way tie with the next defenders based on their projections. With a 33% chance of being an effective top 4 defenseman, teams picking in the 25+ range could do a lot worse than Noah Juulson.

8. Ryan Pilon

CSS NA RANK: 24
Cohort size: 26
NHL %: 39% (26)
Third Pair/Depth: 6% (4)
Top Four or Better: 33% (22)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (11)
Elite : 8% (4)

The second of the three way tie, Ryan Pilon pulled an identical cohort to Noah Juulson. Scouts seem consistent in their ranking of these two defenders, with CSS having them only 2 picks apart. It will be interesting to see how each skater develops given their similarities.

9. Nicolas Meloche

CSS NA RANK: 40
Cohort size: 26
NHL %: 39% (26)
Third Pair/Depth: 6% (4)
Top Four or Better: 33% (22)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (11)
Elite : 8% (4)

Nicolas Meloche is the third member of the tie. Ranked over 15 slots later then the previously mentioned Juulson and Pilon, Meloche is an identical match to the previous two based on cohort alone. If Juulson and Pilon represent good value at the back of the first, Meloche should be considered a steal if taken at his projected mid-second round location.

10. Sebastian Aho

CSS EU RANK: 13
Cohort size: 14
NHL %: 39% (5)
Third Pair/Depth %: 0%
Top Four or Better: 33% (5)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (3)
Elite : 8% (1)

Sebastian Aho is the 13^th ranked European skater and the first to crack our top 10 lists. What does this mean? Well, in actuality it means Aho is probably even more likely to make the NHL then these numbers suggest (Pro euro leagues represent weak NHLE translations for prospects primarily due to the difficulty 17-18 year-olds face in getting ice-time on pro-level teams in non-development leagues).

Note: Aho is an Over-Age player. This comparison was done using his stats from his first year of eligibility. If we adjust to include his DY +1 production his NHL success rate drops to 30%. Please note that DY + DY+1 may not be a better indicator of success then Draft Year production alone

11. Thomas Chabot

CSS NA RANK: 16
Cohort size: 123
NHL %: 31% (38)
Third Pair/Depth %: 5% (6)
Top Four or better: 26% (32)
Top Pair or better: 14% (17)
Elite %: 5% (6)

Thomas Chabot, ranked 16 by CSS in NA, is the final defensemen on our list. Scouts love Chabot because of his defensive game and size, and while his comparisons are not as favorable as some of the smaller defenders ranked behind him, they are decent. Chabot is the type of defender scouts love to call “safe”, even if historically they are less likely to succeed then smaller, scoring defenders.

Honorable Mentions:

Just outside of the top 10 are swede Oliver Kylington and the big, mean, Brandon Carlo. While Kylington has seen his draft stock fall throughout the year, Carlo has been on the rise. Carlo is a decent prospect but his scoring does raise some flags about his value at his projected draft slot.

Kylington on the other hand is likely to be significantly undersold by these numbers due to the difficulty a 17 year-old defender can have earning ice time and scoring points in the non-developmental, pro-level SHL.

The Big Omissions:

The most interesting omission on the top 10 list is #3 ranked Noah Hanifin.

Hanifin’s scoring leaves a lot of questions, especially for a prospect so highly regarded. Still, playing a big roll on an NCAA team at 17 is no easy feat. The question remains, can a player succeed to a level equivalent of Hannifin’s ranking without scoring? or is this a classic case of scouts outsmarting themselves?

Originally not on the list due to a transcription error, Noah Hanifin is in fact a top 10 defenseman from a statistical standpoint.

Note: Zach Werenski has also been omitted due to errors in retrieving data. We will update this article appropriately in the future once that data is available.

Conclusions (ammended):

The most startling conclusions would be the extremely high success rate of the small, high-scoring, Vande Sompel, and the relatively low rating of the highest ranked defensemen in the draft, Noah Hanifin

While the scouts had the top 4 forwards accurately ranked in order by projection, there was far more disagreement with defensemen.

It will be an interesting study to keep tabs on the draft and the development of these players as teams have historically had far less success in identifying top flight defensemen in the draft as compared to forwards.

It is also important to note the disparity between “safe” forwards and defensemen.  While the lowest ranked forward on our top 10 still held a nearly 50% chance of success, the lowest defenseman was a paltry 30%. This trend lines up with team’s history of struggling to identify defensive talent at the same level as forwards in the draft.

Furthermore, other research has shown that at least one other defenseman, who we’ll explore in our next article, was ranked so low by the css that we did not include him in this study even though he would have debuted at number 5.

NHL teams looking to find breakout talent need to be successful in the first round of the draft or face the monumental challenge of gleaning significant players from much longer odds.

On average, over 70% of first round picks make the NHL, but a significantly fewer amount (approximately 45% by one previous study by this author) become impact players (or top six forwards).

What’s interesting is an idea of “safe” or what players have the highest chance to succeed. Historically, scouts have often favored large, defensively-minded players as “safe” picks. Conversely, when modelling off height and scoring, the safer players are always the higher scoring players unless dealing with players on the extremely small end (69 inches or less [5’9”])

With that being said, using nothing but scoring and height in their draft year, we’ll take a look at the top 10 “safest” forwards for the 2015 draft, to become NHL players of any caliber.

Cohort criteria: within +/- 4 NHLE’s in their draft year. Within +/- 2 inches of height.

1. Connor McDavid

CSS Rank: NA 1
NHL : 100%
Top Six: 100%
Elite: 100%

It’s no surprise to see the phenom Connor McDavid at the top of the list. We actually had to expand the criteria just to find 2 comparable players, both of which became elite talents. Based on nothing but the stats, Connor McDavid is as good as scouts say he is.

2. Jack Eichel

CSS rank: NA2
NHL liklihood: 100%
Top Six: 100%
Elite: 100%

The back and forth between scouts on Eichel and McDavid lines up with the statistical projections. Though it was easier to find comparable players for Jack Eichel, they were no less impressive than Connor McDavid’s. All 4 players become elite level NHL contributors.

3. Mitchell Marner

CSS rank: NA6
Nhl: 100%
Top Six: 100%
Elite: 100%

The diminutive Mitchell Marner has put up astounding numbers. Only 3 comparable players were found and all 3 became elite point contributing players, despite their sizes. Ranked at 6’th in NA Central Scouting, Mitchell represents the first disagreement between scouts and statistical projection in this years draft.

4. Dylan Strome

CSS rank: NA4
NHL: 100%
Top Six: 100%
Elite: 67%

The big center is the final forward in the 2015 draft to hit the 100% success rate within their cohort. While scouts love Dylan’s size, he is the only member of the 100% club that did not produce solely “elite” level scorers. Statistically, Strome’s floor would be that of Derrick Brassard, while he compares on the high to Jason Spezza and Taylor Hall.

5. Evgeny Svechnikov

CSS rank: NA17
NHL: 72%
Bottom Six: 20%
Top Nine: 64%
Top Six: 52%
Top Line: 39%
Elite: 18%

The first surprise of the draft, Evgeny Svechnikov may be a victim of “the Russian Factor”. Ranked as low as 17 in NA by CSS, Svechnikov not only offers a 72% chance of NHL success, but over 50% to become an impact player. Is his ranking indicative of the 2015 depth, or will Svechnikov end up a real steal in the back half of the first round?

6. Timo Meier

CSS rank: NA10
NHL: 70%
Bottom Six: 16%
Top Nine: 64%
Top Six: 55%
Top Line: 41%
Elite: 20%

Meier’s production and size point to fantastic things in the future for the big winger.  While slightly less likely to succeed then Svechnikov, Meier’s cohort stacks up as slightly more high end then the Russian Winger’s. Scouts will dock him due to circumstances (playing with Nikolaj Ehlers) but from a statistics only standpoint, Meier looks like a fantastic pick.

7. Kyle Connor

CSS rank: NA13
NHL: 70%
Bottom Six: 20%
Top Nine: 64%
Top Six: 52%
Top Line: 39%
Elite: 18%

Kyle Connor pulled an identical cohort to Timo Meier. Ranked as another mid round pick, his 72% success rate, >50% top six success rate, and the fact that he’s a center make Kyle Connor an extremely attractive pick for anyone who misses out on one of the big 4.

8. Daniel Sprong

CSS rank: NA20
NHL: 54%
Bottom Six: 23%
Top Nine: 43%
Top Six: 31%
Top Line: 23%
Elite: 9%

Statistically Daniel Sprong marks the beginning of a third tier of 2015 draft eligible forwards. Comparable players to Sprong succeeded in the NHL at a 54% rate, with almost 1 in 4 becoming a legitimate top line scorer. Projected as a late round first, those are odds most teams would be happy to get.

9. Anthony Beauvillier

CSS rank: NA30
NHL: 53%
Bottom Six: 13%
Top Nine: 51%
Top Six: 40%
Top Line: 28%
Elite: 17%

Beauvillier is a perfect example of “Scout Safe” v.s. “Statistically Safe”. The scorer has been ranked as a late 1st to 2nd round pick due to scout’s fears that his size makes him “a risk”. This makes sense when looking at his bottom six potential vs top six potential compared to bigger players like Sprong, Connor, or Svechnikov, but it ignores one key fact: Beauvillier is still far more likely to be a top six NHL player then those ranked before him by CSS are to become NHL players of any sort.

10. Mathew Barzal

CSS rank: NA11
NHL: 49%
Bottom Six: 19%
Top Nine: 42%
Top Six: 30%
Top Line: 20%
Elite: 10%

At 49% Barzal is the last forward ranked in the first round who projects to approximately a 50-50 or better chance of success (though Filip Chlapik and Pavel Zacha both get an honorable mention at 47% and 46% respectively). Only a single inch taller than Anthony Beauvillier, the discrepancy in ranking between the two players is stark, and it will be interesting to see how many picks separate the two come June.

Bonus – But what about IMPACT players?

There remains a belief that  a high likelihood of success doesn’t always correlate to a high likelihood of high level success when it comes to NHL draft picks.

But lets explore that:

Rank

Reordering each list shows us that while there is some slight changes between success rate and highest level success rate  (Svechnikov drops, Beauvillier rises) only one player gets added to the list in  Travis Konecny.

While it is likely there could be a much wider spread and more significant jumps when looking at players projected to go in later draft rounds, at the high end it would seem that the higher your ceiling, the more likely you are to be an NHL player.

This is a topic we will be keeping our eye on, so look out for a futur analysis on the notion of “safe” players v.s. “high risk” from later parts in the draft.

Thank you everyone for the support so far! We’ve had an overwhelmingly positive response from the both the stats community and the hockey community at large and it really means a lot to us.

Just a couple of quick updates:

• We’ve removed our old static news page and replaced with this blog. We’ll be using this to publish articles and research done through these tools as well as just posting announcements and updates to the website.
• We’re experimenting with google ads. We’ll be running 2 or three on the site so you’ll see those though we’re trying to make sure they interfere with the layout as little as possibel
• we’ve switched the comparison tool to run off Last Name, First Name – this was easily the most suggested change and was easy enough to implement

Thanks again to everyone for checking the site out so far, and please don’t forget to give us a follow on twitter @hockeyprojproj

Thanks,

Loch.