Hoss Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 stop saying they'll trade myers for a 1 st round pick, its freeking retarded Yea, don't do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Okay to simplify the chart I just compiled RNH, Yakupov, and the 3 Musketeers for comparison purposes. Some interesting things you may notice, RNH is easily the worst 1st overall pick on this thing. The 2011 draft had Landeskog who had more even strength goals, points and primary points. So all things considered this draft looks to have better potential then both the 2011 and 2012 draft. You can't just look at the points column (at the NHL or junior level) and say "this player is better than that one." Which player can help this team win? That's the only question that Murray needs to answer. His quote on Sabres.com: "“It’s a copycat league, so LA wins the Cup again and the terminology is ‘They’re heavy.’ So you’ve got guys like [Nick] Ritchie and [Jake] Virtanen that are good players that are heavy. Teams are looking for heavy.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 You can look at the full list and see how even strength goals and points and Primary Points per game all have direct correlation to post draft success. For instance Tavares: 1.86ppg, 0.82 evp, 0.55evg, 0.77primary points. Now if you look at his draft class and go down from there, he had the best in almost every category. Sure things like actual play matter a ton, but predicting future NHL success while just looking at junior production in their draft years has a lot of strong correlations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Well didn't know people are so sensitive about the use of that word. "I believe that Ekblad is going to go one and then we pick who we have left; the next guy on our list," Murray said. "If he doesn’t go one, I'd be surprised, I guess, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it." Quotes like this have me think he'll take him if he is available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 You can look at the full list and see how even strength goals and points and Primary Points per game all have direct correlation to post draft success. For instance Tavares: 1.86ppg, 0.82 evp, 0.55evg, 0.77primary points. Now if you look at his draft class and go down from there, he had the best in almost every category. Sure things like actual play matter a ton, but predicting future NHL success while just looking at junior production in their draft years has a lot of strong correlations. Your measure of success is goals and assists. I would suggest a better measure (which is probably unmeasurable) is contribution to team wins. Yakupov will score thirty, but he doesn't play a lick of defense. Does that make Yakupov "successful"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Your measure of success is goals and assists. I would suggest a better measure (which is probably unmeasurable) is contribution to team wins. Yakupov will score thirty, but he doesn't play a lick of defense. Does that make Yakupov "successful"? Sounds dangerously close to WAR metrics in baseball. Unfortunately, the NHL is about 10 years behind MLB in terms of statistical measures to quantify player contribution. I would agree that despite Yakupov's goal and point production, his defensive deficiencies would put him at a nearly 0.0 "WAR". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 (edited) Your measure of success is goals and assists. I would suggest a better measure (which is probably unmeasurable) is contribution to team wins. Yakupov will score thirty, but he doesn't play a lick of defense. Does that make Yakupov "successful"? No, it isn't. I'm not that simplistic. Even Strength Points and Primary Points tell us two separate yet equally important things about a player. I will start with Primary Points first. It shows that a player is actively contributing or is an offensive engine on his team. While I don't personally devalue secondary assists, if a player has only 50% of his points coming from either goals or primary assists it makes me wonder who his teammates are and how much is he riding their production. The second and more interesting metric is EVP. To me it tells me two things, first being that the player has the ability to score at 5v5 and that is where his points came from. The second is more important and subjective as well. If a player has a high percentage of his points coming at even strength and he also has a high number of points I would extrapolate out to say that his line has the ability to control the puck for good stretches in the offensive zone and that he must be decent in the defensive zone otherwise he would get hemmed in there. Now Yakupov has a decent EVP which means that is something you consider but not solely rely on, hence why I said "things like actual play matter a ton" because I recognized both the limits and uses for these statistics. Edited June 20, 2014 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Well didn't know people are so sensitive about the use of that word. Quotes like this have me think he'll take him if he is available. I know Gee' M Tee M (had to use it X) has seemed openly transparent but I think this dude is absolutely manipulating everyone. If he's telling everyone that Ekblad is the consensus #1 and its everyone else after that. I think he's blowing smoke up yer hiney. To me that screams "I want nothing to do with drafting this guy". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I know Gee' M Tee M (had to use it X) has seemed openly transparent but I think this dude is absolutely manipulating everyone. If he's telling everyone that Ekblad is the consensus #1 and its everyone else after that. I think he's blowing smoke up yer hiney. To me that screams "I want nothing to do with drafting this guy". Well then he'll trade ennis for sure :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Well didn't know people are so sensitive about the use of that word. I won't accept that being offended by that word makes one "so sensitive" (i.e., overly so). Whether it's meant that way or not, the word is demeaning and hurtful to a group of people who have done nothing to deserve the same. So, yeah. I recommend everyone jettison it forthwith from their vernacular. I know Gee' M Tee M (had to use it X) has seemed openly transparent but I think this dude is absolutely manipulating everyone. If he's telling everyone that Ekblad is the consensus #1 and its everyone else after that. I think he's blowing smoke up yer hiney. To me that screams "I want nothing to do with drafting this guy". Good call. There's no reason for GM TM to be talking publicly right now about the draft unless it's, at least in part, for the purpose of gaming the market. Maybe that doesn't matter to him, and he's just telling it exactly like it is. But that seems unlikely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Your measure of success is goals and assists. I would suggest a better measure (which is probably unmeasurable) is contribution to team wins. Yakupov will score thirty, but he doesn't play a lick of defense. Does that make Yakupov "successful"? Actually, I think some sort of measuring stick could be applied by taking goals and assists (points) as a numerator and use goals against (+, -) as a denominator multiplied by minutes on the ice and I would bet that indicator would give you a good idea of successful. Datsyuk and Toews should rank pretty high. I won't accept that being offended by that word makes one "so sensitive" (i.e., overly so). Whether it's meant that way or not, the word is demeaning and hurtful to a group of people who have done nothing to deserve the same. So, yeah. I recommend everyone jettison it forthwith from their vernacular. Really in today's day and age that guy can't figure out that word is inappropriate, especially when there are so many alternatives. If he insists on using that word, trust me I can be really insensitive and will respond in kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 (edited) McCann that high? Hmmmm. I really think Ehlers is a gem of a player at 9. Ehlers would be off the board at five if I was picking. I'm not sure if McCann is worth top 10, but he is a pretty complete hockey player in a draft that lacks them and who isn't getting enough attention. I know Gee' M Tee M (had to use it X) has seemed openly transparent but I think this dude is absolutely manipulating everyone. If he's telling everyone that Ekblad is the consensus #1 and its everyone else after that. I think he's blowing smoke up yer hiney. To me that screams "I want nothing to do with drafting this guy". I get this vibe too. He's not lying, he's just putting people's attention away from where he wants it. I think Murray likes Ekblad, but he prefers players who are always looking to make a difference. Aaron's a little too laid back for his taste. I also thought his beware the Russians spiel was also true generally, but calculated to help him get Barbashev, who I firmly believe is the reason he wants to get back into the teens. Edited June 20, 2014 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakish Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I finally finished my model. It ended up being a study in size, I no longer try to get a rating for Bennett and a rating for Ekblad to compare them, I try to get a rating of Bennett as compared to Seguin and one for Ekblad as compared to Pietrangelo, but for everyone. http://www.limedata.us/blog/b40.php I tried to write it so you can form your own conclusions. The model loves most everyone everyone here loves, with only a couple exceptions. For those without the time to read, my conclusions are: Buffalo's board at 2: Reinhart or Bennett Second round: Holmstrom, Glover, Engvall, Sanheim, Kempe, Point Third round: Kirkland, Iverson, Mayo, Amadio, Bristedt, Kontos, Tkachev, Gunnarsson, Wood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Actually, I think some sort of measuring stick could be applied by taking goals and assists (points) as a numerator and use goals against (+, -) as a denominator multiplied by minutes on the ice and I would bet that indicator would give you a good idea of successful. Datsyuk and Toews should rank pretty high. Really in today's day and age that guy can't figure out that word is inappropriate, especially when there are so many alternatives. If he insists on using that word, trust me I can be really insensitive and will respond in kind. Oh please get of your high horse already, and think about people using english as a third language first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I finally finished my model. It ended up being a study in size, I no longer try to get a rating for Bennett and a rating for Ekblad to compare them, I try to get a rating of Bennett as compared to Seguin and one for Ekblad as compared to Pietrangelo, but for everyone. http://www.limedata.us/blog/b40.php I tried to write it so you can form your own conclusions. The model loves most everyone everyone here loves, with only a couple exceptions. For those without the time to read, my conclusions are: Buffalo's board at 2: Reinhart or Bennett Second round: Holmstrom, Glover, Engvall, Sanheim, Kempe, Point Third round: Kirkland, Iverson, Mayo, Amadio, Bristedt, Kontos, Tkachev, Gunnarsson, Wood Wow that's interesting. Good job. How did you calculate the score of each group? I did like the group break down as well. Seems that a couple of players that were highly liked are more riskier picks according to the model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 stop saying they'll trade myers for a 1 st round pick, its freeking retarded Americans are masters at being offended on behalf of others. It's something of a national pastime. ;) http://opinionator.b...type=blogs&_r=0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Americans are masters at being offended on behalf of others. It's something of a national pastime. ;) http://opinionator.b...type=blogs&_r=0 Nowadays everyone gets offended easy, so yeah i call people out for being to sensitive, and in no way was it used to insult a certain group of people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Americans are masters at being offended on behalf of others. It's something of a national pastime. ;) http://opinionator.b...type=blogs&_r=0 No. Some of us just like coming to the defense of those who can't defend themselves because they're incapable or too few in number to make a difference. But sure, play the "America is soft" card. It's the laziest way out of actual compassion. Nowadays everyone gets offended easy, so yeah i call people out for being to sensitive, and in no way was it used to insult a certain group of people. Calling somebody what you did is saying they're acting like the group mentioned. You're attempting to put them down by calling them that. So how is that not insulting that group of people? Using them as an example of a lesser group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I think we can conclude that a word was used by a non-native English speaker (whose English is pretty good, btw -- good job on that) who didn't realize that over time that the word has become disfavored, and move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I think we can conclude that a word was used by a non-native English speaker (whose English is pretty good, btw -- good job on that) who didn't realize that over time that the word has become disfavored, and move on. Didn't know English isn't his first language, seems pretty good when he disagrees strongly with somebody haha. The more you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rakish Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Wow that's interesting. Good job. How did you calculate the score of each group? I did like the group break down as well. Seems that a couple of players that were highly liked are more riskier picks according to the model. Thanks, Liger, A lot of it is the same as the work that you've been posting, trying to separate out the second assist, or talking about the even strength points is trying to get the stats to be fair regardless of the players around you. I think the biggest question is how much does Drouin affect Ehlers, the model thinks a lot, certainly more than the people looking at it by eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Americans are masters at being offended on behalf of others. It's something of a national pastime. ;) http://opinionator.b...type=blogs&_r=0 That's a great piece by Cavett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 (edited) Oh please get of your high horse already, and think about people using english as a third language first. No can do, I have two family members mentally challenged and I play hockey as well as being a fan. The only way to put an end to your bullying (insult) is stand up to it call it out. If I was on the ice with you we could settle it. But fine, I am sensitive to that word, cut the crap. Obviously you must have some underlying emotional issue not to simply issue an apology and move on. Should I continue? Hmm Belgium next to and once part of France, so you might have well just surrender now. Edited June 20, 2014 by Icehole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I keep watching highlights and these 3 forwards all bring something to the game I love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted June 20, 2014 Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 I like this kid's potential. @Sportsnet VIDEO: @DamoSpin sits down with Josh Ho-Sang, a diverse player who's outspoken and an offensive juggernaut http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-draft/ho-sang-an-outspoken-offensive-juggernaut/ #NHLDraft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.