DRAFTING FOR SUCCESS

Byron Bader
May 09 2014 08:30AM

Banners

-via Dave Shaver

The NHL draft is one of the most important parts of any NHL team’s year. It is a team’s opportunity to pick up players that, down the road, may turn into franchise cornerstones or at least pieces that will them be successful. Unlike free agency or trades, the draft is an opportunity to add pivotal assets at basically no charge, with the added bonus of (likely) having the player through his prime playing years.

Despite the importance of the draft, there is no guarantee a team is going to end up with that elite player they covet or even a player who ends of being an NHL regular. Some have even suggested that teams could pick players ranked similarly at random and have a better success rate than picking the player they think might be the best player available, through scouting, analysis and gut reaction. 

Detroit has long been admired as a team that drafts well and knows how to develop players. The team is regarded as one of the very best at finding hidden gems in the later rounds and turning them into uber-elite talent (e.g., Lidstrom, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Fedorov, etc.). But, over the long-run, how do they compare to other NHL teams and draft success?  Alternatively, how successful is a bottom feeder team (i.e., a team that has done very little over the past decade) at drafting and developing talent compared to the better teams?

Lets take a look...

Team Busts 50+ Games 200 + Games Total 50G % 200G % Playoffs Cup Finals Elite  Elite Players
Anaheim 36 22 9 58 37.9% 15.5% 6 1 2 Getzlaf; Perry
Boston 35 16 11 51 31.4% 21.6% 8 2 3 Bergeron; Kessel; Seguin
Buffalo 36 23 11 59 39.0% 18.6% 4 0 1 Vanek
Calgary 42 13 5 55 23.6% 9.1% 5 1 0  
Carolina 37 16 6 53 30.2% 11.3% 2 1 1 E. Staal
Chicago 51 21 11 72 29.2% 15.3% 6 2 3 Kane; Toews; Keith
Colorado 38 20 9 58 34.5% 15.5% 5 0 3 MacKinnon; Duchene; Landeskog
Columbus 41 25 11 66 37.9% 16.7% 2 0 1 Johansen
Dallas 37 15 8 52 28.8% 15.4% 5 0 1 Benn
Detroit 38 14 7 52 26.9% 13.5% 10 2 0  
Edmonton 31 26 8 57 45.6% 14.0% 1 1 1 Hall
Florida 41 18 9 59 30.5% 15.3% 1 0 0  
Los Angeles 45 21 10 66 31.8% 15.2% 5 1 3 Doughty; Kopitar; Quick
Minnesota 39 17 8 56 30.4% 14.3% 4 0 1 Koivu
Montreal 38 20 14 58 34.5% 24.1% 8 0 3 Pacioretty; Subban; Price
Nashville 41 22 9 63 34.9% 14.3% 7 0 2 Weber; Suter
New Jersey 39 14 4 53 26.4% 7.5% 7 1 1 Parise
NY Islanders 47 20 12 67 29.9% 17.9% 3 0 1 Tavares
NY Rangers 41 19 9 60 31.7% 15.0% 8 0 0  
Ottawa 38 20 10 58 34.5% 17.2% 7 1 1 Karlsson
Philadelphia 42 16 9 58 27.6% 15.5% 8 1 1 Giroux
Phoenix 39 14 9 53 26.4% 17.0% 4 0 1 Ekman-Larsson
Pittsburgh 37 19 10 56 33.9% 17.9% 8 2 3 Crosby; Malkin; Letang
San Jose 37 21 11 58 36.2% 19.0% 10 0 3 Couture; Vlasic; Pavelski
St. Louis 44 20 10 64 31.3% 15.6% 5 0 1 Pietrangelo
Tampa Bay 43 17 4 60 28.3% 6.7% 5 1 1 Stamkos
Toronto 35 13 7 48 27.1% 14.6% 2 0 1 Rask
Vancouver 37 9 7 46 19.6% 15.2% 7 1 1 Kesler
Washington 43 20 10 63 31.7% 15.9% 7 0 2 Backstrom; Ovechkin
Winnipeg 46 11 6 55 20.0% 10.9% 1 0 0  
Average 39.8 18.1 8.8 57.8 31.1% 15.2% 5.4 0.6 1.4  
Stan. Dev. 4.2 4.0 2.3 5.8 5.5% 3.6% 2.6 0.7 1.0  


The table above is a summary of each team’s drafting success rate from 2003 to 2013. If drafted before 2010, success constitutes playing over 50 games; if drafted after 2010, success constitutes playing over 30 games; players drafted from 2010 – 2013 that haven’t played over 30 games yet were completely omitted. List is in alphabetical order.

THE NUMBERS

Teams, on average, have 31% of their players play at least 50 games and only 15% (so far) go on to play at least 250 games. In other words, in order to be treading water, a team should expect that two of their seven draft picks should at least play in the NHL at some point, and one of the seven should go on to be an impact player that plays at least 2.5 seasons.

Furthermore, the average team drafted 1 elite player between 2003 – 2013 (one a decade). A number of teams have drafted 2 and a select few have drafted 3 or 4 star players over that time. Not surprisingly, the clubs that have drafted the most elite talent over the past decade also tend to be very good. Alternatively, a team that hasn’t been able to draft an elite talent in the past 10 years, especially an org that has been consistently drafting in the top-10 (e.g., Edmonton, Winnipeg/Atlanta, Florida), should be making some significant adjustments in how they evaluate and/or develop their draft picks.

Now let’s have a look at some specific teams and their drafting success rates. I’ve chosen four that jumped out at me: Detroit, Edmonton, Boston and Calgary.

DETROIT

Detroit has made the playoffs every single year for the past 23 seasons. However, that was mostly due to two elite cores that were running together for a decade (the Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Lidstrom era and the Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Lidstrom era). The Wings have actually only graduated 27% of its draftees to the NHL since 2003, slightly below the league average.

While Detroit certainly has a reputation for developing players the right way, they also are much more selective about who gets a real shot in the NHL. They have been so good for so long that it has been nearly impossible for a newly Detroit-drafted player to get a long look in the NHL. Interestingly, Detroit has actually not developed an elite player through drafting since they picked Zetterberg and Datsyuk in the late 1990’s. Johan Franzen (2004) and Nik Kronwall (2000) might be the only skaters close to that distinction. 

So while the Red Wings franchise is known for their ability to find elite talent late in the draft, they haven't done it for about 14 years. However, 50% of the players (7 in total) that have come up to play at least 50 games have gone on to play at least 200 games. This supports the notion that Detroit likes to let prospects ripen on the vine. When players do come up, they are ready to produce and stay in the bigs. 

EDMONTON

Edmonton has actually graduated the most draftees to NHL players since 2003. The team has been in rebuild mode for the better part of a decade and has only made the playoffs once since 2003.

Yet, here they are at the top of the heap in terms of bringing players through the system to become NHLers.  Given Edmonton’s success, or lack thereof, does this mean that Edmonton is rushing their draft picks into the league?

I would say it most certainly does. While the Oilers lead the league in converting draftees to NHLers, only 30% of those players (8 in total) have gone on to play 200+ games in the NHL so far, by far the biggest drop off between 50-game players and 200-game players. Edmonton will likely have Nugent-Hopkins and Yakopov crossing the 200-game barrier in the near future, but the drop off between 50 to 200 game players is still substantial.   

BOSTON

Boston is an intriguing case and perhaps even the class of the league when it comes to drafting. They have drafted 3 elite players in the past 10 years where most teams have drafted 1. They’ve traded away 2 of those players, but have made the playoffs 8 times in the past decade and will likely be a top-tier team for the next 5 years.

The Bruins have turned 22% of their players into regular NHLers with 200+ games under their belt.  Essentially, Boston is converting three players every two years into useful big leaguers. They, along with the Canadiens, lead the league in converting draftees to this level of 200+ game guys. 

Also, while they didn’t draft Rask, they acquired him for nothing very early into his professional career when Toronto decided he was expendable. They have groomed Rask into one of the best goalies in the league. It’s unclear whether Boston is using a different drafting strategy to analyze the upcoming talent or implementing a unique way to develop the players they draft or both.

What is clear is that what they are doing seems to be working.

CALGARY

Since 2003, Calgary has been one of the very worst drafting teams in the entire league. They convert draftees to NHLers or regular NHLers far less than the league average (23.9%). Additionally, they are one of only five teams that have not drafted one elite player in the past ten years. In addition, they are the only team in the entire NHL that hasn’t had a 2nd rounder (a top 31 – 60 pick) play 50 games or more since 2003 - in part, no doubt, because Darryl Sutter's favourite bargaining chip seemed to be second round picks. 

These dire circumstances appear to be changing given the apparent depth of their current prospect pool.  Many up and coming players will likely play at least 50 games in the NHL, with several of those potentially crossing over the 200 mark.  As well, with any luck, there is 1 or 2 elite players in the system or soon to join it since the club is picking 4th in the upcoming draft. When we look back in five years, if the players are developed right, the Flames’ drafting over the 2010’s might turn out to be very good. It can’t get much worse than their drafting in the 2000’s, that’s for sure.

SUM IT UP

The draft is the one of the most important aspects of an organization's quest for success. Whether you’re drafting to become good in a few years or drafting for impact right now, you have to go about it the right way. GMs that can hit on 2-3 draft picks out of 7 year after year will likely develop a good team that can last for years, as it constantly infuses ample new and ready talent to the mix. 

Peter Chiarelli and the Boston Bruins certainly seem to be doing everything right. You want a model for how to build a winner without tanking for a slew of top- 5 draft picks, follow the recipe of the President’s trophy winner. Learning what they look for when drafting, how they look for it and how they develop their draftees may be the best thing any bottom-feeder team could do to accelerate their team’s drive to become a great team that stands the test of time.  

Fb039371a1a1b706383cb72243cb4446
Byron has a background in psychology, economics and business and is a business researcher/data analyst by day. His love for hockey is as deep as the ocean is wide. Tell him your questions and let him into your heart. Twitter: @Baderader; Email: byron.bader@gmail.com
Avatar
#51 BurningSensation
May 09 2014, 07:01PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
2
props
Chambers wrote:

I understand what both you and couchpotatoe are saying...as much as I like Dal Colle he is a winger. Historically teams have not built successfully drafting someone other than a Defenseman or Centre.Those are the critical positions of rebuild and the risk of drafting a winger is just as great as drafting a german player, in my view.

I tend to agree the top 3 players (Eckblad, Reinhart, Bennett) are a different class than the others. I am confident the Flames are really doing there homework on Draistl. From what I have seen he exceeds the Flames truculence requirement on size,grit and his toughness on the puck and along the boards. His talent level is exceptional.

My hope is that the Oilers pass up on Bennett as he is of similar mold to RNH, TH and Eberle. Draistl would give them the size they desperately need.

Ok, so there are a couple of things worth talking about here;

- while it is true that Cs are in high demand (justifiably) at the draft, taking D-men with high picks is an absolute heart-breaker more often than not. The list of first round failures is heavily tilted towards D-men taken way too early.

- it may not be popular to say it out loud, but if the talent level is considered equal and the Flames have to look at 'need', Dal Colle is the pick over Draisatl. We have a nice group of young C's coming up the pipe, but other than Poirier and (cough) Hanowski, there aren't any RW in the system.

- I have exactly zero problem with the Flames taking Draisatl. None whatsoever. The only knocks on him are that his skating is only average, and that like many bigger guys, he doesn't seem to be making the same level of effort as other smaller players do (a result of longer strides, and edge work). Mario had silimar 'issues' with his skating, but he seemed to turn out ok.

- 'Truculence' isn't something Draisatl has in abundance. He's a pretty slick/skill player rather than a bang-crash kind of guy. Dal Colle however, is the rough and tumble type that Burke professes to love.

- Edmonton desperately needs a crap ton of things; 4 defensemen (4!!!), a #2C, a #2 LW who won't get pushed around in his own end, and a legit #1G. None of those are getting solved by parsing the difference between Bennett and Draisatl.

Avatar
#52 Sean Bennett
May 09 2014, 09:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
8
props
BurningSensation wrote:

Ok, so there are a couple of things worth talking about here;

- while it is true that Cs are in high demand (justifiably) at the draft, taking D-men with high picks is an absolute heart-breaker more often than not. The list of first round failures is heavily tilted towards D-men taken way too early.

- it may not be popular to say it out loud, but if the talent level is considered equal and the Flames have to look at 'need', Dal Colle is the pick over Draisatl. We have a nice group of young C's coming up the pipe, but other than Poirier and (cough) Hanowski, there aren't any RW in the system.

- I have exactly zero problem with the Flames taking Draisatl. None whatsoever. The only knocks on him are that his skating is only average, and that like many bigger guys, he doesn't seem to be making the same level of effort as other smaller players do (a result of longer strides, and edge work). Mario had silimar 'issues' with his skating, but he seemed to turn out ok.

- 'Truculence' isn't something Draisatl has in abundance. He's a pretty slick/skill player rather than a bang-crash kind of guy. Dal Colle however, is the rough and tumble type that Burke professes to love.

- Edmonton desperately needs a crap ton of things; 4 defensemen (4!!!), a #2C, a #2 LW who won't get pushed around in his own end, and a legit #1G. None of those are getting solved by parsing the difference between Bennett and Draisatl.

Dal Colle is a LW. He has never played RW. Also, Dal Colle is not -repeat not- a crasher or banger. He is softer than a baby`s bum. I have absolutely no clue where you are getting this info, lol. Dal Colle`s got great vision, an elite shot, and tremendous passing skills. But if you ever watched him play or read a scouting report from a recognized scouting institution like Mckeens, Redliune Report, or ISS you would know that he is big, but does not play a physical style or consistently muck it out in the tough areas of the ice. In fact, if he had that grit, any scouting agency would tell you that he would be the first pick overall, as no other player in the draft compares to the combination of size, speed, and skill he brings.

Avatar
#53 Jeff Lebowski
May 09 2014, 09:54PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
2
props

Regarding Sam Reinhart:

What's interesting to me is his late birthday. As with Monahan I wonder if their draft -1 indicates something interesting?

What's more since their draft-1 is the draft years of their birthyear peers how do they rank with them?

Monahan: GP G A Pts PIM 62 33 45 78 38 It seems given his position and THAT draft class he could have gone top 3

Reinhart: 72 35 50 85 22 Where would he fall, given the late birthdays Lindholm and Monahan (WOW Barkov and Mackinnon just made it) would be out (pushed back)?

Is he better than Barkov? Would he have gone 5th?

When I read Sam's scouting report, I'm reminded of Monahan.

Given a situation where the top 5 guys this year DON'T bust, what is a dream scenario if Calgary does get a centre?

I'm asking, if a 1-2 of Monahan and - Reinhart (same) Bennett (dynamic) Draisaitl (?) which is more appealing?

Avatar
#54 Baalzamon
May 09 2014, 11:32PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
5
props

@BurningSensation

I have to question why anyone wouldn't like the guy if he is the BPA when we pick.

That's just it, though; with the Flames picking 4th, there's a 100% chance someone better than Dal Colle will still be on the board (You know, unless a quantum singularity pops up somewhere and warps the essence of space time in such a way that 4=5, cats chase dogs, and Bennett and Reinhart are the same person).

How I have seen the draft for quite a while is a very definite top 4 of Ekblad, Reinhart, Bennett, and Draisaitl (Draisaitl is 4th). The drop from Draisaitl to Dal Colle is very significant. Almost the steepest drop I've ever seen between two consecutive players ranked that high.

And that right there is the main reason I was so grumpy when it looked like the Flames would pick 5th. There should be at least one player between Draisaitl and Dal Colle, but there really isn't (maybe Nylander? Anyone?).

Avatar
#55 Sean Bennett
May 09 2014, 11:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
3
props
Baalzamon wrote:
I have to question why anyone wouldn't like the guy if he is the BPA when we pick.

That's just it, though; with the Flames picking 4th, there's a 100% chance someone better than Dal Colle will still be on the board (You know, unless a quantum singularity pops up somewhere and warps the essence of space time in such a way that 4=5, cats chase dogs, and Bennett and Reinhart are the same person).

How I have seen the draft for quite a while is a very definite top 4 of Ekblad, Reinhart, Bennett, and Draisaitl (Draisaitl is 4th). The drop from Draisaitl to Dal Colle is very significant. Almost the steepest drop I've ever seen between two consecutive players ranked that high.

And that right there is the main reason I was so grumpy when it looked like the Flames would pick 5th. There should be at least one player between Draisaitl and Dal Colle, but there really isn't (maybe Nylander? Anyone?).

The drop-off isn`t that steep. DC`s got a better shot and skating ability. Draisaitl is stronger and is the slightly better passer. Both are insanely creative and have great vision, while lacking the elite two-way ability of Reinhart and Bennet.

Moreover, DC is 8 months younger. He`s got another full season of development time relative to Draisaitl. DC will definitely get bigger, and might end up being 6`3 and 210-20 when all is said and done.

DC just has to elevate his defensive game and show a little more willingness to play in the dirty areas and get his hands dirty.

Moreover, Future Considerations has Dal Colle at fifth, ahead of Draisaitl at sixth. ISS has DC at 3 and Draisaitl at 6. The head scout of Redline recently mentioned in a USA today article that he believes Dal Colle may well turn out to be the best player from the draft in a few years.

In other words, the scouting community is very bullish on Dal Colle, and many consider him to be the superior player over Draisaitl. Either way, I think the Flames are getting a really good player at 4. I just hope they pick Draisaitl as centers are more valuable to a franchise than wingers if all other factors are relatively equal.

Avatar
#56 coachedpotatoe
May 10 2014, 07:32AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
0
props

One of my questions is; if there is drop of after the top 3; are there more than just DC and DR in the conversation.

The point I was more interested in was the two second round picks and if anyone had any real knowledge of any of them. (I have read the general rankings, size, and stats but has anyone done the eye test and the advanced stats test on them.) By the way can anyone tell me exactly what numbers the Flames draft at in the later rounds.

I also think that Trevling is actively pursuing another 1st.

Avatar
#57 ChinookArch
May 10 2014, 09:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
6
props

@coachedpotatoe

"I also think that Trevling is actively pursuing another 1st."

I'm curious, what makes you believe this is true (aside from who isn't looking)?

Avatar
#58 Baalzamon
May 10 2014, 10:07AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
4
props

@Sean Bennett

THN has Draisaitl 1st overall. NO ONE has Dal Colle higher than 3rd (and ISS also has Julius Honka outside the top 30, which is hilarious).

Who cares? I was talking about my opinion. Dal Colle's results look fine, until you dig into them even a little bit. Seriously, it isn't close between him and Draisaitl, even considering the age difference.

Draisaitl, Reinhart, and Bennett all had the highest scoring rate on their team--and not by a little bit, either. All of them were at 1.6/game or higher. Dal Colle was at 1.4/game, and he was second on his team (Scott Laughton had 1.6/game).

Dal Colle spent at least half the season centered by Laughton. That sounds like a complementary player to me, especially considering he's a winger.

Avatar
#59 Sean Bennett
May 10 2014, 11:42AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
4
props
Baalzamon wrote:

THN has Draisaitl 1st overall. NO ONE has Dal Colle higher than 3rd (and ISS also has Julius Honka outside the top 30, which is hilarious).

Who cares? I was talking about my opinion. Dal Colle's results look fine, until you dig into them even a little bit. Seriously, it isn't close between him and Draisaitl, even considering the age difference.

Draisaitl, Reinhart, and Bennett all had the highest scoring rate on their team--and not by a little bit, either. All of them were at 1.6/game or higher. Dal Colle was at 1.4/game, and he was second on his team (Scott Laughton had 1.6/game).

Dal Colle spent at least half the season centered by Laughton. That sounds like a complementary player to me, especially considering he's a winger.

LOL! Who cares what scouting agencies have to say? And why should we care about your opinion? It would be one thing if you actually referenced a scout or agency, but you just pulled PPG as an evaluating tool for prospects?

So will your fancy PPG stat tell me why Laughton never had more than a PPG of 1.14 before Dal Colle emerged as a stud for Oshawa? Yeah, you might want to check your causality.

Dude, you -like everyone else here, myself included- are an armchair GM that has not watched a majority of these prospects play a majority of their games. In order for constructive dialogue to take place, you might want to base your opinion on more informed opinions -especially since we have no advanced stats that would give us context as to how these points are being produced.

In sum, throwing out PPG as the as the only evaluating tool for prospects is pretty misguided.

Avatar
#60 JJ
May 10 2014, 02:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
5
props

@Baalzamon

"Almost the steepest drop I've ever seen between two consecutive players ranked that high."

I also prefer Draisaitl to Dal Colle, but suggesting the difference is anything close to a Malkin-Barker or Crosby-Johnson/Ryan or Seguin-Gudbranson gap is a little silly

Avatar
#61 Mark Jones
May 10 2014, 09:34PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
0
props

@Byron Bader

Would you consider Iggy to be on the bubble of elite?

Avatar
#62 coachedpotatoe
May 10 2014, 10:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
ChinookArch wrote:

"I also think that Trevling is actively pursuing another 1st."

I'm curious, what makes you believe this is true (aside from who isn't looking)?

I heard an interview with him and he was asked about the draft and how things were different now that he had the 4th and not Phoenix pick and it seemed to me that his response was such that the next two groupings (his term)both had lots of talent. The fact that the next 5-10 top ranked players also have some guys with both skill and size (he's on record suggesting he would like a team that plays heavy) makes me think he would like to get a player in that range. Also he would have a good understanding of what the Coyotes might want for the pick and if the Flames have anything that might be of significant interest on them. Like much of what is said here on FN it is speculation and I think wishful thinking. I wish I had a crystal ball but I don't.

Avatar
#64 Gored 1970
May 11 2014, 07:55AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
3
props

Forget about Draisaitl and Dal Colle. Burke's going to pound the table and pick Nick Ritchie.

Avatar
#65 ?
May 11 2014, 12:43PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
McRib wrote:

Agree, Especially with Ryan Kesler who is absolutely not elite in any sense of the word he had 2 good seasons. He has only scored more than 26 goals once and has only broken 60 points twice. Honestly he is an average second liner for me considering how soft he is and his "temper tantrums" as well,

Kesler is one of the best 2 way players in the entire league. He has slowed down since the Canucks cup final appearance, but I would still say he is an elite player. Look at the interest he commanded around the league at the deadline. He's not massive point producer, but neither is Patrice Bergeron. Both guys have been nominated for Selkes'. Kesler is still the guy who stirs the drink in Van, I think all it would take for people to remember how good he is is a simple change of scenery.

Avatar
#66 Mark Jones
May 11 2014, 01:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Byron Bader

Thanks, definitely mis-read the criteria. Good article.

Avatar
#67 EugeneV
May 11 2014, 04:39PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
1
props
Byron Bader wrote:

No he's elite or at least he was. Age is taking over now but he was very elite. He was drafted in 1995. That's why he wasn't included here.

And he was also not a Flames draft pick in the first place.

Avatar
#69 wes
May 14 2014, 11:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Will wrote:

This is a great article. It has some neet data that is hardly ever compiled and analyzed, and it is able to be disseminated in different ways by different people leading to good debate.

As an Oiler fan, I think you hit the nail on the head in that they love rushing players to the NHL. And that they're success is actually a mark of failure in terms of development. The Pendergast era was terrible. Had they drafted better back then, that talent would be developing as we speak and be ready to take some serious spots on the big club to help the top end talent.

I think there is a metric you are missing here which explains Chicago's draft success. Sure they have the 3 elite, but they also got Seabrook, Bickel, Versteeg, Saad, Shaw, Hjalmarsson, Smith, and Crawford.

That is 8 players on top of Toews, Kane, and Keith that are all huge parts of that team. I would even argue Seabrook and Crawford are elite players, with Bickle, Versteeg, and Hjalmarsson being important to the team's success.

As you say Boston is a good model for drafting, and Detroit is a good model for development, but I don't think any team touches Chicago's ability to basically build a potential dynasty almost strictly through the draft. The only players that stick out as important acquisitions are Hossa and Oduya.

Oh and PS, Buflygn was also drafted by Chicago. That is simply tremendous scouting.

brouwer & ladd... the list is incredible really.

Avatar
#70 mtgould89
May 14 2014, 12:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Anaheim isnt in that graphic.

Avatar
#71 wes
May 22 2014, 01:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@McRib

that's what he is. he's a great center. but that's what he is. 30 goals once. that's it.

Comments are closed for this article.