Pick #31 Ryan Johnson Defenseman

[Derrico]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Just want to say one last time. Ryan Johnson is a good prospect with 2nd pairing potential. His skating is very good but he really needs to work on his shot and bulking up. Long road ahead for him but if we are lucky in 3-5 years he will become a regular. He is young and should be interesting to watch going forward. 

Ya this guy seems like he has a ton of potential but will be a longer term project.  Botts went with what he thinks Johnston can be in 5 or 6 years vs the competition for that pick.  

[woods-racer]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Just want to say one last time. Ryan Johnson is a good prospect with 2nd pairing potential. His skating is very good but he really needs to work on his shot and bulking up. Long road ahead for him but if we are lucky in 3-5 years he will become a regular. He is young and should be interesting to watch going forward. 

 

1 hour ago, Derrico said:

Ya this guy seems like he has a ton of potential but will be a longer term project.  Botts went with what he thinks Johnston can be in 5 or 6 years vs the competition for that pick.  

These are examples of the traditional way to handle defensemen and goalies, right?

It is a low risk chance of stocking up players that has been happening since the draft was first conceived. Getting enough of these picks and letting them simmer is a great way to ensure long term success with little cost to the parent club. I believe EXGMTM really screwed this part up, but it seems to be getting corrected.

[LGR4GM]

You all wanted proof and justification for me hating this pick. I reacted the way I did because the pick was, is, and will continue to be a massive failure. Thank god Botterill and half the scouts got fired because they were bad at what they did. Taking a defender at 31 was awful with the offensive talent stacked on the board. 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by LGR4GM

[tom webster]

12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You all wanted proof and justification for me hating this pick. I reacted the way I did because the pick was, is, and will continue to be a massive failure. Thank god Botterill and half the scouts got fired because they were bad at what they did. Taking a defender at 31 was awful with the offensive talent stacked on the board. 

 

You may end up being right, in fact on at least Robertson you probably are, but we are a long way from knowing definitively. It’s not about picking guys who make top prospects lists or roster fill ins. 

[LGR4GM]

20 minutes ago, tom webster said:

You may end up being right, in fact on at least Robertson you probably are, but we are a long way from knowing definitively. It’s not about picking guys who make top prospects lists or roster fill ins. 

No it is about picking the best most talented players who have the best NHL chances. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by LGR4GM
changed "shots" to "chances" for clarity

[LabattBlue]

35 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You all wanted proof and justification for me hating this pick. I reacted the way I did because the pick was, is, and will continue to be a massive failure. Thank god Botterill and half the scouts got fired because they were bad at what they did. Taking a defender at 31 was awful with the offensive talent stacked on the board. 

 

Be careful not to get hurt when patting yourself on the back. ?

[LGR4GM]

3 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

Be careful not to get hurt when patting yourself on the back. ?

If Ryan Johnson turns around and completely dominates as a top pairing defender, I will be gladly say I was wrong. 

[Curt]

53 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You all wanted proof and justification for me hating this pick. I reacted the way I did because the pick was, is, and will continue to be a massive failure. Thank god Botterill and half the scouts got fired because they were bad at what they did. Taking a defender at 31 was awful with the offensive talent stacked on the board. 

 

I get where you are coming from and I think you are right, but that’s not exactly proof.

[LGR4GM]

Fun fact

Ryan Johnson, had a .315 PrPPG in his draft year. That includes his pp time. ESP clocks in at 0.260

Why is this fun? 

Henry Thrun and Domenick Fensore, both higher in PrPPG and ESP would go on to outproduce Johnson in the NCAA this year. On top of that, they were selected in 60 and 70 picks later. 

This is a really fascinating study in not drafting the BPA. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by LGR4GM

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Fun fact

Ryan Johnson, had a .315 PrPPG in his draft year. That includes his pp time. ESP clocks in at 0.260

Why is this fun? 

Henry Thrun and Domenick Fensore, both higher in PrPPG and ESP would go on to outproduce Johnson in the NCAA this year. On top of that, they were selected in 60 and 70 picks later. 

This is a really fascinating study in not drafting the BPA. 

Little confused. Is it your contention that the Sabres didn’t draft the best player available on their list?

Separately, if Johnson’s role is to be a finesse shutdown defender (with Vlasic and Pysyk being players cited, and Jokiharju another Im picturing) why are his PrPPG and ESP compared to the pair you cited crucial to,his evaluation?

[LGR4GM]

2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Little confused. Is it your contention that the Sabres didn’t draft the best player available on their list?

Separately, if Johnson’s role is to be a finesse shutdown defender (with Vlasic and Pysyk being players cited, and Jokiharju another Im picturing) why are his PrPPG and ESP compared to the pair you cited crucial to,his evaluation?

I was about to write something else but I will start here because these are great questions. 

1) The Sabres drafted the top player on their board, the problem is their board was that wrong.

2) It is fair because Johnson isn't a shutdown player. Jokiharju is a tough comparison because unlike Johnson, Joki only had his draft year in NA. However like Johnson they both have late birthdays and were not great in their draft year. Joki was at 0.197 ESP and 0.352PrPPG. Now the one component we are missing is TOI which can help explain the numbers (see Raymond who was at roughly 10 minutes of TOI a night). Now I don't have that right now but let's keep going. Joki wasn't awesome at even strength but he slightly outperformed Johnson when combining his primary power play points. Where am I going with this? Okay, it isn't that Johnson can't be Joki or a 2nd pairing defender (that is his ceiling) it is what value were you getting in the draft by taking that specific player at that specific slot. The draft isn't just about BPA, it is about best player and value. Now we do have hindsight and know that Jokiharju went on in his D1 year to really crank up that production. Johnson not so much, but he was in the NCAA and really the point is less about him over all and more about the value we missed out on by having a very narrow view of prospects (the botterill bias). 

Which not brings me all the way back to my thoughts on the Sabres drafting under Botterill and why I am so annoyed by it. Once you start leaving the certainty of the first round you need to compile as much data as possible to give you a leg up (I would do it in the top of the first but that's another convo). It helps uncover the Points, cirellis, and even olofssons. You need to compare the player to his draft class. For example I would have taken Guhle over Jokiharju if we just compare those two and I am just looking at the numbers without TOI and the team and the ages and the league all factored in. Joki and Johnson both have a disadvantage of playing hockey in a different league right before their draft. So we only have 1 year of data, Joki worked where Johnson did not but from a numbers perspective, they are both risky picks. Yet, as I keep saying numbers are only the first part. All the contexts need to be added into that equation as well. Skating, work ethic, on ice mentality... etc...

Basically however the Sabres created their draft board from 2017-2019 is suspect and 2019 in particular irks me with it's illogical drafting in the face of clearly superior talent. I am actually stunned they picked Cozens instead of someone else at that pick. 

[tom webster]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

No it is about picking the best most talented players who have the best NHL chances. 

And it’s all objective and while I continue to say how much I respect and appreciate your insight and analysis, while the numbers are fascinating what I want my team to do after the first few picks is find the outlier. It might be fun talking about Justin Bailey or Nic Baptiste for a few years but I’d rather see a VO come out of nowhere.

At this point you have no idea how any of these guys will end up yet. Robertson could turn out to be an awesome top six forward but the odds are he is more likely to end up a small tweener, a gadget player who excels on the third line but can’t handle top line minutes.

The real point is that while it all makes for interesting message board fodder, no one really knows or will know for a few years who really hit a home run in June of  2019.

Right now you win the Rex Ryan award for winning the off season.

[LGR4GM]

42 minutes ago, tom webster said:

And it’s all objective and while I continue to say how much I respect and appreciate your insight and analysis, while the numbers are fascinating what I want my team to do after the first few picks is find the outlier. It might be fun talking about Justin Bailey or Nic Baptiste for a few years but I’d rather see a VO come out of nowhere.

At this point you have no idea how any of these guys will end up yet. Robertson could turn out to be an awesome top six forward but the odds are he is more likely to end up a small tweener, a gadget player who excels on the third line but can’t handle top line minutes.

The real point is that while it all makes for interesting message board fodder, no one really knows or will know for a few years who really hit a home run in June of  2019.

Right now you win the Rex Ryan award for winning the off season.

You are wrong because this implies everything outside of the top 2 or 3 picks is luck and that is false. We see other teams find guys in later rounds and they aren't just "lucky" guesses. I have a good idea of how these guys will end up because there is data and cohort numbers that give us a really good idea. You don't try and find outliers, you try and find NHL players. 

I don't win anything because my team didn't do something smart. It isn't about me, it is about the team continuing to fail. As I said, I think you are wrong, 100% in this case with your view of the draft and most of what you wrote here. The draft is about understanding the numbers, using those when you watch the tape, and then putting all the anecdotal evidence together to understand if this players got a shot and what that shot looks like. You don't pass on a top 6 winger (wingers in this case because we haven't even touched on Kaliyev) to draft a 4-6 defender. The way the Sabres evaluate players was flawed and it was blatant and obvious to anyone who did more than rely on old scouting methods while ignoring 60 CHL teams. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

I am willing to place money on Roberston being more, much more than a "small gadget player". That right there tells me how you view things in more detail than the rest of your post. It is an old school line of thinking that helped get us to where we are today. A ***** prospect pool, failed draft picks, failed development. 

 

You need to view the draft as doing eveything you can to increase your odds because you are playing blackjack against the house. Looking at it as some luck filled oh golly who knows exercise is the exact thing that gets us to a team that has drafted like hot garbage since 2007. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by LGR4GM

[Curt]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

It is fair because Johnson isn't a shutdown player.

He is a defense first, transition it out of the zone with really good skating, no?

He is a player somewhat similar in style to Montour, no?

[tom webster]

Again, my only true disagreement with you is that, in my opinion, you are speaking in absolutes where there are none. It will be a fascinating couple of years as the evidence unfolds.

[LGR4GM]

15 minutes ago, Curt said:

He is a defense first, transition it out of the zone with really good skating, no?

He is a player somewhat similar in style to Montour, no?

I would say montour is similar. 

4 minutes ago, tom webster said:

Again, my only true disagreement with you is that, in my opinion, you are speaking in absolutes where there are none. It will be a fascinating couple of years as the evidence unfolds.

And again you are speaking as if it is all just luck and it isn't. The Sabres screwed up and every piece of evidence since that moment continues to confirm that. 

[dudacek]

23 minutes ago, Curt said:

He is a defense first, transition it out of the zone with really good skating, no?

He is a player somewhat similar in style to Montour, no?

He’s less flashy and less risky than Montour.

His style seems much more Jokiharju.

[tom webster]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

I would say montour is similar. 

And again you are speaking as if it is all just luck and it isn't. The Sabres screwed up and every piece of evidence since that moment continues to confirm that. 

And that’s what we will find out but do not know. I’m really not trying to be difficult. I think this is all fascinating. I’ve said before, I’m a numbers guy, almost became an actuary, have debated re-immersing my sixty year old brain back into the study almost entirely in order to have an intelligent conversation with you and two friends/acquaintances whom I also respect. However, I am also a results guy and right now the study is incomplete. I’m still yet to be convinced that your system versus luck can withstand the cost /benefit test and I’m truly trying to be open minded about what to expect.

 

[Curt]

52 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I would say montour is similar. 

 

44 minutes ago, dudacek said:

He’s less flashy and less risky than Montour.

His style seems much more Jokiharju.

I’m curious about how Johnson will develop over the next couple years.  He is a very good skater with very good puck handling skills who needed to work on his passing, overall decision making, polish, and strength/weight.  He was also very young for his draft class, being just 17 when drafted and just turned 19 last week.

He certainly doesn’t have a super high upside, but I’m optimistic that he can be a good transition defender with the skating and good puck handling.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Curt

[sabremike]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I am willing to place money on Roberston being more, much more than a "small gadget player". That right there tells me how you view things in more detail than the rest of your post. It is an old school line of thinking that helped get us to where we are today. A ***** prospect pool, failed draft picks, failed development. 

 

You need to view the draft as doing eveything you can to increase your odds because you are playing blackjack against the house. Looking at it as some luck filled oh golly who knows exercise is the exact thing that gets us to a team that has drafted like hot garbage since 2007. 

Smart organizations target guys who are undervalued because of outdated thinking/market inefficiencies. It's actually something that Bill Bellichek was great at and why the Pats were dominant for two decades in an era where that should've been impossible in the NFL.

[Thorner]

8 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

Be careful not to get hurt when patting yourself on the back. ?

People realize that @LGR4GM would draft better than Botterill and it's not particularly close right? Botterill had an abnormally bad drafting strategy. 

I don't like to use the "O" word often, but he was an objectively bad draft strategist. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Thorny

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

He’s less flashy and less risky than Montour.

His style seems much more Jokiharju.

Oh...so he's untouchable then? ?

[tom webster]

1 hour ago, sabremike said:

Smart organizations target guys who are undervalued because of outdated thinking/market inefficiencies. It's actually something that Bill Bellichek was great at and why the Pats were dominant for two decades in an era where that should've been impossible in the NFL.

No, they actually drafted horribly except for one sixth round pick that turned everything around. That coupled with Belichek’s coaching genius and ability to not get too loyal to any players other then TB and a select few. Finally, being in a division that virtually guaranteed you a first round bye was the icing on the cake. A confluence of luck, sociopathic loyalty and brilliant coaching strategy.

[Andrew Amerk]

Is hot garbage in some way substantially better or worse than cold garbage?