2023 NHL Entry Draft

[Mrb1p]

Yet, both are much stronger physically. Brindley is 5'9 .

Yeah he's thin, but he's also 17. Were you built like a tank at 17 ? I know I was, but that's just cause of my superior genetics.

 

[Goldenhands]

Yeah he's thin, but he's also 17. Were you built like a tank at 17 ? I know I was, but that's just cause of my superior genetics.

Always makes me laugh when it comes to your phenomenal genetic, we all know how great you are. Just kidding...

 

[crosbyshow]

Did you guys have seen Leo Carlsson in the playoffs....wowwwww.

He was my second pick in December....he still is

 

[Skip Bayless]

Yager is Pacioretty, that's the comparison. The way he generates offense is literally a copy cat of Pac when he was good. He has the same qualities on the rush, from opening up the ice on the neutral zone to letting go of a shot around the hash.

Same long, explosive stride, same puck handling at high speed, I'd like to say he has a bit less of blinders on but well see when he goes up a level. Defensively, he's very good at applying pressure and at holding out the zone, just like Pac was. Bonus point because Yager can play C too.

He has been compared to Mac (and he likes to compare himself to Mac) but he doesn't have anything near the edges that Nate has and he certainly does not have the east-west game that Mackinnon has.

He's simply going to score goals in the NHL. Safe bet.

Would gladly pick him with FLAs pick.

 

[Goldenhands]

Yeah he's thin, but he's also 17. Were you built like a tank at 17 ? I know I was, but that's just cause of my superior genetics.

Because of your exceptional genetics or only because of your early spurt growth like Barlow? We want a pic to compare beards and want to know if you peaked too early...

 

[Habby Patty]

Way too early? Wdm the drafts in a month and a half

Bro what? The draft is 3 months away?

 

[Mrb1p]

Because of your exceptional genetics or only because of your early spurt growth like Barlow? We want a pic to compare beards and want to know if you peaked too early...

I did lmao

I looked exactly like Barlow at his age.

Bro what? The draft is 3 months away?

Ya bro I cant count, cant fault me.

 

[Goldenhands]

I did lmao

I looked exactly like Barlow at his age.


Ya bro I cant count, cant fault me.

We want pics of your Camaro.

 

[Gael]

Low-key Martineau is doing a much better job than other Quebec based media reporting on prospects and the draft. Can’t stand Leroux.

But is he better than Norman Flynn?

 

[Mrb1p]

We want pics of your Camaro.

Actually co-own a 1980 Camaro with my dad/bro that we rebuilt a few years back

 

[Goldenhands]

Actually co-own a 1980 Camaro with my dad/bro that we rebuilt a few years back

You lucky.

 

[ReHabs]

How good is this Byron M Bader prospect analytics fella? Does anybody know? He runs HockeyProspecting.com and makes neat looking dashboards.

NB Don't search his tweets for Slafkovsky if you don't want to have your day ruined.

 

[NotProkofievian]

How good is this Byron M Bader prospect analytics fella? Does anybody know? He runs HockeyProspecting.com and makes neat looking dashboards.

NB Don't search his tweets for Slafkovsky if you don't want to have your day ruined.

Not very, IMO.

 

[MrNasty]

How good is this Byron M Bader prospect analytics fella? Does anybody know? He runs HockeyProspecting.com and makes neat looking dashboards.

NB Don't search his tweets for Slafkovsky if you don't want to have your day ruined.

His modeling is interesting but not perfect. His modeling had Norlinder as the second coming of Jesus so there is that.

 

[ReHabs]

His modeling is interesting but not perfect. His modeling had Norlinder as the second coming of Jesus so there is that.

I don’t remember if it was this chap or someone else who had Jiricek was the next Erik Karlsson.

I don’t hold it against analytics types when their predictions don’t come true, but their precaution and accuracy should be at a high enough rate to give us confidence.

 

[Jaynki]

How good is this Byron M Bader prospect analytics fella? Does anybody know? He runs HockeyProspecting.com and makes neat looking dashboards.

NB Don't search his tweets for Slafkovsky if you don't want to have your day ruined.

The thinking behind his concept is nice but it has to be improved a lot because if you take his last draft ranking, it is random at best. It is very, very flawed.

Example for Slafkovsky, it did not take into account his performance at the Olympics or the WC, nor did it take into account his performance as an underager in the U18 and U20.

It had Tim Stutzle as the 13th forward in 2020.

The idea of equivalency and that a point in the CHL is worth a fraction of an NHL points and that a point in the liiga is worth another fraction of an NHL points and then using past comparables to draw predictions. It is flawed. Its not something that's illiquid and static and on which we can draw conclusions. Those are nice cards and they are entertaining tho.

Also, his cards are not analytics or advanced stats. If anything, they are very simple and static maths.

A true analysis of gameplays that goes behind simple production showed that despite Kemell killing the Liiga and Slafkovsky underproducing, we could see under the hood who was the best player of them both. Kemell faltered slowly after and Slafkovsky exploded slowly after that. Bader algorithm told you that Kemell and Jordan Dumais were better prospects than Slaf.

 

[MarkovsKnee]

I don’t remember if it was this chap or someone else who had Jiricek was the next Erik Karlsson.

I don’t hold it against analytics types when their predictions don’t come true, but their precaution and accuracy should be at a high enough rate to give us confidence.

They aren't.

 

[Jaynki]

Byron Bader has nothing to do with "analytics". Its quite the opposite actually. Simple formula that draws parralel in a huge database.

 

[ReHabs]

Byron Bader has nothing to do with "analytics". Its quite the opposite actually. Simple formula that draws parralel in a huge database.

If it’s a simple calculation it is pretty much worthless then

 

[Jaynki]

If it’s a simple calculation it is pretty much worthless then

A CHL points = X NHL Points

A Liiga points = Y NHL point

A NCAA = Z NHL point

They then all have an equivalency.

And then a player at 18, or 19, or 20, scores X number of points.

The algorithm then goes in the database to see who scored like that and then it draws equivalency and lay odds based on the past performance of past player.

For example, a player scores 80 points in the CHL in his draft year, 30% of his equivalency ended up NHL players (200+ games) and 8% ended up stars (0.7ppg over their career).

Then his cards will show you 8% chance of being a star and 30% chance of being an NHL player.

Nothing really concrete in my humble and shitty opinion, nothing more than a funny tool.

 

[WeThreeKings]

A CHL points = X NHL Points

A Liiga points = Y NHL point

A NCAA = Z NHL point

They then all have an equivalency.

And then a player at 18, or 19, or 20, scores X number of points.

The algorithm then goes in the database to see who scored like that and then it draws equivalency and lay odds based on the past performance of past player.

For example, a player scores 80 points in the CHL in his draft year, 30% of his equivalency ended up NHL players (200+ games) and 8% ended up stars (0.7ppg over their career).

Then his cards will show you 8% chance of being a star and 30% chance of being an NHL player.

Nothing really concrete in my humble and shitty opinion, nothing more than a funny tool.

Yeah it's just his model but it's always going to have a whole lot of outliers for various reasons.. but whatever he gets attention on it, all good.

Someone like Sawchyn is gonna get wrecked by the model since his ice-time is low as he's on a stacked team.

 

[BeliveauFan4ever]

Yeah it's just his model but it's always going to have a whole lot of outliers for various reasons.. but whatever he gets attention on it, all good.

Someone like Sawchyn is gonna get wrecked by the model since his ice-time is low as he's on a stacked team.

He looked like a smooth puckhandler in the limited time I saw him.

Do you see him going earlier than projected?

 

[morhilane]

Byron Bader has nothing to do with "analytics". Its quite the opposite actually. Simple formula that draws parralel in a huge database.

That's how analytics results are generated.

Sometimes the query isn't simple, but that depends on the data you have available and what you are looking for. Which is actually why Barber's model isn't great, a lots of leagues don't publish ice-time, zone/team usage and there are no way to define opposition quality properly (example: Junior players destroying the bad teams in their league, but struggling against the good ones more than average).

 

[MonkeyBusiness]

Yager's compete level is ok, but nothing special. He doesn't dog it. That's about it.

As for his playmaking, he's not an elite playmaker by any means, he gets the job done, and generally makes the right play.

I don't find him involved enough as a center. He's always F3, and sits back too much in passivity. It doesn't help that Firkus is his linemate this year, and tends to puck hog. They were on separate lines last year. Yager also doesn't bring much of a physical game.

Yager was a winger last season a position that suits him much better. I loved his game way more as a winger than as a center. Way more speed, net drive & more involved in the forechecking as the F1. He would fly up the wing, and would beat defenses wide, and had a more complete scoring game.

At NHL level, I think he gets moved to wing. He'd do well as a right shooting LW. He can shoot in motion, and has a really heavy shot.

I mean, compared to Hoffman (the comparison was made yesterday), he shows a lot more compete. That was more to my point. I agree it could be better, very few players are a Ryan Leonard, for example. Maybe I went a bit too far with the Point comparison, but I do think there are some similarities in their skating, shot, and in terms of their styles. If everything goes right, I could see Yager's ceiling being that of a Point. He says he wants to improve defensively and keep enhancing his playmaking. So if all goes according to plan, I think he could be special. I just don't want him to lose that goal-scoring instinct.

Mrb1p compared him to Patches, which after he said that made a ton of sense, and I can definitely see it. As for him moving to the wing, it could be logical, but he's also a decent faceoff man. So it could be worthwhile for him to keep developing his positioning and defensive instincts at center. He seems like a smart and determined kid, and I wouldn't bet against him.

With all that being said, I still probably wouldn't draft him in the top 10, but if we're sitting at #8, I would take a long look at him. I'm just not sure I'd take him over the Americans or Dvorsky.

 

[Fuonki]

That's how analytics results are generated.

Sometimes the query isn't simple, but that depends on the data you have available and what you are looking for. Which is actually why Barber's model isn't great, a lots of leagues don't publish ice-time, zone/team usage and there are no way to define opposition quality properly (example: Junior players destroying the bad teams in their league, but struggling against the good ones more than average).

The issue is that Baders "model" ignores every little detail except what ends up on the scoreboard in the form of points. It doesn't look at ice-time, shooting percentage, deployment, none of that. There's not even any sort of weighting for primary assists or goals scored. It's basically statwatching taken to the extreme. The only good thing about it is that it shows people how flawed of a metric points are when it comes to defining how good a certain player is.

A player can go on a hot streak and have a 20% oiSH% and have his name appear on the scoreboard every night, while someone who consistently performs better can also just be unlucky and have something closer to a 5% oiSH% while his goalie couldn't even catch a beach ball at the same time. The worse player could have twice as many points while being nowhere as valuable for his team as the guy with half his points totals. Of course this is an extreme example, but the point of analytics is to give us the ability to quickly see much further than just points or even +/-, if anyone still bothers with that pointless stat.

I can see Bader's model having maybe some value when it comes to prospects from the CHL, NCAA and AHL since those have produced hundreds of NHL'ers of varying quality, so there could be some statistical correlation between point production in junior/AHL and future NHL-points, but for European leagues I think it's completely worthless. Before Stützle there hadn't practically been a single "star" forward come from the DEL, so of course the "model" thinks that DEL points don't account for anything in the NHL. There's no nuance or detail to it, just some basic maths that any high school student could do with enough time.

Compare that with someone like Micah (HockeyViz) who gathers just an absurd amount of data for his model that he's built for almost a decade now. You can read about his current xG model from here. I don't pay attention to any of the other hockey analytics stuff available online, but Micah's stuff is by far the best there is.