Who Should Vancouver Draft? Spoiler: It’s Sam Reinhart


For a lot of Canucks fans, this is their first rodeo going in to the NHL entry draft with a high 1st round pick, and certainly the first time this has happened in the Twitter era. We’re all a little excited. Unsure at what to make of this whole mess, but excited. What makes it all the more exciting is that a local kid – Vancouver’s own Sam Reinhart – is projected to be one of the top prospects of this year’s draft class, and according to Ben Kuzma, Jim Benning may be willing to move the 6th overall pick along with Bo Horvat to Florida for the 1st overall selection and the chance to draft him.

But hey, a rumour is just that: a rumour. This probably isn’t going to happen (especially if you believe what Benning said to Mark Spector recently). As professional fans of an awful team, the guys at The Leafs Nation have gone through this “trade up for 1st overall!” hysteria before; nearly every year in fact. Unsurprisingly, nothing really ever comes of this talk, and we all get excited for nothing.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

But what if…

What if Jim Benning really is out to make a big splash and land Reinhart? What if Vancouver is willing to part with their two highest draft picks since 1999 to make it happen? What if Florida goes for it? Is Sam Reinhart really that good? Is parting with Horvat and another top-10 draft pick really worth it? Should Vancouver do this deal if it’s presented? Read past the jump to find out.

The Value Of A 1st Round Draft Pick

The thing about the entry draft is that talent is not distributed in a linear fashion. That is to say that each prospect is not just a little worse than the guy before him. Instead, talent tends to decline exponentially from the 1st overall pick onwards, and draft picks in the 5-10 range tend to be closer in value to 3rd round picks than they are to guys taken just 2 or 3 picks ahead of them:


Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

The above graph, courtesy of Matt Pfeffer’s Draft Book available on Hockey Prospectus. It measures player contributions in GVT (Goals Versus Threshold), which is essentially a hockey version of baseball’s WAR. GVT measures a given player’s contribution in goal differential contributed above a replacement level player (ie: one freely available on the open market. Guys like Zac Dalpe, Tom Sestito, Andrew Ebbett, etc.), but it’s not commonly used due to the fact that most of the time, we’re trying to predict how a player will perform in season n+1 by looking at how he did in season n. GVT uses goals, which we all know are noisy on a season-by-season level, so it’s usefulness is generally limited by sample size issues. When looking at the scope of a career however, most of these issues should wash out, leaving us with a good measure of career-long player value.

With all that aside, we can look at who we can expect to win a trade for draft picks/prospects based on draft position and how each player at that position performed over their respective NHL career. Using the rumour that Ben Kuzma floated, Vancouver would be trading their 6th overall pick this year along with Bo Horvat (9th overall) to Florida in exchange for the 1st overall pick. Based on average career GVT of forwards since 1990, Here’s how that trade would shake down:

avg gvt by draft position

exp gains

The table on the left shows the average expected values of each pick, while the table on the right shows the average expected values of the next few guys on the board at each selection, to smooth out some of the small sample size quirks.

In both cases, trading Bo Horvat and the 6th overall pick for the 1st selection in this upcoming entry draft is the equivalent of adding another free pick in the 4-10 range, and a deal Vancouver should expect to definitively win in the long run. 

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Derek Zona of Copper & Blue also takes a look at a similar issue here, but examines the chances of each pick becoming a “top player,” which is a player he defined as scoring 0.5 points per game as a forward (which is mid-tier 2nd line production). He found that draft picks in the 4th-13th turn out to be impact pros 44.5% of the time, while 1st overall picks become top players roughly 86% of the time. 

Given those odds, there’s a 50% chance that one of Vancouver’s two current top-10 picks becomes at least an average NHL 2nd liner, and a 30% chance that neither do. By trading Horvat and the 6th pick for 1st overall, the Canucks increase their odds of finding an impact NHL player by nearly 36%.

Of course, all of these numbers are looking at averages and probabilities. They assume average conditions, average drafts, and an average group of prospects. If you listen to experts though, you’ll quickly be told that this draft is pretty underwhelming, especially among the first few picks. If the experts are right and this draft does not have any real star-calibre players, is it still worth trading Horvat and the 6th pick for 1st overall and the chance to draft Bennett or Ekblad or Reinhart? The answer would probably be “no,” but fortunately, there is no reason to really believe that the experts are right.

Sam Reinhart Is Really, Really, Really Good

The argument for not dealing two low-end top-10 picks for the best pick available is that there are no “deserving” #1 prospects this year. As the narrative goes, none of the group of 5 CHLers (Reinhart, Bennett, Ekblad, Draisaitl, and Dal Colle) or Willie Nylander have really done enough to separate themselves from the pack. None have performed at a high enough level or produced enough to warrant a “franchise player” label.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

To quote Daniel Wagner of Pass It To Bulis:

“There’s no consensus number one pick or even a two-man race, but instead a top-four group that lacks a true can’t-miss prospect like in previous years. There’s no Nathan MacKinnon, John Tavares, or Steven Stamkos in this draft.”

It’s funny he should mention Tavares, Stamkos, and MacKinnon, because those three guys happen to be some of Sam Reinhart’s closest comparables in terms of 17-year old scoring:

draft yr pts per gp since 03

That table shows every forward drafted in the 1st round since 2003 that scored over a point per game in their 17-year old season (a.k.a. their first draft-eligible season), ranked by points per game. Also included are guys who may be taken in the 1st round this season, highlighted in red.

Long in short, Sam Reinhart is keeping elite company. In his draft year, he outscored Steve Stamkos, Nathan MacKinnon, Tyler Seguin, Claude Giroux, and Matt Duchene, and shattered the WHL’s high water mark for scoring rate, held by Ryan Nugent-Hopkins. Other than Sam Gagner (who rode Patrick Kane’s coattails with the London Knights), basically everyone in Reinhart’s range is a legitimate star player in the NHL and a worthy 1st overall pick. It’s not unreasonable to say that Reinhart may be one of the most talented players to come out of the WHL in over a decade.

Not only that, but this 2014 draft looks like it may be one of the deeper ones in recent memory in terms of talented CHL forwards. Nikolaj Ehlers rode shotgun with Jonathan Drouin for part of the year, but he, Leon Draisaitl, Sam Bennett, and Robby Fabbri stack up well in comparison to guys like Nail Yakupov, Claude Giroux, Matt Duchene, Evander Kane, and Eric Staal.

Of course, scoring levels change on a year-by-year basis, and if scoring is up CHL-wide this year compared to years past, we should probably deflate all draft eligible players’ numbers a bit. However, CHL scoring is currently on a comparable to recent years, and doesn’t look to be out of line with average scoring since 1999-2000:


If anything, we should deflate the scoring numbers of guys like Patrick Kane, Bryan Little, and Sam Gagner to bring them back to historical levels. We can do that by dividing the CHL average scoring rate over the time frame we want to look at (2003-2014) by the yearly scoring rate in each respective CHL league, then multiplying this result with a player’s points per game to get an adjusted number. Adjusting for league and era, Sam Reinhart (along with a few 2014 draft eligibles) still comes out looking extremely impressive:

adjusted draft yr pts per gp

While Bennett and Ekblad and Draisaitl and Ehlers are surely good, Sam Reinhart is in a league with some truly elite NHL talent. It’s also worth noting that Reinhart basically shouldered Kootenay’s offensive burden by himself. The Ice had four 30+ goal scorers in Reinhart and his two linemates Jaedon Descheneau and also draft eligible Luke Philp as well as Tim Bozon, who suffered a life-threatening case of meningitis late in the year and was placed in a coma, ending his season (he has since recovered). Other than that, the Ice did not have a single player score more than 12 goals.

Reinhart was also 3rd in the entire WHL in even strength points, behind only overage New Jersey draft pick Graham Black, and 19-year old Phoenix Coyotes 1st round pick Henrik Samuelsson. He also followed up his impressive regular season with a huge showing in the playoffs, leading all WHL draft-eligible players in scoring and all WHL players in points per game with 23 and 1.76 respectively. In the first round alone, Reinhart outscored fellow top prospect Jake Virtanen an astounding 17 points to Virtanen’s 4, both in 6 games.

Taylor Hall, John Tavares, Nathan MacKinnon, Tyler Seguin, Steven Stamkos – these are the guys who Sam Reinhart is keeping company with. Is he guaranteed to reach this level in the NHL? No, but mostly because there’s no such thing as a guarantee when dealing with prospects. We can only speak in terms of probabilities and likely scenarios. And based on what we know, it’s likely that Sam Reinhart is a worthy 1st overall pick and has as good a chance as anyone drafted in the past decade to become a legitimate NHL star.

Given the average value of the 1st, 6th, and 9th overall picks, as well as how Sam Reinhart compares to his recent peers, Vancouver should absolutely pursue the chance to acquire the 1st overall pick should the opportunity present itself.

  • Romulus' Apotheosis

    This is a great piece.

    Personally, I’m a Draisaitl partisan, but of the 3 centers, I don’t understand how Reinhart gets such little attn. Bennett and Draisaitl seem to eat up all the oxygen.

    For reference, here’s the ES PPG for the 3:

    Reinhart: 60 22-41-63 (1.05 ES PPG)

    Bennett: 57 25-34-59 (1.04 ES PPG)

    Draisaitl: 64 25-36-62 (0.97 ES PPG)

    And, here’s the NHLEs:


    Reinhart: 43

    Draisaitl: 40

    Bennett: 39


    Bennett: 39

    Reinhart: 37

    Draisaitl: 35

  • Peachy

    Really well-argued article. Based on good sample of past comments sections, I’m going to predict that some readers are going to miss how you couch this in terms of probability.

    You make me wonder what the story is that Reinhart isn’t getting the same kinds of traction as Tavares and company. Derek Zona’s consensus draft rankings, last updated in January (it seems), has Reinhart at the top.

    But you also make me think that Dale Tallon probably knows this too. Why would he want Horvat and a 6th? I know this is just complete “delusion,” but wouldn’t it be great if Tallon would take Kesler and the 6th, and Kesler would agree.

    Of course, even if Benning found a way to get Reinhart, Rhys would just write another post about why Reinhart will never be more than a 4th line penalty killer…;)

    • Mantastic

      Kesler & #6 for #1 may very well be delusion due to the NTC.

      But perhaps there is a way to use the Kesler asset to move up to #1 via a trade with, for example, Anaheim.

      Now I sound just as delusional as the rest of you…

      • andyg

        It’s not without historical context.
        Burke made 3 moves, including getting and then trading away the #1 pick, in order to get the Sedins.
        I’m not saying it’s not delusional to hope for, I’m just saying…

        • Mantastic

          That was also 15 years ago.

          One would think that in 2014 teams have a better understanding of how valuable #1 is whether this is a “weak” draft or not.

          I’d love to see it but it is probably nothing more than wish fulfilment steeped in homerism…

          • Peachy

            Also critical that draft picks weren’t worth as much pre-cap as they are now. The top four in this draft are likely (not definitely) to be impact players within one year, i.e. on the ELCs. That’s monster value.

            The Canucks are limited to only moving prospects and picks if they want to advance their draft position, because there’s no way in hell one of the guys with NTC/NMCs is waiving it to join a bottom feeder.

          • Fred-65

            Luongo waived his NTC to join a “bottom feeder”.

            A special case for sure.

            But perhaps one of the NTC guys has a connection to an organization (or someone in the organization) that would pave the way for a trade.

            Perhaps Edler has fond memories of his time in Manitoba…

            Maybe Garrison (or his wife?) misses the Florida sunshine.

            NTC is just leverage.

            I’m just glad Benning is willing to approach NTC players because a GM should leave no stone unturned to improve the team…

        • Peachy

          The idea of acquiring the #1 overall in 2015 is ridiculous to be sure, but there’s a kernel of an idea there…

          The Canucks may be able to pry a 2015 1st round lottery pick out of a franchise that is likely to under-perform relative to its own expectations at (relatively) low cost if the deal can be made this summer, simply because that franchise doesn’t believe that it will own a lottery pick in 2015.

          Toronto, Colorado, Montreal and Washington are reasonable candidates. Of course, no guarantee that you get a lottery pick in such a deal, much less that you win the lottery.

          Risky move, but it may make sense to zero in on Colorado as a destination for Kesler’s services and ensure that an unconditional 2015 1st round pick is included in the treasure.

  • andyg

    Exceptional article Rhys.

    Thank you for quantifying what I think many of us suspected.

    The price to move up to #1 should be very, very high.

    If Benning has a chance to move to #1 and the cost was merely #6 and Horvat, he absolutely should take it.

    Espescially since, like 1999, the Canucks are in desperate need of a (potential) star to reset the team.

    Of course, I doubt it makes sense from Florida’s perspective to make such a trade since they seem to be in win now mode.

    #6 & Kesler (if he were willing to play in Florida) would probably address their needs better in that they get an established NHLer along with a high pick.

    A price I’d be glad to pay as well.

    Kesler, Horvat and #6 for #1 might be something to consider as well even though it’s not going to happen…

  • andyg

    Great article. After reading it and looking at the numbers though I’m not convinced Reinhart is greater than Horvat and Ehlers combined. Just wondering whether you thought about it from this angle and, if so, why discount Ehlers?

  • andyg

    So what you are saying is that Horvat and #6 (which could easily be Dal Colle) are worth less than Reinhart.

    That’s debatable, but even if true, then Why would Fla trade #1 for so little? They’d want more.

    And the fly in this ointment are guys at the top like Brule, and to a lesser extent yakupov, and little.

    And assuming you get the pick right, and dont draft a patrik Stefan, Erik Johnson, Chris Phillips, Alex Daigle, DiPietro, Bryan Berrard.


  • Fred-65

    Seems to me there’s 5 top end players in the draft, Ekblad, Reinhart, Dal Colle, Bennett and Draisaitl. Edmonton wants a defensman ( or should ) and assume Ekblad is gone when they pick at 3rd will they trade down or draft Fleury…the next rated “D” in the draft ( ranked 8th ) if that happens or alternatively BB in Calgary wants truculence and takes Ritchie…..one of the top 5 might fall to Vcr any way. I’m sure it’s already been figured out who’s taking who. Some lists show Reinhart as low as 3rd overall…

    • Mantastic

      why should Edmonton take D in this years draft? Edm’s pipeline is currently filled with D prospects and that D prospects take way longer time to develop than forward prospects, how does this help the team now? please don’t talk like you know other teams needs…

      • Fred-65

        Well they have a lot of prospects as forwards too but that hasn’t done much for them and given the chance this year they’d likely want Ekblad. Sad case the Oilers all those high picks Hall, Eberle, RNH, Yakopov, Gagner but no defense and no goalie

  • Mantastic

    The Horvat and the #6 pick made me jump there a moment, but after reading the entire article, I just don’t see that being enough to move up. There will be other bidders and I don’t think any players with a NTC would agree to go to Fla….. Which BTW says it all about Luo…

    It would be a great story to get the local boy at #1 , but do you gut the system that had zero prospects to begin with. Good thing that Benning is a scout at heart and probably knows what the team has in Horvat and Shinkaruk…. If Rienhart is the real deal, then Benning should pull out all the stops. You can always acquire 2nd line forwards in the 2/3 TDs and through FA…. True stars don’t become available until they have lost a step.

    Should make for an interesting month

  • Mantastic

    There is no chance I deal Horvat and 6th overall for the 1st overall pick. This organization lacks depth. I’d rather take the player with pick #6 and then develop that player.

    Reinhart is very good but he isn’t a special talent like a McDavid or MacKinnon etc. Now, if you could deal other pieces like a Tanev + or something like that (RFA and we already have too much invested on D) then have at it. I just don’t think Reinhart is worth Bo and 6th overall. Honestly, with the first overall pick, I’d rather take Ekblad who projects to be your #1 d-man…something the Canucks lack and never really had; yes, you never know but the scouts suggest Ekblad will be a special player…Sam may not be.

    • Mantastic

      Tanev may be part of a deal but not a miain piece… Ekblad is not a great choice since the big defensemen take a lot of time to develope if the ever do. Look at Hedman in Tampa. He was supposed to be the real deal.

      • Mantastic

        Yeah, look at Hedman. 55 points, 22 mins/game, +5% rel. CF%.

        Seem to remember Lebrun trashing Ekblad recently though – not much offensive upside, ‘safe’ pick to be a 3/4 d man etc.

        • andyg

          Hedman wasn’t chosen to represent Sweden, so he isn’t exactly Chris Pronger. A true #1 Dman is worth anything ie Chara, but more guys fail to live up to the spot than excel. Jack Johnson was another guy that was good, but LA traded him for forward talent. Something tells me this is moot since Van will probably pick at 6

      • yugret

        Oh you never know with a draft pick. Anyone we pick can become an underachiever. Scouts say Ekblad has a good chance of being that #1 horse on D that all teams covet. Play the odds, I say, and get him.

        Scouting reports say they top 4 forwards are all very similar with maybe an edge to Reinhart. Get the best talent in Ekblad.

    • andyg

      I can’t believe people would move Horvat out for this years new shinny toy. One player does not an organization make. We will never get enough depth if we see our prospects as trading chips.

      Draft,keep and develop.

  • Mantastic

    I’m telling you Bo Horvat is a heck of a player. He won’t win scoring titles, but his well-rounded game will help ease the loss of Kesler. You need and want players like that on your team. Versatility is very underrated. No point having a Reinhart if you don’t have a player like Hovart around.

  • Andy

    Considering how the prospects this year are clustering in a top 4-5 and a 6-15 style…

    I wonder if we could find a way to flip Kesler, Garrison/Edler/Hamhuis & a solid bottom 6 player (Hansen/Matthias) into 2 first round picks (1-3 & 5-10).

    I trust Benning to be able to pick some amazing talents with two first round picks.

  • andyg

    Why not first trade Kess. Then offer Tanev and our 2015 1st for this years 1st over all.

    They might be willing to role the dice on where we might end up.

    Or maybe Buffalo.

    • Mantastic

      are you serious? people are talking about trading this year’s 6th overall pick AND Horvat for the 1st overall and you come back with a hella low ball, like next years 1st rd pick which isn’t guaranteed any higher than 6th and Tanev, which has way lower value than Horvat?

      • andyg

        “are you serious?”

        No, but it is about as dumb an idea as putting our 6th together with Horvat for another good player. Move 2 good players for one good player. That makes no sense.

        If we move Kess we will be into rebuild territory.
        We need more depth not less.

  • andyg

    Nice article. Personally, I’m really starting to like Ehlers. He played on the same team as Drouin but they shared the ice a lot less than most people think, apparently at even strength they hardly played together but Ehlers still managed 60 points… Nikolaj Ehlers is looking like the real deal to me, I realy hope we take him at #6 and don’t trade up for Reinhart. That being said, Reinhart would be a nice consolation prize if the trade happens.

  • andyg

    Ideal scenario is getting the no. 10 pick back in a Kesler trade (almost guaranteed that one of Kapanen, Ehlers, Virtanen or Fabbri will be available) and somehow trade up with the Panthers. I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere that they might trade down twice – say with Edmonton, so they can take Ekblad (probably why the Panthers have briefed that they’d take Ekblad with the 1st pick) and then again with us, if they expect Nylander to fall that far. Draisaitl or Bennett would still be a great pick if we were only giving up Garrison + 6.

    Personally I’m as high on Nylander as the Panthers, so if we’re not getting Reinhart, I’d stick at 6.

  • acg5151

    Here is top 3 basically that you can take to bank . Ekblad goes to Florida . Reinhart is on Buffalo’s radar . That is basically your top 2 in most mock drafts anywys . Oilers will draft Draisaitl in third spot . If you want Reinhart you should be looking at dealing with Buffalo I would think .

  • acg5151

    What if we could keep Horvat and trade Edler and the 6th instead? That makes more sense to me. Horvat and Reinhart would give us potentially two centers of the future as opposed to one.

  • andyg

    For all you stat people.

    Is there a way to break down Ehlers numbers for the second half versus the first.

    I no it took him a while to get adjusted to the style over here.

    For the first 20 games he averaged 1.15 points. The last 43 he was 1.883 per game.

  • Barnabas

    I did some research into the coaching situation and feel that Canucks will be looking to a) hire Willie Desjardins as Head Coach and b) hire his assistant Doug Lidster as an assistant to work with Glen G. Doug Lidster has a long history with the Canucks and has done a lot since he retired as a player. With these hirings in place, the coaching situation will be stabilized for some time. As far as the draft, the coaching staff will work really well with young players and will bring with them knowledge that can only help the Canucks. I liked John Stevens and his experience beating San Jose, Anaheim and Chicago would be invaluable – but his style of play may not be best suited to the talent we have. Having watched clips of Willie D. and reading about his work with young players gives me confidence that this is the best possible coach for our group.

    I was not sure where to post this comment so have posted it to this article by Rhys which was a great read. I hope we can get the first and still retain Bo as he would add what we lost in Manny and has a bigger upside than say a Jordan S.

  • yugret

    Reinhart was 18 for the majority of his “17 year old season”. Give Bennett another year in the OHL, since he’s 8 or so months younger, and he’d be in the same 1.75 p/g category. I would like the Canucks to trade up for him though.