That Aud Smell

Well, wait. I think that's a false paradigm. Something can be implicit and rational. Or explicit and rational. Or implicit and irrational. Or explicit and irrational. My basic point with bias is that, to me, it connotes a mental inclination being unfair or poorly reasoned, or an implicit inclination that's not capable of withstanding reason. I think you're right, though. Probably, mostly, just bickering about semantics at this point. One additional wrinkle/offering: If JBOT has indeed developed a preference for players from certain systems or leagues and he has done so based on current data, information, and observations, then that, to me, is a preference and not a bias. However, if JBOT continued to hold that preference indefinitely, without any regular and meaningful reassessments of the preference (i.e., fresh looks at more current data, information, and observations), then that would become a bias.

Not for nothing: I don't feel that you ever meaningfully responded to the distinctions I was making about the difference between bias and preference. (If you did and I missed it, sorry.)

he looks a tiny bit like a young Housley in that one shot.

Thanks. My question, to Liger, I think remains: Is average age the way to determine whether Sexton was right to say that he USHL tends to have more 19 and 20 year olds? I'm wondering whether (and, really, why) Sexton would say something like that, if it were demonstrably untrue.

Is average age the way to confirm or dispute what Sexton said? I'm asking.

i have no beef with dougie.

Interesting.

I'm only recently becoming oriented to what the USHL is, frankly. Don't a good number of USHL players move on to NCAA hockey when they're 18-20? And aren't the CHL players basically bound to their club until they're 20 years old (unless they can make an NHL roster)? I'm unclear on how the USHL would have more 19 and 20 year old players than the CHL.

There’s a similar focus over at One Bills Drive.

But neither a CHL player, I don't think. (Or is the QMJHL considered part and parcel of that?) Because they're not so good at the hockey? Or maybe they aged out?

Per Baker: No Hurley, no Karabacek. Both 2nd rounders.

[Foghorn Leghorn voice]: Son, now, son. Son, I sai--now listen, son. Ain't nothin' for us to do with them Dolphins, boyyah, but hate 'em. Unnerstan'?!

But your favourite franchise does! You are the rightful heir to the hatred that we olds maintain for Philadelphia. Please don't leave us hanging.

Outside of rounds 1 and 2, I am thinking that the players chosen develop into NHLers at such low rates and in such seemingly unpredictable ways that the very best thing you can do regarding those rounds is get additional time with the prospects before deciding what to do. Also, I think you may be inadvertently damning with faint praise there.

Is this a bad thing? Why?

Right. Which is why this strikes me as little more than good asset management. The concern could and should come if, in some subsequent draft, the Sabres are picking in the late teens or early 20s of the first round (let's hope!) and they forego a CHL player who's clearly fell to them and instead go with a Swede who most pundits had as a 2nd round value.

my man - i 'splained it to you. it's an homage, not a ruse. it's also being done pursuant to a labatt-oath i pledged to an angry townie on a back road in ridgeway, ontario on a summer's night in the mid 80s. true story. (stoury?) This sort of "bias" is commonly understood and defined to be something that's unfairly prejudicial -- poorly reasoned.

As revised, agreed. 'zactly.

This particular draft? Sample size issues there, yeah? Anyway, there's always more than one way to skin a cat. Just work your system, and make your system work. Nothing I've seen or heard has suggested that Team JBOT would actively avoid a superior CHL talent in favour of a lesser prospect from another league/pool.

To d4rk's point, though -- all bias has a connotation of being unfair or in some way irrational, not grounded in sound thought processes. I don't get the sense that JBOT's biased in this regard. He has views and preferences, but they appear based in reasoned decisions. And I also don't get the sense that he'd pass over a CHL player his scouts had ranked significantly higher in favour of a lesser ranked Swedish prospect, or whatever. But, when things are generally "equal," it sounds like he chooses to skew away from the CHL. That's fine by me. He just needs to make it work.

I think this is right. The eyebrow-arching and even borderline hand-wringing over JBOT's tactic strike me as over-wrought.

Croatia agrees.

Ehhhh. I dunno. That’d be a weird ass look for a venture whose stock and trade is the 1st Amendment and such. (Yes, yes. I know: TBN is not the government. Still.)

He clearly intimated that he focused on non-CHL players in the later rounds, which makes sense — long shots, late bloomers need time to develop. Why not get 4 years instead of 2?

Agreed, agreed.