The Shero administration was good with hitting on later picks. Full props on that. But it's not up for debate how terrible they were with high picks. They hit on Staal and Maatta. The rest were bungled picks or traded away. I don't think Ray Shero had the proper amount of respect for how valuable high draft picks ae and used them exclusively as trade chips whether it be straight up trading them or picking PMDs to trade away in the future. The only time he made a draft pick after Staal with the intention of him being a big time contributer to the Pens' future was Beau Bennett and he busted.

So it's really a tale of two drafters when it comes to Ray Shero.
- Victoro311

You're not going to successfully turn over more than half a team in one season. Did you notice how none of those guys made it to the cup team?

Ruth did Houdini level work in a season and a half. One of the most remarkable sports turn-around jobs I can think of. To change that much personnel and win a championship in two seasons is far more remarkable than anything Shero did.
- madmike71

So agree. Rutherford came in saying he was going to retool, and he did. The first year was rough, but it was the first year. Reasonable expectations dictated that contention was two to three years out as Rutherford brought in new guys and let them jell. I think its a testament to the GM-Coach relationship of Rutherford and Sullivan that we got the Cup on the second year. The coach knew how to succeed and The Old Man knew how to get him the pieces he needed to succeed. Its nothing short of impressive when you think about the insane amount of turnover that took place between the Shero and Rutherford era.

It'll be interesting how Rutherford's drafting will come to be seen in hindsight. Way too early to tell on that.

The Shero administration was good with hitting on later picks. Full props on that. But it's not up for debate how terrible they were with high picks. They hit on Staal and Maatta. The rest were bungled picks or traded away. I don't think Ray Shero had the proper amount of respect for how valuable high draft picks ae and used them exclusively as trade chips whether it be straight up trading them or picking PMDs to trade away in the future. The only time he made a draft pick after Staal with the intention of him being a big time contributer to the Pens' future was Beau Bennett and he busted.

So it's really a tale of two drafters when it comes to Ray Shero.
- Victoro311

Beyond Staal, the only genuine high end player Ray has added to this team (via draft) is Murray. The verdict is still out on Guentzal, DP, Maatta and Jarry. Other than those guys everybody else is 3rd and 4th line players. If I had to guess, I think Guentzal and Jarry have the best chance of being impact players. Maatta is falling a bit, and who knows what the hell we have in DP.

Of course teams need good cheap 3rd and 4th line players so I don't take that for granted. For most of his tenure, Ray wasn't even able to produce those out of his drafts.

Beyond Staal, the only genuine high end player Ray has added to this team (via draft) is Murray. The verdict is still out on Guentzal, DP, Maatta and Jarry. Other than those guys everybody else is 3rd and 4th line players. If I had to guess, I think Guentzal and Jarry have the best chance of being impact players. Maatta is falling a bit, and who knows what the hell we have in DP.

Of course teams need good cheap 3rd and 4th line players so I don't take that for granted. For most of his tenure, Ray wasn't even able to produce those out of his drafts.
- madmike71

While true, I'm willing to give Shero credit on the bottom six talents. The lower rounds are such a crap shoot, a lot of them don't even make it into the AHL. He consistently picked NHL level talent in those lower rounds and there's something to be said for that.

I think its unfair not to give him credit for his lower round selections because none of them are genuine high end players. That's so rare and I feel like only the Red Wings do that with any sort of consistency. The fact that he hit it out of the park on Murray and possibly Guentzal in the third round, to me, is a high point of praise.

He should absolutely be lambasted for not picking any high end players in the first round though. After Staal, he only has Maatta to his name, and like you said he's falling behind. After so many years, that low hit rate is unacceptable.

While true, I'm willing to give Shero credit on the bottom six talents. The lower rounds are such a crap shoot, a lot of them don't even make it into the AHL. He consistently picked NHL level talent in those lower rounds and there's something to be said for that.

I think its unfair not to give him credit for his lower round selections because none of them are genuine high end players. That's so rare and I feel like only the Red Wings do that with any sort of consistency. The fact that he hit it out of the park on Murray and possibly Guentzal in the third round, to me, is a high point of praise.

He should absolutely be lambasted for not picking any high end players in the first round though. After Staal, he only has Maatta to his name, and like you said he's falling behind. After so many years, that low hit rate is unacceptable.
- Victoro311

Never forget that Ray's entire scouting staff was pounding on the draft table demanding he take Saad.

While true, I'm willing to give Shero credit on the bottom six talents. The lower rounds are such a crap shoot, a lot of them don't even make it into the AHL. He consistently picked NHL level talent in those lower rounds and there's something to be said for that.

I think its unfair not to give him credit for his lower round selections because none of them are genuine high end players. That's so rare and I feel like only the Red Wings do that with any sort of consistency. The fact that he hit it out of the park on Murray and possibly Guentzal in the third round, to me, is a high point of praise.

He should absolutely be lambasted for not picking any high end players in the first round though. After Staal, he only has Maatta to his name, and like you said he's falling behind. After so many years, that low hit rate is unacceptable.
- Victoro311

Staal, Esposito, Despres, Bennett, Morrow, Pouliot, Maatta

4 of 6 are NHLers with DP still TBD is a very solid rate.

Staal, Esposito, Despres, Bennett, Morrow, Pouliot, Maatta

4 of 6 are NHLers with DP still TBD is a very solid rate.
- Feds91Stammer

And for comparison because everyone thinks DET is so great at drafting and developing here are their 1st rounders during that time frame: Kindl, B. Smith, Sheahan, Mantha. Sure they are 4 for 4 on NHLers but only 1 has the potential to be a major impact player.

Staal, Esposito, Despres, Bennett, Morrow, Pouliot, Maatta

4 of 6 are NHLers with DP still TBD is a very solid rate.
- Feds91Stammer

Don't even give me that. 4 out of 6 on this list are not high impact players.

Espotito: bust

Despres: TBD, honestly. Had a good 2015 season but now can't stay healthy. Everything before 2015 was questionable at best.

Bennett: Bust. He's 25 and is in the middle of his best season to date where he has 1 G and 7 points in 21 games. That is not high impact.

Morrow: Perhaps not a full on bust but certainly not high impact. Just now proving he's a capable 7D.

Pouliot: Bust until proven otherwise at this point. He has no more rope left.

Maatta: Arguably high impact but starting to look questionable. Love the guy and hope he turns it back around.

The Shero administration was good with hitting on later picks. Full props on that. But it's not up for debate how terrible they were with high picks. They hit on Staal and Maatta. The rest were bungled picks or traded away. I don't think Ray Shero had the proper amount of respect for how valuable high draft picks ae and used them exclusively as trade chips whether it be straight up trading them or picking PMDs to trade away in the future. The only time he made a draft pick after Staal with the intention of him being a big time contributer to the Pens' future was Beau Bennett and he busted.

So it's really a tale of two drafters when it comes to Ray Shero.
- Victoro311

I think you are way overrating the value of late 1st round picks. Take the selection of Joe Morrow. Did you know he was one of the best picks at that point in the draft. Of picks 20-30 in that draft you have namestnikov, rackell......joe morrow...a huge bunch of cup of coffee guys. The hit rate was basically 20% and Joe Morrow has gotten a little bit more coffee than the other guys.

Don't even give me that. 4 out of 6 on this list are not high impact players.

Espotito: bust

Despres: TBD, honestly. Had a good 2015 season but now can't stay healthy. Everything before 2015 was questionable at best.

Bennett: Bust. He's 25 and is in the middle of his best season to date where he has 1 G and 7 points in 21 games. That is not high impact.

Morrow: Perhaps not a full on bust but certainly not high impact. Just now proving he's a capable 7D.

Pouliot: Bust until proven otherwise at this point. He has no more rope left.

Maatta: Arguably high impact but starting to look questionable. Love the guy and hope he turns it back around.
- Victoro311

If a pick turns into an NHL player, that is a success. It's very rare that players picked outside the top 10 are "high impact players" (which is where the Pens picked most of those years, with the exception of DP.) You're lucky if they even become NHL regulars (BB, Depres, Morrow, etc.).

I think Shero would have played the youth this year. For a simple reason we already traded a lot of picks so rentals were not much of an option.
- sditulli

Not Shero's call. Disco always went with vets. Hated him for that.

I think you are way overrating the value of late 1st round picks. Take the selection of Joe Morrow. Did you know he was one of the best picks at that point in the draft. Of picks 20-30 in that draft you have namestnikov, rackell......joe morrow...a huge bunch of cup of coffee guys. The hit rate was basically 20% and Joe Morrow has gotten a little bit more coffee than the other guys.
- sditulli

Exactly, late first round picks are crap shoots. And you might even say Shero did the right thing by trading them away, realizing they were never going to reach their potential. Look at the players he traded away, for the players he got in return. Hossa, Dupuis, Gill, Iginla, Morrow, Guerin, Roberts, etc. he gave up players who were not going to contribute for players that COULD contribute then.

Don't even give me that. 4 out of 6 on this list are not high impact players.

Espotito: bust

Despres: TBD, honestly. Had a good 2015 season but now can't stay healthy. Everything before 2015 was questionable at best.

Bennett: Bust. He's 25 and is in the middle of his best season to date where he has 1 G and 7 points in 21 games. That is not high impact.

Morrow: Perhaps not a full on bust but certainly not high impact. Just now proving he's a capable 7D.

Pouliot: Bust until proven otherwise at this point. He has no more rope left.

Maatta: Arguably high impact but starting to look questionable. Love the guy and hope he turns it back around.
- Victoro311

Yeah you clearly highly overrate expected pick value.

While true, I'm willing to give Shero credit on the bottom six talents. The lower rounds are such a crap shoot, a lot of them don't even make it into the AHL. He consistently picked NHL level talent in those lower rounds and there's something to be said for that.

I think its unfair not to give him credit for his lower round selections because none of them are genuine high end players. That's so rare and I feel like only the Red Wings do that with any sort of consistency. The fact that he hit it out of the park on Murray and possibly Guentzal in the third round, to me, is a high point of praise.

He should absolutely be lambasted for not picking any high end players in the first round though. After Staal, he only has Maatta to his name, and like you said he's falling behind. After so many years, that low hit rate is unacceptable.
- Victoro311

I'm surprised more high-end talent isn't found in later rounds. You are drafting 18 year olds. Stars are routinely found in late rounds in baseball and in college football recruits ranked 500-1000 nationally routinely become NFL 1st round picks. Too much physical maturation still taking place at 18 plus scouting of those kids take place when they are 16-17 so not much track record.

I assume its a function of having far fewer kids playing hockey than football or baseball.

Don't even give me that. 4 out of 6 on this list are not high impact players.

Espotito: bust

Despres: TBD, honestly. Had a good 2015 season but now can't stay healthy. Everything before 2015 was questionable at best.

Bennett: Bust. He's 25 and is in the middle of his best season to date where he has 1 G and 7 points in 21 games. That is not high impact.

Morrow: Perhaps not a full on bust but certainly not high impact. Just now proving he's a capable 7D.


Pouliot: Bust until proven otherwise at this point. He has no more rope left.

Maatta: Arguably high impact but starting to look questionable. Love the guy and hope he turns it back around.
- Victoro311

I consider that really average drafting if you factor out Pouliot who was a major reach and just about everyone thought that at the time. Maybe even above average drafting with the lower ranked picks.

Two of the guys are NHL players except injuries derailing their career. Joe Morrow is about average for a late 1st. Maata was a huge coup for late 1st. Esposito is the only one who pops out as a bad pick as he's no where close to being a NHL player.

If you consider Maata a bad pick then you have never looked back at past drafts. For guys picked after Maatta I have to go all the way to round 3 to find a guy who would be a better pick. Jimmy Vesey pick number 66. The next 45 or so guys after Maatta would have been inferior picks.

I'm surprised more high-end talent isn't found in later rounds. You are drafting 18 year olds. Stars are routinely found in late rounds in baseball and in college football recruits ranked 500-1000 nationally routinely become NFL 1st round picks. Too much physical maturation still taking place at 18 plus scouting of those kids take place when they are 16-17 so not much track record.

I assume its a function of having far fewer kids playing hockey than football or baseball.
- sditulli

that's what I am thinking too

Exactly, late first round picks are crap shoots. And you might even say Shero did the right thing by trading them away, realizing they were never going to reach their potential. Look at the players he traded away, for the players he got in return. Hossa, Dupuis, Gill, Iginla, Morrow, Guerin, Roberts, etc. he gave up players who were not going to contribute for players that COULD contribute then.
- j.boyd919

Yes. Honestly I'd rather go for high potential than high hit rate on picks 20-40. Seems like you get 4-6 guys on average in that range who become impact players. Guys who are just ok don't do much for your team. You can find good role players with good analytics. I'd rather target impact guys even if it means more bust.

Yes. Honestly I'd rather go for high potential than high hit rate on picks 20-40. Seems like you get 4-6 guys on average in that range who become impact players. Guys who are just ok don't do much for your team. You can find good role players with good analytics. I'd rather target impact guys even if it means more bust.
- sditulli

Boom or bust vs. safe picks you mean?

If thats where you're going, I agree. Gimme a kid lighting up a euro league, over some vanilla american/canadian whatever. Find the next Kucherov type, with that mindset.

that's what I am thinking too
- j.boyd919

At 18 in hockey kids are playing the best of the best already so you can better evaluate the talent. In football they are playing whatever kids happen to be from their area. Baseball sucks.

Boom or bust vs. safe picks you mean?

If thats where you're going, I agree. Gimme a kid lighting up a euro league, over some vanilla american/canadian whatever. Find the next Kucherov type, with that mindset.
- j.boyd919

You don't want a kid that plays a strong 2 way game at 18 to compensate for his lack of actual skill?

At 18 in hockey kids are playing the best of the best already so you can better evaluate the talent. In football they are playing whatever kids happen to be from their area. Baseball sucks.
- Feds91Stammer

I think that is only part of it. Smaller pool of players I would guess is the main factor. To think level of competition is the driving factor doesn't make a lot of sense to me since you are evaluating 16-17 year olds. A lot of kids physically mature late or even then didn't have the right coaching at that age level to show off their ability.

I think that is only part of it. Smaller pool of players I would guess is the main factor. To think level of competition is the driving factor doesn't make a lot of sense to me since you are evaluating 16-17 year olds. A lot of kids physically mature late or even then didn't have the right coaching at that age level to show off their ability.
- sditulli

Well for one hockey is a more skill based sport than football that relies much more on physical abilites.

But at 18 years of age the top 200 ranked hockey players are players that are all playing in leagues where all the competition is made of other kids that were good enough to move away from home to make these teams. In football the top 200 ranked players are playing against kids that are good enough to make a high school team which is basically anybody with a pulse.

Well for one hockey is a more skill based sport than football that relies much more on physical abilites.

But at 18 years of age the top 200 ranked hockey players are players that are all playing in leagues where all the competition is made of other kids that were good enough to move away from home to make these teams. In football the top 200 ranked players are playing against kids that are good enough to make a high school team which is basically anybody with a pulse.
- Feds91Stammer

Some truth to this. Basketball has a high hit rate with 18 year olds. They have ways to get top talent playing against each other.

The skill argument is probably the strongest. Basketball has a even larger filter needing both skill and height. Hockey lacks height as a filter.

I still would expect far more hockey players coming from lower rounds like Datsyuk/Zetterberg but we really haven't seen that in years. And a lot of their fall was probably do to bad scouting in europe/russia at the time.

Some truth to this. Basketball has a high hit rate with 18 year olds. They have ways to get top talent playing against each other.

The skill argument is probably the strongest. Basketball has a even larger filter needing both skill and height. Hockey lacks height as a filter.

I still would expect far more hockey players coming from lower rounds like Datsyuk/Zetterberg but we really haven't seen that in years. And a lot of their fall was probably do to bad scouting in europe/russia at the time.
- sditulli

Hockey does still overvalue size. Just ask Gaudreau and Tyler Johnson.

Datsyuk and Zetterberg are pure luck. Datsyuk's draft year he had 8 points in 24 games in the old KHL. Zetterberg was under a point a game in the second tier Swedish league. Also neither were very big. They are extreme outliers.

Hockey does still overvalue size. Just ask Gaudreau and Tyler Johnson.

Datsyuk and Zetterberg are pure luck. Datsyuk's draft year he had 8 points in 24 games in the old KHL. Zetterberg was under a point a game in the second tier Swedish league. Also neither were very big. They are extreme outliers.
- Feds91Stammer

Point on height isn't that its valued. Point on height is that in basketball its essential. Its basically a filter to be an effective player in the NHL. A core competency that immediately eliminates 95-98% of the population to even be guards in the NHL. And for big men it eliminates 99.99% of the population. Great filter to narrow the potential 18 year olds to draft than in other sports. Height is far less important to be a good hockey player.

Agree those two are outliers, but I would expect far more outliers. Kids are not physically mature at 17 when you are scouting them. Could have lacked focus, bad parenting, any host of reasons for why a player might be a late bloomer. I'd still expect that if I had a choice between the #3 pick in the draft or I could select 500 players who were undrafted that I would prefer the latter, but the data says the #3 pick is the better deal.