Taylor Hall - Comparables
Whenever a player is drafted first overall, he brings a tremendous amount of excitement with him. The fans of the team that drafted him have almost always suffered through a deplorable season, and are in need of hope. That the player is almost always quality in the long run helps to justify that hope. My hope is that this article provides Oiler fans with confidence to be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, and faithful in prayer. Well, maybe not that last one, but you get the idea. In order to do that, I'm going to take a look at a couple of players that I think make good comparables for the Oilers' primary source of new hope, Taylor Hall. In order for it to work, you can't expect one of those comparables to be Sidney Crosby. Agreed? Good.
When I went searching for comparables, I knew it wouldn't be an easy task. By their nature, first overall picks are somewhat unique talents, so we shouldn't expect barrels of players who look similar. That said, I think there's real value in using systematic criteria to come up with a preliminary list of names. The first of those criteria was to limit the number of years I looked at. It's my view that the whole point of looking at comparables is to see what similar players are doing or have done at a much more advanced stage of development. Thus, when looking for comparables for Taylor Hall I looked only at players drafted in 2006 or earlier. Even if a guy like John Tavares met the rest of the criteria (he doesn't), it's not all that instructive to look at Hall as following the same path as Tavares since neither guy is very far along in his development. The other side of the equation is how much the game has changed in the last couple of decades, especially at the NHL level. Picking a comparable from 1951 or 1972 can be instructive, but I prefer to look at players who've come into the league more recently if it's possible. As such, I limited my original search to players drafted in 1992 or later, which gave me a solid fifteen year range.
The second of my criteria was the league the players played in when drafted, the slot in which they were drafted, and their production in their draft seasons. I only looked at forwards who were chosen in the top five picks and who played their draft year in the CHL. This guarantees that the comparables will have been in a similar situation from a young age, which I think helps the comparison. Further, the player needed to be within 0.15 points per game and 0.10 goals per game of Taylor Hall in his draft year.
Using that criteria, only two players make the list:
If Taylor Hall had a career like either one of those guys, I wouldn't be the least bit disappointed, but these comparables aren't without their problems. Spezza played the first quarter of his draft year with the Mississauga Ice Dogs who won a grand total of three games that entire year. They didn't win three out of ten, or twenty, or thirty - they won three times in sixty-eight games, and scored a grand total of 157 goals in the process. Spezza was only there for his first fifteen games, but that's a pretty hefty chunk of his season in a pretty brutal situation. Further, Spezza was sent back to junior for 2001-02, played the majority of 2002-03 in the AHL, and spent the entire 2004-05 season in the AHL as well (go lockout!). The chance of Taylor Hall spending that much time playing hockey outside of the NHL over the next four years is incredibly remote. The two players would seem to be on different tracks.
The Marleau comparison presents a different set of problems. Although Hall looks a bit further along than Marleau in the chart above, that presentation is somewhat deceiving. For starters, although Marleau played in a higher scoring era, Hall actually played on the higher-scoring team; whereas Marleau recorded points on 40.8% of his team's goals, Hall scored points on only 33.5% of Windsor's goals. Further, Marleau was just over ten months younger than Hall in his draft year; whereas Hall was one of the older players to be drafted in 2010, Marleau was the youngest player drafted in 1997. Marleau's draft year was also only his second in the CHL, whereas 2009-10 was Hall's third. Marleau's draft year, then, might be a better comparison for Taylor Hall's 2008-09 season, rather than his 2009-10 season. And if that's the case, the comparison isn't quite as favourable:
The goal totals are still similar, but Marleau jumps ahead in terms of points and has a sizeable advantage in terms of how much his team relied on him for offense. In terms of style, I very much like the Marleau comparison. Both guys can play center or wing, both guys have tremendous speed, both are regarded as goalscorers despite less than off-the-charts goalscoring in junior, and the players are about the same size. Nonetheless, because Marleau was drafted at such a young age (the cut-off date on the dot), I do think this latter comparison is probably more fair, and that Hall is likely tracking slightly behind, rather than slightly ahead.
Even if the Marleau comparable looks pretty good, perhaps we should expand the criteria somewhat to see if we can't find someone to add to the group. If we include players who are within 0.20 points per game and 0.10 goals per game of Taylor Hall in their respective draft years, three more potential comparables are added:
None of these new additions jump out as being similar players to Taylor Hall either statistically or stylistically. Thornton's best skills are his passing, vision, and size, which enable him to play a very different kind of game than Hall, and his offensive numbers are quite a bit better. Lecavalier's numbers in junior are better still, and like Thornton, he relies on his superior size to control the play, an advantage that Hall likely won't have at the NHL level. Legwand may be the most similar stylistically, but the numbers in his draft year are on the low side, and that discrepancy becomes even more pronounced when we look at his 1996-97 and 1998-99 junior seasons and see that his production in 1997-98 is an outlier on the high side. If Legwand can be regarded as a Hall comparable, he definitely belongs on the low end.
What happens if we allow for more seasons and draft positions in addition to the wider production? Say, forwards drafted in the top ten selections as far back as 1982 who played their draft seasons in the CHL and scored within 0.20 points per game and 0.10 goals per game of Taylor Hall in his draft year. An additional nine players are able to meet this criteria:
A lot of the players added to this list demonstrate the wisdom of the previous criteria. Darrin Shannon's rates came in an injury-shortened season, so we can throw him out for that alone. Pierre-Marc Bouchard, Stu Barnes, and Derick Brassard weren't selected higher because they're all somewhat undersized, something that won't be a concern for Taylor Hall going forward, which illustrates why draft position is an important component to the overall criteria. Jocelyn Lemieux and Todd Harvey are much closer to 10th than they are 1st, which implies that there were concerns about them that just aren't there with Hall. Lemieux in particular is being boosted by playing in a weak junior league (the QMJHL had some completely ridiculous offensive seasons in the 80's).
It's odd to see Hall mixed in with the guys from the early 90's and late 80's in terms of percentage of team offense. The Spitfires were a dominant team, and likely didn't need to rely on Hall as much as other junior teams do on their stars. Still, it's odd, and would be downright disconcerting if it weren't for the presence of Petr Nedved and Mike Modano. Of those two, I like Modano as a comparable better in terms of playing style. He's always used his speed to create plays and has often exhibited the "reckless" style that Hall has sometimes been criticized for in the last several months. There's obviously no guarantee that Hall will develop the kind of all-around game Modano used effectively (against the Oilers! Damn you Modano!) for so many seasons, but if he did, I would be very pleased indeed.
The last new addition, Jason Arnott, also seems like a decent if unspectacular comparable for Hall (let's just hope Edmonton fans don't treat them comparably). Arnott is quite a bit bigger than Hall, and his numbers are a tinge weaker, but he's not way out of the mix statistically and his major strengths - shooting, skating, physicality - are similar to Hall's. Overall, I think I'd go back to a list that's limited to top five selections, uses the narrower 0.15 point range on the top end, and takes the larger 0.20 point range on the bottom end to help account for Hall's age when he was drafted. I'd also like to throw in Jason Arnott since he jumped straight from junior to the NHL, is somewhat comparable statistically, is somewhat comparable stylistically, and is very familiar to Oiler fans. That leaves us with a list that includes Mike Modano as the "(almost) everything goes right" scenario, Patrick Marleau, Jason Spezza, Jason Arnott, Petr Nedved, David Legwand, and Stu Barnes in the "(almost) everything goes wrong" position. In terms of what to expect going for next season, three of those players went immediately to the NHL with Jason Arnott having the best offensive season (33-35-68 in 78 GP) and Petr Nedved having the worst (10-6-16 in 61 GP). It's very likely that Hall ends up somewhere in between alongside Patrick Marleau, the guy I think serves as the best comparable for Hall today.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I will not be happy if Hall ends up being a player of the ilk of Marleau. I would want him to be at least either a consistent 40 goal scorer or 90 points. I expect that he starts touching these landmarks around his 3rd or 4th season. Anything lower, will be a disappointment for me
Sins can be forgiven but conscience is a killer.
…really? That’s harsh.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Aug 15, 2010 1:44 PM MDT up reply actions
Those are some lofty expectations! When you say “consistent” do you mean for those to be minimum thresholds, or just numbers that he approaches on a regular basis? Because there are only eight guys in the league who scored 90 regular season points in at least two of the last four seasons (Crosby, Datsyuk, Iginla, Lecavalier, Malkin, Ovechkin, St. Louis, Thornton), and only Ovechkin and Crosby have done it more than twice. In terms of goal-scoring, only seven guys have at least 40 regular season goals in at least two of the last four seasons (Gaborik, Heatley, Hossa, Kovalchuk, Lecavalier, Ovechkin, Vanek), and only Ovechkin and Kovalchuk have done it more than twice.
I would be thrilled if Hall ends up on those kinds of lists, but I don’t think that’s his expected value. It’s more like the best case scenario.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 15, 2010 4:10 PM MDT up reply actions
If we can’t have high expectations for the freakin’ #1 overall pick, for whom can we have them?
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Aug 15, 2010 6:24 PM MDT up reply actions
In order for it to work, you can’t expect one of those comparables to be Sidney Crosby.
If we can’t agree that Taylor Hall turning into one of the five or ten best players in the league would be exceeding expectations, then we may as well just put analysis away.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 15, 2010 6:39 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
First overall draft picks often turn into one of the five or ten best players in the league. Sure, the ones that do “exceed expectations”, but not by a lot. I have high expectations for Hall because of his draft pedigree and the tremendous track record of players chosen as the top of their draft class.
In 2009-10, the top six goal scorers in the NHL consisted of four #1 overall draft picks, one #2, one #3, and nobody else! Until 2010, the Oilers have never even had a top three draft pick, ever!! So pardon this Oiler fan if he gets a little excited over the prospects for this prospect.
That said, I’ve been around long enough to season my expectations with a pinch of patience and a dash of trepidation, the latter about health mostly. I don’t expect the guy to win the Hart Trophy at 19 the way Gretzky did, let’s put it that way. But I do expect him to be a Halluva player.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Aug 17, 2010 4:31 AM MDT up reply actions
Although they played in different leagues (NCAA and OHL), Parise is often mentioned as a Hall comparable. Parise scored 61 points in 39 games in his pre-draft NCAA season, which is an NHLE of 53 points over an 82 game season. Hall scored his 106 points this season in 57 games, for an NHLE of 46 points. Pretty close I’d say, especially considering the fact that as a smaller player, the difficulty of scoring points becomes exponentially more difficult as he progresses to more difficult leagues, where as with a player of “NHL size” such as Hall, it still becomes more difficuly obviously, but I believe less so than an undersized player.
So looking at those numbers, I do believe that Parise-level offense is a decent comparable for Hall in the long run, although obviously the career path is vastly different, with Parise not making the NHL until his third post-draft season.
I suppose it’s a bit of a stretch of a comparison, I just believe their style of play is very similar, and although Modano fits that very well also, I have a hard time comparing an 18 year old kid to a first ballot hall of famer.
I wouldn’t say no to a Zach Parise. Unlike Kevin Lowe.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Yeah, for me it’s pretty important that the comparables have similar pre-draft development, and preferable that they take a similar path to the NHL after being drafted. It would be difficult to compare Parise and Hall over the next few years, which is why I tend to shy away from him as a comparable, even if they might end up being similar players in the end.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 15, 2010 4:12 PM MDT up reply actions
For sure, I agree completely. Like I said, their careers just won’t track the same way, Hall will play in the NHL next year, and Parise played two years college and a year in the A. I just feel like aside from Modano, the playing style of the other guys are too far from Hall’s style, so I was looking for a guy who maybe isn’t quite so great and accomplished a player as Modano is.
by bhommy on Aug 15, 2010 4:39 PM MDT via mobile up reply actions
Great article; frustrating
If I make a request on behalf of the more linguistically conservative of your readers, could you limit your use of “criteria” to plural situations? Merriam-Webster acknowledges that its use as a singular is increasing, but concludes that “Only time will tell whether it will reach the unquestioned acceptability of agenda.”
(I know, language evolves over time, its purpose is communication, and people who stick to a prescriptivist position should be speaking Latin, or they’re hypocrites. Even so, I die a little inside when I see “criteria” as a singular.)
by sarcasticidealist on Aug 15, 2010 5:40 PM MDT reply actions
Sorry, that should be “frustrating that there aren’t any perfect comparables.”
by sarcasticidealist on Aug 15, 2010 5:41 PM MDT up reply actions
I can appreciate your linguistic concerns, although I likely won’t be using criterion in my writing anytime soon. I just don’t like it. Hopefully “of those” or “or my” criteria works for both of us, because that’s what I’ve edited in.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 15, 2010 6:32 PM MDT up reply actions
Well, easiest way to figure this one out is to figure out what attributes the kid has, and who that compares to. Lets feed these little tidbits into the old Calculatron 3000…
Plays Left Wing — Check
Blazing Speed — Check
Plays with wreckless abbandon — Check
Seems immune to injury — Check
Seen as a Goal Scorer — Check
Calculating…
You are describing a rich-man’s Ryan Smyth. Congratulations!
I’m not really a fan of the “rich man’s” vs. “poor man’s” stuff when looking for comparables. Otherwise, practically every forward is a comparable in some way. In terms of style, a “rich man’s Brad Isbister” might make sense, but it’s not the most useful comparison. For me, playing characteristics take a backseat to numbers, and only come out once you’ve first got something close to a match there. And Smyth’s numbers don’t seem like a good match. With this example in particular, I actually don’t see the stylistic comparison being all that strong. I really like Smytty, but I don’t remember him ever having “blazing speed” (and do remember him being injured pretty frequently). His goal-scoring also came largely from within five feet of the net. I honestly don’t know what Halll’s game is like there. I know he drives the net hard, but is he the kind of player who stands out front and battles defenders effectively? I’ve never seen that mentioned about him, but I don’t know for sure.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 16, 2010 9:53 AM MDT up reply actions
…. That’s what he means. Ryan Smyth = Heart + Character – Skill
And Ryan Smyth turned that into a pretty good career.
Now give Ryan Smyth speed, goal scoring ability, dangles, passing… and you have a player never seen in the NHL before. Disqualifying him as possibly having Crosby potential disqualifies your entire article.
This is going to sound lame and old-hat, but Hall is a special player. When the playing style comparisons he gets are always beaming “Bigger Pavel Bure”, “Faster, Smarter Messier”, “Rich Man’s this or that…” You know you have a player that simply isn’t comparable.
As Hans Solo would say, “Never tell me the odds”
Disqualifying him as possibly having Crosby potential disqualifies your entire article.
Um… what? Crosby was nine months younger than Hall in his draft year and just dwarfs him in terms of production. That kind of expectation is ludicrous. As for being incomparable, of the CHL players drafted in the top 10 since 1982, Hall ranked 31st in points per game. If we just go since 1995, he ranked 9th. He was an excellent junior player but he was definitely not the “OMG BEST JUNIOR OF ALL TIME”
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 16, 2010 10:37 PM MDT up reply actions
In the grand scheme of things, 9 months of age is nothing. Also, you missed my point completely. I was trying to help you understand that Hall has a some skillsets and qualities that make him an entity that cannot be quantified. As much as you try to assign him a number, he simply is not one.
Sometimes people get way too caught up in sports math and forget that the future is not a science.
I’m not sure what you mean by “the grand scheme of things” but nine months of age when the players are teenagers is pretty significant. As to your overall point, I obviously don’t think that we’ll find a perfect comparable that will help us to predict exactly what’s going to happen in Taylor Hall’s career. In fact, I say exactly that in the article:
When I went searching for comparables, I knew it wouldn’t be an easy task. By their nature, first overall picks are somewhat unique talents, so we shouldn’t expect barrels of players who look similar.
So we agree he’s a somewhat unique talent, and we agree that no comparable will be perfect. It seems like your suggestion is to then throw your hands in the air and say, “well there’s nothing perfect, so let’s not try.” And maybe that’s the way you enjoy sports. I prefer to look for comparisons that might help us to understand what to expect. And that’s the way I enjoy sports. Both ways are fine, but I think it’s silly to say that no comparisons are valid just because you don’t like math. Taylor Hall does in fact compare well with other players (I think Marleau is a good one, the poll seems to think Modano is pretty good). There are other players he doesn’t compare well with, either because he’s very likely not as good (Sidney Crosby and others) or very likely much better (Jason Bonsignore and others).
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 16, 2010 11:25 PM MDT up reply actions
I’m actually very good at math. I used to find “looking for patterns to predict professional sports” very fun. Then I got good at it, and then it got boring. It’s easy to predict averages, and it’s actually very easy to make lots of money in mid-season betting and playoff pools. But in my experience, it’s nearly impossible to predict a players performance – you need to follow intuition, something that isn’t supported by math.
So no, I wouldn’t say I’m just “throwing my hands in the air”, I’m following my intuition, which I trust more than anything or anyone, because it’s gotten me incredibly far in life.
I suppose that’s fine, but it doesn’t really help to move the discussion anywhere. If your reason for believing something about a player is, “because I have a feeling,” without any supporting evidence other than your track record of success – which is something I and our readers have no firm knowledge of since this is your first set of comments – the conversation can’t move anywhere. It’s especially so when the position you take seems to go beyond what seems reasonable (you can correct me if I’m wrong but you seem to be suggesting that Hall is a “special” talent along the lines of Crosby). If your intuition trumps everything, I can offer no evidence that you will ever find compelling and you have nothing to say but, “believe me, I have a feeling” when evidence to the contrary comes up. If that’s the case, I’m unsure as to why you would bother engaging in a conversation here.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 17, 2010 1:26 AM MDT up reply actions
Welcome, Eirhead! Great handle!!
Sometimes people get way too caught up in sports math and forget that the future is not a science.
I mostly agree with this even as I would counter that science can help us to consider, predict, and ultimately interpret the future. I think it’s worth trying, even as it is to some extent folly on the individual level.
As you say, it’s easier to predict groups of players rather than individuals who are as likely to be the stragglers and outliers that are averaged out in the bigger picture. In a similar vein, physicists can predict the future of large groups of atoms very accurately – e.g. radioactive decay rates – but haven’t a prayer of guessing which particle will go next. At a certain point things get reduced to the quantum level, and a whole new set of strange rules takes precedence.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Aug 17, 2010 4:21 AM MDT up reply actions
Sometimes people get way too caught up in sports math and forget that the future is not a science.
We don’t see anything—anything—suggesting Hall might become comparable to the guy Gretzky said was the one who could break his scoring records. Of course, he could, but what are the chances of that?
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Aug 17, 2010 3:19 AM MDT up reply actions
It’s not like Hall’s ceiling is going to be determined by what some hack writes (my favourite kind of writer by the way) on a website.
So if we agree that the words Scott writes about on here aren’t going to have an impact on Hall’s future, what exactly do they mean?
I think for the most part they are there to quell expectations. If Hall is only a Mike Modano type player and not a “Faster, Smarter Messier”, does that make him a failed pick? I don’t think so. But if you are expecting a generational player and don’t get it, it can certainly look like that.
My issue is that there are certain players who are potentially being held to expectations that are going to be impossible to live up to, and Oiler fans have been doing this ever since Gretzky left.
Take Jordan Eberle for example. There’s a good chance that in the rest of his career he will never do anything as close to as special as what he did at the last two WJC’s. Sure some of it was skill, but a lot of it was luck (which you need), and circumstance. He may never find himself in that situation again or he may not find the right circumstances again. It doesn’t mean he still can’t be a good player, but the perception of him (Captain Clutch) might not be the same.
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
How about Rick Nash as a comparable? His junior numbers don’t measure up to Hall’s which rules him out of your results-oriented method, but there are some commonalities, not the least of which is that each was an OHL winger who went #1 overall. Mind you Nash was seven months younger than Hall in his draft year so maybe his production should have been expected to be less, even though the method doesn’t really allow for that.
The other OHL winger to go #1 overall in the past 20 years was Patrick Kane and maybe he’s not such a bad comparable either. Again the junior numbers don’t line up all that well – Kane put up some really gaudy numbers his draft year – but Hall did win the scoring title as a draft-eligible so he’s no slouch. I’m not sure we know enough about their relative ice time, powerplay stats and the like to do a full analysis. P/G is a very different matter from P/60 as you know, and we only have the former.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
I think they play a different game…. and I hope Hall learns how to play the NHL game sooner than Nash had to (that 41 goal season he spent a lot of time hanging out behind the other teams defenceman while the puck was in his end). He learned it after a bit and is a very good player, but man those first few years were painful to watch.
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Even if we use Hall’s previous season, he’s got better offensive totals than that of Nash. It’s a closer comparison, but Hall still comes out ahead, which is encouraging. I think that comparison is a good one to keep in mind going forward. Pat Kane doesn’t seem quite as good. Offensive totals aside (where Kane has a clear advantage), the two don’t seem like they play a very similar game.
by Scott Reynolds on Aug 17, 2010 10:43 AM MDT up reply actions

by 




































