Five things I need to see to validate the Sabres being fully in on analytics

[Der Jaeger]

Posted this on another site:

 

There’s a happy medium here. Analytics and visual scouting have to go hand-in-hand. Having worked in a scouting department, there’s plenty analytics can’t determine.

A player can have elite play driving analytics. But if he’s horrible in the room, a distraction, etc, I don’t want him. And analytics can’t tell you that type of stuff. You need to go see a game, talk to coaches, etc

Conversely, a player can have intangibles which make Toews look like weak sauce. But if they are getting caved every shift, then they don’t have a place on the team.

Has to be in balance.

[Hoss]

If we’re actually comparing profiles I figured it’d be useful for everyone to have something to go off.

[Der Jaeger]

Just now, Hoss said:

If we’re actually comparing profiles I figured it’d be useful for everyone to have something to go off.

Beniers may rival Marchand.

[Pimlach]

Interesting dialog.  I know I don’t know who to pick.  I don’t study the film enough and the videos we see are promotional.   Scouts know about the person, the work habits, and more.  I am counting on Karmanos and Ace Ventura to  guide KA   

I’ve said it before, if Power can be like Hedman, or any type of Norris Candidate, I would pick him first.  I mention Hedman as a comparable because of his size, but asking for the same offensive production is a lot   Just be a force that controls the flow out of our zone.   

Remember, it took years for Hedman to become the Hedman of today, which is 1 Norris in 12 years.  I like that Power has committed to another year in NCAA.  That will help him a lot.  I’m fine with that   Granato has enough kids to worry about.  

Also regarding Ekblad.  He is still a young defenseman and already was getting Norris attention.  What’s not to like?  The recent cup winners all seem to have great/hot goalies and a Norris type defenseman.   Some have elite centers, some teams have a few centers in the next tier down.  

Edited July 12, 2021 by Pimlach

[Curt]

54 minutes ago, Der Jaeger said:

Beniers may rival Marchand.

Absolutely.  Extremely punchable face.

Edited July 12, 2021 by Curt

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Help me @Thorny,  what was that?   I think I clicked on it by mistake?   Who was it?  

Our very own @rakish. It's a good illustration of the importance of context when looking at, well any stat really (and also a good illustration of some things I've been well off base about, but we needn't get into that)

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Our very own @rakish. It's a good illustration of the importance of context when looking at, well any stat really (and also a good illustration of some things I've been well off base about, but we needn't get into that)

The idea that teams don't look at context and just have some raw numbers they use continues to be hilarious

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, Hoss said:

Aaron Ekblad was considered a contender for the Norris Trophy at 25 years old this year prior to being hurt. He has been very good since coming into the league.

Seth Jones is being railroaded by the out of touch analytics community (analytics are great, clinging to a few metrics to claim a very good player is bad is foolish) despite being a Norris Contender in multiple recent seasons.

I’d be happy with those results. The anti-defense because it isn’t fun bias is strong.

I agree with the gist of what you are saying but I know you know his "floor" isn't Ekblad though like pi said, considering your arguments re: Beniers and how projections work. 

As to the bold, I'm sure some of that is going on, but there's definitely a reason why D men rarely go 1OA and it's not just an anti-fun bias. This isn't an argument for not taking Power, mind you, merely an argument for why you generally hope the best available at 1 is a F. 

2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Does Dahlin still profile out to James Norris?

Chuck norris that profile out the window 

[Pimlach]

2 hours ago, Der Jaeger said:

Beniers may rival Marchand.

Then I like him.  

[Thorny]

2 hours ago, Hoss said:

If we’re actually comparing profiles I figured it’d be useful for everyone to have something to go off.

This was excellent, full marks 

4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The idea that teams don't look at context and just have some raw numbers they use continues to be hilarious

Well ya, but I think it's an affliction that's known to affect fans en masse, and as you mentioned earlier about Botterill, he "couldn't see the forest through the trees", which is pretty much the same thing: failure to recognize context 

[Pimlach]

7 minutes ago, Thorny said:

I agree with the gist of what you are saying but I know you know his "floor" isn't Ekblad though like pi said, considering your arguments re: Beniers and how projections work. 

As to the bold, I'm sure some of that is going on, but there's definitely a reason why D men rarely go 1OA and it's not just an anti-fun bias. This isn't an argument for not taking Power, mind you, merely an argument for why you generally hope the best available at 1 is a F. 

 

I think sometimes teams (and fans) give up on defenseman, they take awhile to peak.  That’s why keeping a stable FO in place helps. In St Louis, Pietrangelo had his detractors when he was young, but they loved him when they won the cup and sorely missed him last year.  

[Thorny]

4 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

I think sometimes teams (and fans) give up on defenseman, they take awhile to peak.  That’s why keeping a stable FO in place helps. In St Louis, Pietrangelo had his detractors when he was young, but they loved him when they won the cup and sorely missed him last year.  

They are obviously very valuable still it's just that forwards tend to statistically impact the game a little bit more 

on average 

[inkman]

22 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

The idea that teams don't look at context and just have some raw numbers they use continues to be hilarious

See Edmonton 😀

On 7/11/2021 at 9:34 AM, rakish said:

19 minutes, pretty brutal.

I should have removed @Randall Flagg from my list of people I read, I think it would have made him laugh.

Did I just get major trolled?  Don’t mind the discourse. Glad you could bring some data to my near worthless opinion.  

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I wouldn't draft Power first overall.

Okay, fair enough. I would. I have said that since the draft talk first started and nothing has convinced me that's wrong. 

It doesn't matter, but you argued with me before about it (draft rankings thread maybe? or one of the specific players threads, can't remember which) and to close the argument I asked you to be definitive and say "I wouldn't draft Power" but at that time you surprised me and said you would. You later went all in on Beniers, now it's Eklund . That's all fine, but maybe you're spinning yourself in circles reading too many rankings and reports? Just saying. Again, doesn't matter. You're free to change your mind.

So, to pin you down again, if you're GM, #1 pick, you're taking Eklund, correct? 

and I'd assume your ranking is 1. Eklund  2. Beniers 3. Power  is that about right or you still undecided?

Mine is 1. Power 2. Beniers  absolutely solid as a rock on 1 2 . After that I'm a little less certain but 3. Hughes 4. Clarke 5. Eklund and the wild card is Mason McTavish who really intrigues me and if we got that Vancouver pick or something and took him I'd be really really happy because he might turn out to be the best player in this draft in the long run. Not 100% sure, many IFs but maybe. 

 

[LGR4GM]

29 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Okay, fair enough. I would. I have said that since the draft talk first started and nothing has convinced me that's wrong. 

It doesn't matter, but you argued with me before about it (draft rankings thread maybe? or one of the specific players threads, can't remember which) and to close the argument I asked you to be definitive and say "I wouldn't draft Power" but at that time you surprised me and said you would. You later went all in on Beniers, now it's Eklund . That's all fine, but maybe you're spinning yourself in circles reading too many rankings and reports? Just saying. Again, doesn't matter. You're free to change your mind.

So, to pin you down again, if you're GM, #1 pick, you're taking Eklund, correct? 

and I'd assume your ranking is 1. Eklund  2. Beniers 3. Power  is that about right or you still undecided?

Mine is 1. Power 2. Beniers  absolutely solid as a rock on 1 2 . After that I'm a little less certain but 3. Hughes 4. Clarke 5. Eklund and the wild card is Mason McTavish who really intrigues me and if we got that Vancouver pick or something and took him I'd be really really happy because he might turn out to be the best player in this draft in the long run. Not 100% sure, many IFs but maybe. 

 

No I haven't and that's not accurate. You suffer from the same problem a lot of ppl on this board and elsewhere suffer. You get a prospect in your mind you like and then you stick with it until hell freezes over. 2 month ago was early in the process of reading reports and putting together the list of names that might be viable guys to do more research on. Since Power and Beniers were talked about most, followed by Guenther, Hughes, Clarke that is where I started. Once I complete that I went on to Eklund, Lysell, Svechkov, etc... 

You are implying that I suddenly changed my mind because I can't handle it, just like Hoss did when he implied some were "bored" of Power. Instead what you witnessed was the completion of draft guides, lists, and scouting report which gave a clearer picture. On top of that you get another 2 months of looking at the numbers. The result is simple, William Eklund IMPO is the best player in this draft. You're implying some type of flip flopping garbage which is not true but instead is the naturally conclusion to the process I use when I go through this stuff. It is why when the draft thread first pops up, usually in November or sooner, I barely comment. There is nothing to even talk about yet. The WJC20 gives you something to start putting things together but then you can ignore a lot of stuff until March. Watch games where you can, have a spreadsheet of notes but really don't form any deep opinions. 

You asked if I would draft Power, yes. He is in my top 10, but he is not in my top 3. Scouch today firmed up his spot which was between 4-6. 

Edited July 12, 2021 by LGR4GM

[dudacek]

4 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Does Dahlin still profile out to James Norris?

Yes.

Cigar-chomping scotch-sipping cattle and grain baron with a corrupt hold over the NHL

[PerreaultForever]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

No I haven't and that's not accurate. You suffer from the same problem a lot of ppl on this board and elsewhere suffer. You get a prospect in your mind you like and then you stick with it until hell freezes over. 2 month ago was early in the process of reading reports and putting together the list of names that might be viable guys to do more research on. Since Power and Beniers were talked about most, followed by Guenther, Hughes, Clarke that is where I started. Once I complete that I went on to Eklund, Lysell, Svechkov, etc... 

You are implying that I suddenly changed my mind because I can't handle it, just like Hoss did when he implied some were "bored" of Power. Instead what you witnessed was the completion of draft guides, lists, and scouting report which gave a clearer picture. On top of that you get another 2 months of looking at the numbers. The result is simple, William Eklund IMPO is the best player in this draft. You're implying some type of flip flopping garbage which is not true but instead is the naturally conclusion to the process I use when I go through this stuff. It is why when the draft thread first pops up, usually in November or sooner, I barely comment. There is nothing to even talk about yet. The WJC20 gives you something to start putting things together but then you can ignore a lot of stuff until March. Watch games where you can, have a spreadsheet of notes but really don't form any deep opinions. 

You asked if I would draft Power, yes. He is in my top 10, but he is not in my top 3. Scouch today firmed up his spot which was between 4-6. 

Well I didn't "imply" any of that and you're far too "touchy" as they used to say. Relax. You're way too tense.

I did my research, I saw what I saw, I inferred what I inferred, I used my lifetime of hockey watching as a guide and made my mind up. I got other things to do besides look at draft numbers and stats for months on end. KA can do that, he gets paid for it, not me. You can do that if you got nothing better to do, hope you're having fun.

So once again, it's almost here. WHO are you picking if it was up to you? Is it Eklund? Final answer as they say in the game show.........

To me, Power is the best player in this draft and he will be a huge impact player. 

Help me out though, I'm old. I know IMHO is in my humble opinion, what's "IMPO"   professional? pugilistic? punk rock? what's the P stand for? 

[LGR4GM]

39 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Well I didn't "imply" any of that and you're far too "touchy" as they used to say. Relax. You're way too tense.

I did my research, I saw what I saw, I inferred what I inferred, I used my lifetime of hockey watching as a guide and made my mind up. I got other things to do besides look at draft numbers and stats for months on end. KA can do that, he gets paid for it, not me. You can do that if you got nothing better to do, hope you're having fun.

So once again, it's almost here. WHO are you picking if it was up to you? Is it Eklund? Final answer as they say in the game show.........

To me, Power is the best player in this draft and he will be a huge impact player. 

Help me out though, I'm old. I know IMHO is in my humble opinion, what's "IMPO"   professional? pugilistic? punk rock? what's the P stand for? 

You did imply that. You and Hoss have both implied it or basically said it recently that ppl got bored of Power and went looking for issues. That isn't the case but what is the case is you made your minds up about Power and that's it, there's not logical conversation because if I mention Power in any way, it is "well rabble rabble grrr". 

IMPO stands more In My Personal Opinion. 

And I do have fun looking at the numbers because they tell you a lot about what a player is actually doing and if the eyes don't match the numbers or the numbers don't match the eyes... there's a problem. In Power's case, the eyes and numbers match, they just aren't as grandiose as you and Hoss are making Power out to be. Now is where both of you jump in because I didn't say "Power is the greatest thing since Betty White". 

[Hoss]

When I started the draft process I thought Beniers and Guenther were very close with Power very slightly ahead of them. Guenther has definitely taken a dip for me and is only in the picture if we end up with Columbus’ pick at 5 or similar. I said from the beginning Eklund and Kent Johnson are my “I have a feeling” guys who could end up being stars we never really saw coming.

Now while I still view Power as the first pick I prefer Eklund right behind him with Beniers barely trailing him.

The thing about prospects is there are things we can never know because a lot of development comes after the draft and that’s something that will never be predicted.

[rakish]

3 hours ago, inkman said:

See Edmonton 😀

Did I just get major trolled?  Don’t mind the discourse. Glad you could bring some data to my near worthless opinion.  

Trolled? No disagreed with. And I value your opinion very highly. Next time you drive to Florida crash here for the night, my girlfriend has a bigass house. And now that Virginia has gone legal, there's something growing in the backyard for company.

[SDS]

10 minutes ago, rakish said:

Trolled? No disagreed with. And I value your opinion very highly. Next time you drive to Florida crash here for the night, my girlfriend has a bigass house. And now that Virginia has gone legal, there's something growing in the backyard for company.

I love tomato sandwiches. 

[rakish]

3 minutes ago, SDS said:

I love tomato sandwiches. 

First tomato came yesterday, tonight it's bread, cheese, tomato, sausage, olive paste, and wine, I'm starting to get full

[rakish]

6 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Help me @Thorny,  what was that?   I think I clicked on it by mistake?   Who was it?  

My girlfriend's parents acted exactly the same way when we first met

[rakish]

30 minutes ago, SDS said:

I love tomato sandwiches. 

Now that I have a paddleboard, I don't even fear hosting someone's teenage children. 

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

When I started the draft process I thought Beniers and Guenther were very close with Power very slightly ahead of them. Guenther has definitely taken a dip for me and is only in the picture if we end up with Columbus’ pick at 5 or similar. I said from the beginning Eklund and Kent Johnson are my “I have a feeling” guys who could end up being stars we never really saw coming.

Now while I still view Power as the first pick I prefer Eklund right behind him with Beniers barely trailing him.

The thing about prospects is there are things we can never know because a lot of development comes after the draft and that’s something that will never be predicted.

See this? I have no problem with this and it's fine by me. I don't agree but whatever. My issue with you and others is that if I explain my disagreement it turns ugly fast.