So...
I really like Larsson but the fact he has 4 more votes than the 2nd closest person for FOURTH best prospect in one of the deepest prospect pools in the league is hilariously wrong. He is not a better prospect than JT Compher, Jake McCabe and Joel Armia. Come on now. Same pack mentality that happened last year.
What would this hypothetical runoff consist of?
Top 2 votegetters head-to-head?
So...
I really like Larsson but the fact he has 4 more votes than the 2nd closest person for FOURTH best prospect in one of the deepest prospect pools in the league is hilariously wrong. He is not a better prospect than JT Compher, Jake McCabe and Joel Armia. Come on now. Same pack mentality that happened last year.
I dunno, I've always thought of Makarov taking over but Ullmark has really impressed me this year. Petersen is WAAAAY to early to even tell.EDIT: Am I the only one who thinks people may be jumping the gun with Ullmark a bit? I mean yeah, he's putting up video game numbers in one of the top 5 leagues in the world as a rookie but still, goalies are such a crap shoot that he could end up as the next lundqvist or a complete and utter bust, I feel much more comfortable projecting the aforementioned players than Ullmark, and would rather wait to start projecting him. Also, Petersen,Makarov and Ullmark is a fantastic trio of goalie prospects.
I can't wait until offensive skill is in vogue again~
let's talk about how larsson's offensive game has thus far translated to nhl play
it should be a short conversation
i dont choose when to rely solely on potential and ignore development flaws/dips
and i dont think 3 seasons of post draft hockey is "insufficient data" with regards to allowing those seasons to impact other areas of "prospect rankings"... i.e. Development, Projection/Probability.
wow, what a stunning argument...
23 points in 25 games in Rochester screams offensive ineptitude.
Let's not act like Larsson is some black hole on offense.
Right. You just take in years worth of data, analyze it, apply some mathematical formulas, and then your supercomputer-of-a-brain spits out objective, fundamental truths directly onto this hockey message board for all of us to quiver in awe of.
Yes, you do choose your opinions. You base them on your unique simplifications of complex data sets, just like the rest of us.
Your opinions are no more valid because you express them with arrogance, they're just more arrogant.
By "insufficient data" I was referring to the fact that the view of Armia has seemingly changed around here based on recent events... obviously. I apologize if I am misunderstanding your poorly worded sentence.
Ooh. Got him. Nice retort. I take back all the other things I said.
Hey Woodhouse, would you be open to a runoff so that our winner has at least a half/third of the votes? Assuming that's necessary.
Well, we didn't have a runoff in the summer poll when Flynn and Tropp had less than a third of the vote and finished within a few votes of each other. I'll readdress it in the morning though, as there's at least 10-15 votes missing, so it's plausible one of Armia or Larsson could separate.I support this idea, accepting that it adds more work for him so no complaints if he doesn't want to bother
Armia, add Bailey.
Well, we didn't have a runoff in the summer poll when Flynn and Tropp had less than a third of the vote and finished within a few votes of each other. I'll readdress it in the morning though, as there's at least 10-15 votes missing, so it's plausible one of Armia or Larsson could separate.
What would this hypothetical runoff consist of?
Top 2 votegetters head-to-head?
Maybe we should just have a Larsson and Armia poll to determine the winner.