It's very easy to play the hindsight game. Trust me, I know, I'm as guilty of it myself as everyone else. The trick to getting around that is trying to place yourself in the moment and forget anything that will happen later. It's a big game in the prospect business and a hard thing to let go. While I'm not the biggest critic of Craig Button, I truly don't enjoy his "Re-Draft" series of articles. If you're unfamiliar with them, it is essentially a rundown two or three years after a particular draft, then he re-drafts them based on their success to date or his opinion on the prospect. This led to the rather infamous (and now deleted) 2010 re-draft where he had Jarred Tinordi at 8 because reasons. Though it was the 2009 re-draft that really shows the nature of hindsight as he had Matt Duchene going first overall (Tavares 3rd) based entirely on Duchene having a slightly better rookie season. Ryan Ellis also goes fifth overall in case you were wondering.
Now this isn't a blog about slagging Craig Button, this is about slagging hindsight as a reason to mock a draft selection as incorrect. That's not to say calling the pick incorrect at the time or in the context of the actual situation of the draft, but just using hindsight to justify it is unhelpful and meaningless. For example, Taylor vs Tyler, if you use hindsight you could make your argument that Tyler is having a crazy year and has a Cup Ring etc. to back up why the Oilers should have picked Tyler. There is however actual relative arguments that carry more weight. Such as the argument that Seguin won the CHL Top Prospect Award and was the OHL's Most Outstanding Player while Hall wasn't. That's just an example of an argument in context vs in hindsight.
To Nail Yakupov and the main thrust of this article. Nail Yakupov right now is in a poor place. There is no denying it. You can justify it, make excuses or laugh and point to your hearts content. It doesn't matter because it is what it is right now. 12 points simply could not be imagined when he was drafted as the bright young goal scorer who beat Steven Stamkos' rookie goal scoring record on the Sarnia Sting and the guy who would lead the Oilers and rookies in goals scored his first NHL campaign.
1st overall picks are very similar. When has a first overall pick been selected because they have great defensive awareness? I'm talking forwards obviously. Let's look at a few examples of forwards selected first overall and the problems and slight worries people attached to them going into the draft. Added with Yakupov's own perceived weaknesses when drafted. The similarities might surprise you...but they shouldn't.
All these scouting reports are from thehockeynews other than Crosby and Ovechkin. I did this because they were written at the time before the draft and unchanged. Crosby and Ovechkin were such high profile expected generational talent I don't think we need to go super in-depth on them.
2013 - Nathan MacKinnon
Strengths - Elite game breaking speed. Highly creative offensively. Ability to raise his game in the playoffs and tournaments.
Weaknesses - Requires more work on his play away from the puck.
2012 - Nail Yakupov
Strengths - Elite speed and scoring ability. Extremely gifted with the puck. Elite one-timer.
Weaknesses - Poor defensive awareness. Lack of size.
2011 - Ryan Nugent-Hopkins
Strengths - Elite vision and awareness on the ice. Hockey sense excellent.
Weaknesses - Needs to put on weight and muscle to compete in the NHL.
2010 - Taylor Hall
Strengths - Explosive speed with constant energy. Extremely dangerous with the puck on his stick.
Weaknesses - Poor play away from the puck and reckless straightforwardness
2009 - John Tavares
Strengths - Best hand-eye of any prospect ever. Amazing scoring and playmaking abilities. Deadly PP player.
Weaknesses - Slow starting skater for an elite talent. Average defensive game.
2008 - Steven Stamkos
Strengths - Elite goal scoring ability including one of the best one-timers out there.
Weaknesses - Poor on face-offs and average defensive play.
2007 - Patrick Kane
Strengths - Elite offensive awareness, as deadly a shooter as he is brilliant playmaker. Explosive skater and stickhandler.
Weaknesses - Lack of size and sometimes a perimeter player. Poor defensive game.
2005 - Sidney Crosby
Strengths - He's Sidney Crosby
Weaknesses - Let's not kid ourselves, he's going to be the best player in the world but he's no Datsyuk in his own end.
2004 - Alexander Ovechkin
Strengths - You can't stop him from scoring goals and he has a power forwards game.
Weaknesses - Awkward skating stride and poor defensive awareness.
I think that's enough to get the point across. Aside from maybe Nugent-Hopkins, nobody was known for having a strong defensive game going into the draft. I'd even say some of these scouting reports are generous with the defensive games of some prospects. No player is perfect entering the draft, not even the expected number one. There's always a flaw somewhere and for most of these high octane skilled forwards...it's their own zone. They've spent years dominating players of their own age and above, so much so that there isn't really a need to focus on that until they reach the NHL. Yakupov is no different. Now you can't look me straight in the eye and say "well he was worse defensively in junior than the others!" That's laughable at best.
Ovechkin was a train wreck in his own zone and if Kane didn't have the puck he didn't care in London. It didn't and doesn't matter to this very day, because they are elite offensive players. That's the difference. That's the hindsight. Nobody cared about Yakupov's poor defensive play in his rookie season because he was scoring and playing well in the offensive zone. When he went cold, suddenly it's time to read him the riot act. See Phil Kessel for this. When he's on fire the media laps it up and forgets that he and his line are one of the worst defensively in the NHL. When he stops scoring for one second, suddenly it's time to talk about that part of his game!
Another argument that people use is that Yakupov was the wrong choice because he is a scoring winger and more of the same. They need defensemen and this Ryan Murray guy is pretty good. Or that centre depth wins, why not pick Galchenyuk? These sound very valid on the surface until you really look at it.
Tampa Bay going into the 2008 draft had Dan Boyle and Paul Ranger as their best defensemen. Their defensive core sucked. Their prospect pool in terms of defenders was bleak and poor. Their best at the time being Vladimir Mihalik the 6'8 hulking shutdown defender playing decently as an AHL rookie. Also at this time the team has three elite forwards. Lecavalier is coming off a 92 point effort. So why pick another forward, when their NEED is clearly defense? Pick Doughty or Bogosian!
You take the top ranked player every, single, time.
Why not trade down? Another hindsight argument. Yakupov at the time was the clear number one prospect. Don't you want to pick the best prospect possible in the draft? Why would you settle for anything less with the first overall selection? He was the CHL Top Prospect and had just come off a year winning the CHL Rookie of the Year as a 16-17 year old. The kind of award won by guys that are 16-17 like Taylor Hall, Steven Stamkos, Sidney Crosby, Joe Thornton, Vincent Lecavalier and...Alexandre Daigle. He had by far the highest PPG average of draft eligibles, had just come off a 9 assist effort where he was snake bitten for the Silver Medal Russian junior squad. He was the guy.
Hindsight is easy and understandable. But I'm tired of it. It's just an act of self satisfaction and ingratiation. A pat on the back by those who would obviously "know better" thanks to knowing the future. This is probably because I studied history where everything is about putting yourself in the time and context that this bothers me so.
Yakupov may go down as an infamous name brought up to beware of the Ides of Busts. Yet even if picking Yakupov ends up looking "wrong." It was "right."
Thanks for reading.