Paste the results into a google doc that you can share out?
- stashu

I may do that later tonight when I have time.

For now, here are the results.

I have every result broken into two categories: from 1995-2011 and from 1995-2015.

I am going to exclude the 1995-2015 result for now because I feel like some of those drafts are too recent to accurately know a players full development level regarding production.

For the years 1995-2011, below are the average number of seasons/years it takes for a player, based on pick position, to hit full development.

Pick Position - Number of Seasons/Years
1. 2.93
2. 4.64
3. 4.4
4. 4.64
5. 5.06

Interesting the dropoff from the number 1 overall pick and also how similar the numbers are for picks 2-4.

This chart shows the amount of seasons/years it took players picked in the top 5 from 1995-2011 to reach full development in terms of production.

Number of Seasons/Years - Number of Top 5 Picks
1. 4
2. 12
3. 11
4. 19
5. 8
6. 11
7. 7
8. 4
9. 1
Never 8

Again, interesting to note the most frequent number of seasons/years for a top 5 pick to develop is 4, followed by 2,3,& 4 in a tight grouping.

Shows that it takes a truly special talent to hit full development in terms of production in their first season.

This final chart shows, for each of the top 5 picks made from 1995-2011, the Fastest Number of Seasons/Years to fully develop, the Longest Number of Seasons/Years, the Most Common Number of Seasons/Years, and the 2nd Most Common Number of Seasons/Years.

Pick - Fastest - Longest - Most Common - 2nd Most Common
1. 1 - 6 - 2 - 1/4
2. 1 - 9 - 3 - 5,6
3. 2 - 8 - 4 - 2
4. 2 - 8 - 4 - 3,6,Never
5. 2 - 8 - 4 - 6,7,8,Never

Very interesting how long it can take even the top pick to fully develop, and picks 2-5 as well.

Also of note that even though the most common number of seasons to fully develop for picks 2-5 are 3/4, it varies a bit after that.

Pick 2 most commonly takes 5 to 6 seasons to hit full development in terms of production if it doesn't happen in 3 seasons.

One final note on this last chart is that the number of years to reach full development were very close between most common and 2nd most common for picks 2,3,& 4 where picks 1 & 5 showed a greater disparity between most common and 2nd most common.

I said we should bring him in as a consultant, but I was talking about shooters. And I was being sarcastic.
- Wetbandit1

Brilliant!

I may do that later tonight when I have time.

For now, here are the results.

I have every result broken into two categories: from 1995-2011 and from 1995-2015.

I am going to exclude the 1995-2015 result for now because I feel like some of those drafts are too recent to accurately know a players full development level regarding production.

For the years 1995-2011, below are the average number of seasons/years it takes for a player, based on pick position, to hit full development.

Pick Position - Number of Seasons/Years
1. 2.93
2. 4.64
3. 4.4
4. 4.64
5. 5.06

Interesting the dropoff from the number 1 overall pick and also how similar the numbers are for picks 2-4.

This chart shows the amount of seasons/years it took players picked in the top 5 from 1995-2011 to reach full development in terms of production.

Number of Seasons/Years - Number of Top 5 Picks
1. 4
2. 12
3. 11
4. 19
5. 8
6. 11
7. 7
8. 4
9. 1
Never 8

Again, interesting to note the most frequent number of seasons/years for a top 5 pick to develop is 4, followed by 2,3,& 4 in a tight grouping.

Shows that it takes a truly special talent to hit full development in terms of production in their first season.

This final chart shows, for each of the top 5 picks made from 1995-2011, the Fastest Number of Seasons/Years to fully develop, the Longest Number of Seasons/Years, the Most Common Number of Seasons/Years, and the 2nd Most Common Number of Seasons/Years.

Pick - Fastest - Longest - Most Common - 2nd Most Common
1. 1 - 6 - 2 - 1/4
2. 1 - 9 - 3 - 5,6
3. 2 - 8 - 4 - 2
4. 2 - 8 - 4 - 3,6,Never
5. 2 - 8 - 4 - 6,7,8,Never

Very interesting how long it can take even the top pick to fully develop, and picks 2-5 as well.

Also of note that even though the most common number of seasons to fully develop for picks 2-5 are 3/4, it varies a bit after that.

Pick 2 most commonly takes 5 to 6 seasons to hit full development in terms of production if it doesn't happen in 3 seasons.

One final note on this last chart is that the number of years to reach full development were very close between most common and 2nd most common for picks 2,3,& 4 where picks 1 & 5 showed a greater disparity between most common and 2nd most common.
- kingcong39

What are you considering "full development"?

Just wondering, for example, Eric Staal hit 100 points in his second year, but never came close to that amount after, just settled into the 70-80 range.

Are you considering a career year "full development"?

What are you considering "full development"?

Just wondering, for example, Eric Staal hit 100 points in his second year, but never came close to that amount after, just settled into the 70-80 range.

Are you considering a career year "full development"?
- sbroads24

Yes, as long as the player achieves a level close to that for a sustained number of seasons surrounding the career year.

I also did my best to factor in the rules changes after the lockout regarding the big uptick in scoring, which I believe is the year Staal hit 100 points.

Man do I miss how hockey was played and looked during the 2005-2006 season!

I would trade Guhle right now for Nylander...

Keep one of Bogo or Kulikov

Sign Shattenkirk

Nylander Eichel Okposo
Nylander ROR Reinhart
Kane Larsson Baptiste
Foligno Girgensons Gionta
Delo

Risto McCabe
Shattenkirk Bogo/Kulikov
Gorges Fedun

Lehner
Nilsson
- Stripes77

Moulson to Vegas
Ennis anywhere

Checks the salary cap...yup its doable
$4.6 for Ennis $5 for Moulson

Say Bogo stays and Kulikov leaves

That leaves the Sabres with about $35 million in cap space.

Foligno, Lehner, Nilsson, Gionta, Girgensons, Larsson would have to be re-signed

$2.5 for Foligno
$3 for Lehner
$1.5 for Nilsson
$3 for Gionta
$1.5 for Girgensons
$1.75 for Larsson

$21.75 Million left

Fedun would be on the books, so would Nylander(s) and Baptiste

Call that $4.5 million total

$17.25

7 year $7.25 to Shattenkirk

$10 million left

Sign a cheap FA for some d depth.

It is completely do able if you can get Vegas to take Moulson and move Ennis!

Yes, as long as the player achieves a level close to that for a sustained number of seasons surrounding the career year.

I also did my best to factor in the rules changes after the lockout regarding the big uptick in scoring, which I believe is the year Staal hit 100 points.

Man do I miss how hockey was played and looked during the 2005-2006 season!
- kingcong39

That's some good info.

I wonder how much top picks production increase from year to year on average.

If Reinhart goes from 43 to 50, is that average or below for a year 2-3 deployment

I would trade Guhle right now for Nylander...

Keep one of Bogo or Kulikov

Sign Shattenkirk

Nylander Eichel Okposo
Nylander ROR Reinhart
Kane Larsson Baptiste
Foligno Girgensons Gionta

Risto McCabe
Shattenkirk Bogo/Kulikov
Gorges Fedun
- Stripes77

Makes sense, I would just be worried Shat made up his mind in going to NYR. Bogo should be here unless Expansion sees something in him I don't. If Shattenkirk wasn't an option and it was going to be same D pairings as right now would you still do it? Just curious.

That's some good info.

I wonder how much top picks production increase from year to year on average.

If Reinhart goes from 43 to 50, is that average or below for a year 2-3 deployment
- sbroads24

Surprised me how closely grouped together picks 2-4 are compared to 1 overall.

You just turned a few hour project into a few days project regarding point production increase haha, but I'll take a look at it.

Buy low, really low candidate - Derrick Pouliot
- sbroads24

We were on this in the summer. Imo it might work out really well as a replacement for gorges in a sheltered role and if he breaks out its a steal.

I may do that later tonight when I have time.

For now, here are the results.

I have every result broken into two categories: from 1995-2011 and from 1995-2015.

I am going to exclude the 1995-2015 result for now because I feel like some of those drafts are too recent to accurately know a players full development level regarding production.

For the years 1995-2011, below are the average number of seasons/years it takes for a player, based on pick position, to hit full development.

Pick Position - Number of Seasons/Years
1. 2.93
2. 4.64
3. 4.4
4. 4.64
5. 5.06

Interesting the dropoff from the number 1 overall pick and also how similar the numbers are for picks 2-4.

This chart shows the amount of seasons/years it took players picked in the top 5 from 1995-2011 to reach full development in terms of production.

Number of Seasons/Years - Number of Top 5 Picks
1. 4
2. 12
3. 11
4. 19
5. 8
6. 11
7. 7
8. 4
9. 1
Never 8

Again, interesting to note the most frequent number of seasons/years for a top 5 pick to develop is 4, followed by 2,3,& 4 in a tight grouping.

Shows that it takes a truly special talent to hit full development in terms of production in their first season.

This final chart shows, for each of the top 5 picks made from 1995-2011, the Fastest Number of Seasons/Years to fully develop, the Longest Number of Seasons/Years, the Most Common Number of Seasons/Years, and the 2nd Most Common Number of Seasons/Years.

Pick - Fastest - Longest - Most Common - 2nd Most Common
1. 1 - 6 - 2 - 1/4
2. 1 - 9 - 3 - 5,6
3. 2 - 8 - 4 - 2
4. 2 - 8 - 4 - 3,6,Never
5. 2 - 8 - 4 - 6,7,8,Never

Very interesting how long it can take even the top pick to fully develop, and picks 2-5 as well.

Also of note that even though the most common number of seasons to fully develop for picks 2-5 are 3/4, it varies a bit after that.

Pick 2 most commonly takes 5 to 6 seasons to hit full development in terms of production if it doesn't happen in 3 seasons.

One final note on this last chart is that the number of years to reach full development were very close between most common and 2nd most common for picks 2,3,& 4 where picks 1 & 5 showed a greater disparity between most common and 2nd most common.
- kingcong39

Very interesting.... thanks for posting!

Makes sense, I would just be worried Shat made up his mind in going to NYR. Bogo should be here unless Expansion sees something in him I don't. If Shattenkirk wasn't an option and it was going to be same D pairings as right now would you still do it? Just curious.
- RhinoFan

I would.

I think Guhle is going to be a good 2nd pairing guy, he isn't a first pairing guy IMO. He also isn't a known point producing defensemen either.

I think Nylander (William) will be a big point producing player, throw in having his brother here as well that could be huge for the organization down the road.

To make it clear I like Guhle a lot but I would trade him for Nylander.

I would.

I think Guhle is going to be a good 2nd pairing guy, he isn't a first pairing guy IMO. He also isn't a known point producing defensemen either.

I think Nylander (William) will be a big point producing player, throw in having his brother here as well that could be huge for the organization down the road.

To make it clear I like Guhle a lot but I would trade him for Nylander.
- Stripes77

I would too. Off topic but this strikes me as another classic too many cooks in the kitchen re: the leafs.

Its probably nothing but im curious to see how Nylanders ice time looks over the next 20 or so games. If I had to guess Id say management didnt envision their top 10 pick on the fourth line

I would.

I think Guhle is going to be a good 2nd pairing guy, he isn't a first pairing guy IMO. He also isn't a known point producing defensemen either.

I think Nylander (William) will be a big point producing player, throw in having his brother here as well that could be huge for the organization down the road.

To make it clear I like Guhle a lot but I would trade him for Nylander.
- Stripes77

I think you can get Nylander with Bogosian, a 2nd, and a 4th (conditional to 3rd if sabres make playoffs)

I think you can get Nylander with Bogosian, a 2nd, and a 4th (conditional to 3rd if sabres make playoffs)
- feetontheair22

I think that is very wishful thinking but I would do it!

I would too. Off topic but this strikes me as another classic too many cooks in the kitchen re: the leafs.

Its probably nothing but im curious to see how Nylanders ice time looks over the next 20 or so games. If I had to guess Id say management didnt envision their top 10 pick on the fourth line
- Sabresfan-365

I think the Leafs would be willing to move him too. Too many cooks indeed. Too much youth is usually never a good thing.

But I think they are thinking more like a Dougie Hamilton than a Brendan Guhle or a Zach Bogosian.

I think that is very wishful thinking but I would do it!
- Stripes77

Honestly I'd swap the 2 picks out with a 1st if i really have to...but Ikn people around here are touchy about trading away 1st round picks

I think you can get Nylander with Bogosian, a 2nd, and a 4th (conditional to 3rd if sabres make playoffs)
- feetontheair22

I have to think if that is even remotely possible, it would have been done yesterday.

Honestly I'd swap the 2 picks out with a 1st if i really have to...but Ikn people around here are touchy about trading away 1st round picks
- feetontheair22

For the Leafs to move him I think that is an offseason type move unless they get a player like Hamilton for him.

Moving a top 10 pick like that who is playing his first full year in the NHL isn't something that is generally done mid-season.

For the Leafs to move him I think that is an offseason type move unless they get a player like Hamilton for him.

Moving a top 10 pick like that who is playing his first full year in the NHL isn't something that is generally done mid-season.
- Stripes77

Nah your probably right.....either way I think the lafs ask for a kings ransom or wait for him to achieve full on "bust" status

I would.

I think Guhle is going to be a good 2nd pairing guy, he isn't a first pairing guy IMO. He also isn't a known point producing defensemen either.

I think Nylander (William) will be a big point producing player, throw in having his brother here as well that could be huge for the organization down the road.

To make it clear I like Guhle a lot but I would trade him for Nylander.
- Stripes77

I agree with the assessment of Guhle and therefore I should agree overall. Probably over estimating my shiny new toy was all. This seems more logical.

I agree with the assessment of Guhle and therefore I should agree overall. Probably over estimating my shiny new toy was all. This seems more logical.
- RhinoFan

This is where someone comes in (not naming names) and says he would trade Sam for Nylander...

This is where someone comes in (not naming names) and says he would trade Sam for Nylander...
- Stripes77

hahaha now THAT would be asssssinine

hahaha now THAT would be asssssinine
- feetontheair22

I concur

This is where someone comes in (not naming names) and says he would trade Sam for Nylander...
- Stripes77

Yeah, then he could haunt us for the next 15 years...

I concur
- Stripes77

poop...why didn't I concur??