Jump to content

Sabres Move Up to 34, Select John Jason Peterka


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Jokeman said:

Good in depth write up about him at https://www.allaboutthejersey.com/2020/4/10/21216310/john-jason-peterka-2020-nhl-draft-prospect-profile-speedy-winger-germany-high-ceiling-question-marks if he is another Michael Grabner as the article suggests it be a good get. 

Quote

Where is Peterka Ranked?
Peterka’s playing style, development path, and perceived inconsistency make him a difficult player to place in a draft ranking. This is apparent in his wildly divergent rankings, a sampling of which ranges from the top-20 all the way down to the back half of the second round.

#7 — NHL Central Scouting - European Skaters (Final)

#14 — HockeyProspect.com (January)

#41 — Future Considerations (March)

#54 — The Draft Analyst (March)

#20 — TSN-MacKenzie (Midseason)

#42 — TSN-Button (March)

#35 — EliteProspects.com (February)

Seems like good value at 34.

 

 

Gauging NHL performance based on DEL performance is difficult because of small sample sizes.  Based on a 2018 factor of 0.2949, JJP's NHLe is 6 points on an 82 game NHL season, but it sounds like he had reduced usage because he was a rare 17 year old (one of only three) to play in the DEL grown-man's league.  My guess is that analytics are showing good production per 60.  Nonetheless, there's near-zero chance he makes the team this year.   He'll likely be transitioned to the AHL/North American game this year or next and for a duration of at least a year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Considering that Pekar was our only RW in the system beside Thompson, is it really a surprise we drafted 2 RWs.

Why do people keep saying this? Literally everywhere has him listed as a C/LW.

But this is only a surprise because they are clearly drafting for need and not BPA, like they said they would.

1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Sorry, but what does Kevin know about analytics, specifically the analytics the Sabres use?

He thinks Johan Larsson is the second-coming of Patrice Bergeron.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, inkman said:

So if Pekar and Thompson both graduate to the NHL, then we'll only have RW in out development system?  So confusing.  You can't draft for need if players are half a decade away from contributing.

What?  Pekar isn’t graduating any time soon.

Our RW prospects depth

1) Thompson 22

2) Pekar 20 Huglen 19

3) Quinn 19

4) JJP 18

Seems like a reasonable list

Edited by GASabresIUFAN
Listed Pekar, when I should have listed Huglen as our only RW in the system
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

What?  Pekar isn’t graduating any time soon.

Our RW prospects depth

1) Thompson 22

2) Pekar 20

3) Quinn 19

4) JJP 18

Seems like a reasonable list

is that in an order or just listed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dudacek said:

Sorry, but what does Kevin know about analytics, specifically the analytics the Sabres use?

He's the smartest Sabres analytical-based guy I know. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Thorny said:

He's the smartest Sabres analytical-based guy I know. 

Which still doesn’t mean he is using the same metrics as the Sabres.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Why does one move up to draft BPA?

My guess is the Sabres thought there would be no player with a discernible skillset left at 38, based on who they thought the teams from 34-37 would pick...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, inkman said:

Pick withstanding, how do you draft for need when these players are 2-5 years away from helping?

I didn't say I thought it was a good strategy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SDS said:

Which still doesn’t mean he is using the same metrics as the Sabres.

No, maybe not. But regarding the numbers we discuss here, and online, he's very good. If said discussion has merit at all, he's a voice I listen to. 

Look - I think I've done a pretty good job outlining why I didn't like the Quinn pick. It's just my opinion, I don't think my arguments are flimsier than those touting Quinn as a great pick - there are people here, even the top posters, who get annoyed at the question of the GM at early stages. I went through it re: Botterill for years. 

I just didn't like the pick - he could end up great. We'll have to wait and see. 

1 hour ago, jsb said:

It also could be they thought they were the best forwards available and took them. We'll find out eventually, hopefully they'll be right.

^yep, it could be. 

Edited by Thorny
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Why does one move up to draft BPA?

Because that BPA won't be available when they pick next? BPA doesn't have to mean only when you pick. They may not 'need' the player at that position but still may love what they are or could become and they are rated very highly that they are the best player available at the time they get picked.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

is that in an order or just listed?

Gotta be by age

21 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Why does one move up to draft BPA?

Analytics says you don't trade up - founding principle of analytical draft strategy. Combined with the Quinn selection this is why I am personally doubting their speak to incorporating analytics better. Yes, I know, they could be using different numbers. I don't see that as much of an argument - that could support either side's argument equally as it's an Unknown. 

Edited by Thorny
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Trettioåtta said:

Analytics should inform decision making, not drive it

While I agree, it's a straw-man argument that those who incorporate analytics heavily do so at the expense of incorporating other factors, as well. 

Edited by Thorny
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OhMyDahlin said:

Why do people keep saying this? Literally everywhere has him listed as a C/LW.

But this is only a surprise because they are clearly drafting for need and not BPA, like they said they would.

He thinks Johan Larsson is the second-coming of Patrice Bergeron.

My mistake, I had Pekar in my notes as a RW, but it's actually Huglen who was the only RW besides Thompson.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having a full slate of picks has been an intentional staple for the franchise since Botterill took over - the last time we did was the 2016 draft (Murray). Trend continued this year with 5 picks total (as of now), and for the next two drafts, we are scheduled to have 5 picks (2021) and 6 picks (2022). 

Will be interesting to see if it's a trend that that continues from Botterill and now Adams this year. 

Edited by Thorny
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, apuszczalowski said:

Because that BPA won't be available when they pick next? BPA doesn't have to mean only when you pick. They may not 'need' the player at that position but still may love what they are or could become and they are rated very highly that they are the best player available at the time they get picked.

I look at it like, a draft board is constructed based on where you value them.  If they have a first round grade on this kid, then they value moving up to secure him rather than just selecting the next highest player on their board.  It makes sense if you especially value him significantly more than the next 5 guys on your board. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This draft as a viewing experience tries even the most ardent of fans lol

I hope Adams is getting all those QO's done in this downtime- considering they need to be in by 5. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Not having a full slate of picks has been an intentional staple for the franchise since Botterill took over - the last time we did was the 2016 draft (Murray). Trend continued this year with 5 picks total (as of now), and for the next two drafts, we are scheduled to have 5 picks (2021) and 6 picks (2022). 

Will be interesting to see if it's a trend that that continues from Botterill and now Adams this year. 

This could really be a thread unto itself. The philosophy of (predominantly) using draft picks as collateral for other moves so you have fewer than 7 per year, vs. stockpiling draft picks so you have as many kicks at the can as possible and average greater than 7 per season. Myself, I tend toward more picks when practical because they can *all* play hockey. It's a matter of which ones rise, which ones can't hack the professional lifestyle, and which get hurt along the way.

It's easier to see in the NFL with compensatory picks also included -- you can take a one-year flier on a resurrect/injured player and then let him walk for a comp. pick there to inflate your numbers.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...