NotProkofievian
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2011
- 24,978
- 25,651
Slaf is no.1 in their ranking
Scandalous, should be ranked 0th. Slafkovsky is so good that he has transcended the natural numbers and needs to be ranked with integers.
Slaf is no.1 in their ranking
I wouldn't ever trust the Slovak media with regards to Slovak players.Not enough to compensate for your Slafkovský fiasco (I saw dedicated articles in Slovak media about your absurd ranking of Slafkovský), but OK. The future will show for all 4 Slovak potential first-rounders.
Which I thought was pretty fair.Slaf is no.1 in their ranking
Big fan of this player. Not big but plays much bigger than he is. Really smart player and finds a way to make an impact. Has some skill too. He made our top 32 (30th) as "B" rated prospect.
He's in our Black Book with a pretty lengthy profile. Not ranked. NI.Sykora's a first-rounder on my list too.
What are your team's thoughts on fellow Slovak Alex Sotek? Did you peg him as draft-worthy?
you are probably confusing Mark Edwards and HockeyProspect.com with someone else.
from what I gather, they use certain mathematical models for their ranking. Not actual scouting. Slaf's weak Liiga production got him to that position. They seem to be completely ignoring his international numbers though.@Mark Edwards: I apologize, but the names are too similar. HockeyProspect.com versus HockeyProspecting.com That borders on copyright infringement by someone. The latter site outrageously ranks Slafkovský at #16 (and I argued with Byron Bader on Twitter about it):
The Hockey Prospecting Top 32 (2022)
Introducing the final Hockey Prospecting rankings of the top 32 for the 2022 draft! The rankings factor in the probabilities from the model, but also age, runway left to improve (i.e., how much tim…hockeyprospecting.com
They seem to be completely ignoring his international numbers though.
Nothing to be outraged about. It's just math.
chill, dudeYou're contradicting yourself. It's bad math if they "completely ignore international numbers". Olympics and World Championships are far more important than silly regular seasons of silly regional leagues, and I told Byron Bader on Twitter so.
I'm sorry, but that's typical overseas arrogance – to be discounting Olympics and World Championships so much as to pretend they don't even exist.
It's precisely this attitude that leads Canada and the US to sabotaging the Olympics and World Championships for decades, and shrug it off as if it's completely fine and natural. What would be unthinkable in international soccer (putting regional leagues over top-level international events), they consider unavoidable in hockey. No, it ain't!
Don't make any draft rankings at all, if your "math model" is flawed to this extreme degree, that a consensus #1 or #2 draft pick lands at #16 on your "list".
it's a model that he makes very clear does not include international tournaments
they are generally regarded as a flash in the pan
they don't match up to larger sample sizes from from full years of league play.
no one else gets credit for their World Juniors or Olympic numbers either, so consider them moot.
the hate Bader has gotten for his 16th ranking on Slaf is hilarious.
His model isn't the Holy Grail - no one ever claimed it was. It's a tool, that can be utilized along with 100 others...
from what I gather, they use certain mathematical models for their ranking. Not actual scouting. Slaf's weak Liiga production got him to that position. They seem to be completely ignoring his international numbers though.
Nothing to be outraged about. It's just math.
No problem.@Mark Edwards: I apologize, but the names are too similar. HockeyProspect.com versus HockeyProspecting.com That borders on copyright infringement by someone. The latter site outrageously ranks Slafkovský at #16 (and I argued with Byron Bader on Twitter about it):
The Hockey Prospecting Top 32 (2022)
Introducing the final Hockey Prospecting rankings of the top 32 for the 2022 draft! The rankings factor in the probabilities from the model, but also age, runway left to improve (i.e., how much tim…hockeyprospecting.com
@Mark Edwards: I apologize, but the names are too similar. HockeyProspect.com versus HockeyProspecting.com That borders on copyright infringement by someone.
No problem.
Never heard of them. We've been around since 2004 so I think it's save to say I didn't copy them.
HockeyProspects.com was gone 18 years ago when i registered our current domain without the sWell, yeah... HockeyProspecting.com certainly seems like a derivate of HockeyProspect.com (by domain name only, I mean) rather than vice versa. I made sure to look up HockeyProspects.com as well, but that domain is yet to be taken, maybe someone third, and then utter confusion will ensue and everyone will get confused for everyone else. (I hope not, of course.)
HockeyProspects.com was gone 18 years ago when i registered our current domain without the s
Aha, time for me to maliciously domain name squat on hockeyingprospect.com. I'll have you know I have Slafkovsky unranked.@Mark Edwards: I apologize, but the names are too similar. HockeyProspect.com versus HockeyProspecting.com That borders on copyright infringement by someone. The latter site outrageously ranks Slafkovský at #16 (and I argued with Byron Bader on Twitter about it):
The Hockey Prospecting Top 32 (2022)
Introducing the final Hockey Prospecting rankings of the top 32 for the 2022 draft! The rankings factor in the probabilities from the model, but also age, runway left to improve (i.e., how much tim…hockeyprospecting.com
I can see Coyotes pick him with one of their late 1sts. If not, he won't last long tommorow, probably gone around pick #40 - 45.Any chance a team takes him in the first round tonight?
Slovak here, on a NHL team he's a 3-4th liner, extremely good forechecker and backskater, huge enthusiasm and energy every shift.The Rangers really need guys that can skate. Thats our biggest need as an organization. Too many slow guys, so this does help in a big way there. Does he have high offensive upside? I'll defer to the Slovaks that know his game better, but I'd say he's probably most likely a player for the 4th line with 3rd line as a best case scenario. Either way, you take a good 4th line winger in the second round. I had him 76 and we took him 63, so a little higher than I had him. There were other players I would've selected, but not a crazy pick.