So you wouldn't pay Zacha $3.5 per? C'mon.
Prospect Info: Devils picking 4th Overall.
- Thread starter Emperoreddy
- Start date
- Status
7% Star probabilty lmao, give me a break. Owen Power is, and will be a stud. Use your eyes and watch the games. will he be a top 5 defensmen in the NHL? I dont know, maybe not. Drafting is about projection and hes just as close to a projected #1 defensman as any Ive seen in the last 5 years, so if im Buffalo im grabbing him and not thinking twice.
Merrills Marauders
Registered User
To reply to this - I’d like to make sure you aren’t insinuating I (or anyone else) is being “hoodwinked” by fancy numbers and analytics. To utilize models from Dom or Bader or Will Scouch is to look at one piece of the decision-making process. It seems you on behalf of the eye-test community have mandated that anyone with a proprietary model be excommunicated from any discussion on a given prospect, and that’s just equally as myopic as saying just watch the players and ignore any underlying advanced statistics that feed into these models.
I'm cool with the underlying stat's, but the models is where I tend to have issues. For one, I don't know what goes into the models. But more importantly the results seem to not make sense far too often.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
I wouldn’t give him a dime more than that. Would definitely rather trade him than sign him for more than 4 million.
I'm saying you need to discern actual draft analysts -- like Dom or Scouch -- from snake oil salesmen who do not even bother watching the prospects, like Bader. I am not a member of the "eye-test community", whatever that means. I'll listen to anyone who helps me get a better read on the prospects. If I can learn one single detail from a 8 minute Scouch video, it was worth it.
It's not that analytics are wrong or right. Every tool is useful in its own way. I've never spoken out against them. I have, however, spoken out against charlatans who know nothing about hockey, like Byron Bader, and will continue to do so. An attack on him is not, I repeat not, an attack on the analytics community. Just because someone employs analytics in their data model does not mean that every person who believes in analytics needs to defend them, and I'm not sure why it always turns out that way. Just a few posts above this, I defended Dom and Scouch and now you're writing with the insinuation that I was discounting them, because I insulted Bader, who is essentially a scam-artist. If someone says "John Chayka was a lousy GM" -- they are not insulting analytics, they are insulting John Chayka, who was in fact a lousy GM.
I consistently defend draft writers I usually disagree with -- so long as I feel they put in the work. I will continue to do this, as I believe my own opinion is just one of many which should be considered. I think we need to stop being so over-sensitive about defending a member of our belief systems, especially if they are poor examples of those belief systems. Byron Bader is helping nobody except for Byron Bader.
No - he is not a good player at even strength clearly and eventually he will be a 2nd unit PP guy.
Someday they will find out that snake oil has anti-inflammatory properties and you will be very embarrassed.
What are his numbers with Nico and Bratt? I’d like to see them all stay healthy and play together for an extended run before we close the book on Zacha.
He was our best PP producer this season, and the best producer amongst returning players over the last 3 seasons. And as he was getting more pp toi late in this past season his production really started to take off.
He should be getting more PP time moving fwd, not less.
It's also a good bet he is going to perform quite well if he remains on Nico's wing.
SteveCangialosi123
Registered User
Zacha produced at a top line rate playing with those guys.
- Dec 20, 2018
- 22,774
- 50,957
Analytics are data and the data we’re discussing literally involves actions that occur on the ice. We’re often using the NHL data but guys like Scouch or Corey Sznajder etc watch video and gather the data themselves. As do teams and private companies with proprietary data. These are events on the ice, the idea being if you get more information about what is happening then you can understand why it is happening and even figure out ways to predict what will happen in the future or figure out ways to make the things you want to have happen, happen more. Plenty of NHL coaches use analytics. It’s not that alien a concept.
Analytic departments on teams all have video guys who break down a ton of video. An interest in data and analytics doesn’t mean gouge your eyes out in order to avoid the “eye test”. The benefits of quantifying things is that you aren’t going on random things you picked up about players.
Having any sort of structured scouting system, where you examine the same elements in every prospects in a detailed way is still allowing you to quantify your judgements when you compare them. You’re analyzing them.
I’m interested in the Prospecting model, to a certain extent since I don’t know how much he shares how it works, because numerous people in the public analytic scene have taken a swing at making a predictive models for prospects. It’s very difficult and complicated for obvious reasons. And will always be limited in it’s helpfulness.
I think analytics are essential but it’s a broad category (that’s weirdly slandered at times) and it’s constantly in flux and developed. That’s a good aspect of it, models and approaches can always be improved, added to, shifted, reconceived etc. It’s all very mutable, whatever is proving to be useful or interesting is what matters.
Scouting is being changed by the influence of psychologists and biologists too. And presumably all sorts of all crap that I probably don’t know about.
Zajacs Bowl Cut
Lets Go Baby
lets not do the Zacha debate in this thread please
Analytics are more then just data. Analytics combines data so as to make predictions. How they combine that data can be biased and faulty.
The data I understand. It's there. Absolutely useful.
The models? Without knowing what goes into them, and at what weighting, I can't help but be skeptical.
He was also expected to score less while on the ice relative to the rest of the team.
On a good team, he is not a PP1 player. Once we have more depth, what do you think is going to happen to his production without that time if he continues to be a poor even strength player?
- Dec 20, 2018
- 22,774
- 50,957
The models are just using that data though and the public analytic guys show their models and they show how they test how predictive they are. There’s a lot of discussion about the modeling and thinking behind it available publicly for a lot of this.
Dom from the Athletic is very open about how his model compares, better or worse, to other predictions of scores or pre-season picks of point totals. Teams and proprietary companies won’t tell you anything but public guys are mostly pretty open. And there are tons of papers on this too. It’s not a big mystery, there are intro articles and a lot of information out there. I can completely understand if you’re not interested in researching it but there’s no reason to dismiss out of hand without looking it more.
And if you’re not going to analyze the data, what do you with it?
Guys have posted some WAR #'s, which give me plenty of reason to dismiss that model.
It's true I'm not going to do the research which explains why Johnsson's PK and PP WAR #'s are so good. But if a supporter of those models wants to do the work I'd be willing to read the summary.
Dom is great. I rarely agree with him and spelling his last name gives me a headache, but I have nothing but props for the work he puts into his analyses and his constant and open desire to improve his models.
Merrills Marauders
Registered User
Wheeler: NHL Draft's top 100 prospects — Michigan players top the 2021 ranking
Wheeler released his top 100 today. Not sure how much of this I can post, but the interesting ones in his top 10 are Kent Johnson at 2, Clarke 3, Hughes 7.
Wheeler released his top 100 today. Not sure how much of this I can post, but the interesting ones in his top 10 are Kent Johnson at 2, Clarke 3, Hughes 7.
AfroThunder396
[citation needed]
Pronman just put Cossa at #10 in his rankings (above Wallstadt, who he put at #11). If he's available at 29 I would take him on sheer value alone but it seems like riser and I'd be pretty astonished if he made it past 15 at this point.
- Status
