ottawa
Avatar of the Year*
Meh, Marchand is fine. Small players like Caufield pay more attention to physical players to avoid dangerous situations.
F Cole Caufield - USNTDP Juniors, USHL (2019, 15th, MTL)
- Thread starter RedWingsAllTheWay
- Start date
- Status
Meh, Marchand is fine. Small players like Caufield pay more attention to physical players to avoid dangerous situations.
ottawa
Avatar of the Year*
ImNeverWrong
THE HF ALPHA
- Jan 18, 2018
- 2,268
- 1,849
These same people voting for the selke..the same people that left miro heiskanen off the ballot?
didimentionlarseller
Snipers are a dying bread in the NHL
Meh, Marchand has created a free pass for himself over the years by being a loose cannon. Smart. The guy can hack a goalie or punch a player in the back of the head and opposing players will just watch, but a few players refuse to fall under his spell and destroy him physically.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 27,216
- 35,013
Could be a steal at 15, or could be Nigel Dawes 2.0 who just couldnt handle the size in the NHL (but dominated everywhere else). We'll see in a few years.
EveryDay
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2009
- 13,324
- 5,531
On the penalty kill, sure but that's it.
When did Eller receive enough vote to finish 7th for the Selke? When did he notch 50+ pts in a season?
jj cale
Registered User
I was watching Caufield rip it up in one game at the under 18's and commented on how it would be great for the Habs to nab this kid in the draft ad an American poster quickly chimed in that I was dreaming if I thought he would be there when the Habs picked at 15 and I said yeah you are most likely right.
Well, here he is.........................I'm pretty happy, you watch him play and the ability is so bloody obvious.We all know why he fell and it will be a question mark until he does it in the n.h.l but damn, that kid can f***ing skate and score, and he knows how to get open too!! real good compete level as well.
I am optimistic as hell.
Well, here he is.........................I'm pretty happy, you watch him play and the ability is so bloody obvious.We all know why he fell and it will be a question mark until he does it in the n.h.l but damn, that kid can f***ing skate and score, and he knows how to get open too!! real good compete level as well.
I am optimistic as hell.
Merci Saku
Registered User
Yes those same people,
That doesn’t take away what Danault has done since he’s a Habs
didimentionlarseller
Snipers are a dying bread in the NHL
if you want to use criteria like that to judge players then when do you anticipate Danault scoring a cup winning goal?
ImNeverWrong
THE HF ALPHA
- Jan 18, 2018
- 2,268
- 1,849
Not downplaying danault, as people are clearly being ignorant but what a bunch of morons in the media think isnt a good argument. Just saying. Haha. But yes for sure danault has proven to be really really freaking good. An ideal 2 way no.3 center for habs going forward.
ProspectsFanatic
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2012
- 3,699
- 2,428
Legend123
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2016
- 9,830
- 4,967
William H Bonney
Registered User
My guess would be that Caufield would have been an elite goal scorer in the OHL because he's an elite goal scorer. How many exact goals that would have been is something none of us can predict.
Canadienna
Registered User
- Jan 27, 2015
- 12,074
- 16,528
Have no fear.
Kotkaniemi's no look passes will compliment that one-t.
One thing that's hard to tell without live scouting is seeing how his defensive game is. How well he helps out the D, and his reaction speed when trying to break out.
ProspectsFanatic
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2012
- 3,699
- 2,428
Cool, I hope no one ever makes a prediction on anything because none of us can predict things with certainty and that people write walls of text explaining why prediction can't be perfectly accurate if one dare to make one. Why don't you dare simply saying a number instead of going circles?
William H Bonney
Registered User
I'm sorry I don't think your "software" has any value. The problem isn't predictions. It's predictions without logic, reason, and evidence and acting as if you've produced something reputable or scientific. If you think it's fun to guess at his hypothetical OHL numbers like you're playing EHM or fantasy hockey, go for it. But don't act surprised if people don't grant your predictions any respect if they don't know how you arrived at them. It doesn't really matter to me if you think he'd have scored 40, 50, or 72 goals. The interesting part to know is why you think he'd end up with whatever made up number you choose. I don't "dare simply saying a number" because there's no value in doing so.
You seem to love guessing. Wouldn't it be more interesting to predict his upcoming points at Wisconsin? At least you can validate your work later.
Scuba-Steve
Registered User
I really like Eller but Danault has developed into a better center than Eller ever was or ever will be...
He's one of the most underated player in the league IMO. He always gets the toughest matchup and still produces over 50 pts with little to no PP time.
ProspectsFanatic
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2012
- 3,699
- 2,428
I would like you to say a number because I would know the discrepancy of our disagreement. From my perspective, you do not hold any opinion other than me being wrong. Don't tell me my opinion is wrong if you aren't willing to give yours (and yes even though it can't have perfect predicting value, you have an opinion, you chose not to share it, or you refuse to think it through because you ardently want to avoid to share it).
I agree, my methodology indeed is not "scientific" in any absolute sense, but you or scouts gut feeling based on the information they have and their ability to reason isn't scientific with absolute predicting value either, so that point isn't proving that my methodology doesn't have any value, neither does it suggest that it has less predicting value than the standard approach that wouldn't use computational assistance.
Why would I attempt to project points in the OHL? There is no value in trying to predict what numbers he would have had in the OHL supposedly? If you can't compare stats between leagues by adjusting them, stats have absolutely no value. 100 points in the OHL is as good as 2 points in the AJHL because no one knows what the player in the AJHL would have done in the OHL, you just can't tell with certainty, is 2 points in the AJHL worth less than 100 points? "that is something none of us can predict" with certainty, "you can't extrapolate", one simply can't argue with that, and if you argue with that you are necessarily wrong because you just can't know for sure, you might be overlooking so many things, therefore, I am so wise to restrain from having any form of opinion. JFL. How dare you assume that "Harder league automatically means less individual points." or vice versa. Everyone does this all the time in their head because it gives more perspective to those numbers. Don't need to discredit things through disingenuous reasonings because it happens to come out of my software which you don't believe in (and also, I am quite sure, because you happened to disagree with the results).
Your point that you can't respect the prediction it produces because you don't know how I got there is a valid point. Some appear to give it some level of respect based on the lists it produces (other like you do not, which is fair), time will give us the answer whether it has predicting value or not because the results will speak for themselves. The prediction about Caufield in the OHL could be wrong but it could also certainly be telling within a certain range if it is well programmed. I'd like to tell you how it exactly get to those numbers, but as you can't tell me exactly and with certainty why you prefer the color blue over the color red because there are too many variables to take into account throughout your life, I can't tell you how because they are literally dozen upon dozen of formulas that have been written in the algorithm, so I couldn't tell you the exact "reason, logic" unless I gave you the algorithm, I could develop more to an extent if you are genuinely interested and have questions about it though. (it can't do for Wisconsin)
I guess it is better to leave it there, it would be preferable to look back on this years from now at this point because, as I said, the results will show whether the software has reasonably strong predicting value or it is poorly programmed which leads to erroneous predictions, at this point none of us has the definitive answer on this. Having said that, you still could have typed of a couple of numbers on your keyboard.
Last edited:
William H Bonney
Registered User
You continue to argue a point I've yet to make. I've never claimed your point projection was wrong. It could be high, low, or spot on. Like you, I have no idea. The issue is that it's based on nothing documented. Your "software" as reasoning is no different than if I countered your projections with my own and my only reasoning was my "instincts" - everyone would rightly be dismissive if I provided nothing else to substantiate my opinion. No one expects perfect certainty or prognostication. We're all going to be wrong on many occasions. No one expects you to refrain from opinions or projections. But we should expect logic, reasoning, and evidence, and when your projections lack them and are challenged, it's even more suspect when all we get is indignation instead. The difference is when scouts or others have opinions, they provide supporting evidence, accuracy irrelevant. You haven't. If you think Caufield would have scored 40 goals in the OHL last season, great. Why? I can't prove your numbers wrong any more than you could prove they're accurate. And years of results won't give you the ability to look back and prove it either. But at least we could discuss your reasoning.
ProspectsFanatic
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2012
- 3,699
- 2,428
When you said that my prediction was in "tin foil hat territory" and provides several points to support this, I wasn't supposed to assume that you thought my projection was wrong? Like what? While clearly suggesting that he is an elite goal scorer and should be higher. This seems like a covered up revision to still appear as if you are somehow right now that many things that you said have been addressed.
It is just a GUESS body. We should expect that I provide "logic, reasoning, and evidence". What? I was supposed to write a well a text along my guess in my OP, stop being disingenuous. It is mainly adjusted with league difficulty and I said average linemates instead of that exceptional stacked team. Do I need a scientific paper with it? Or are you just on me because you want to dismiss that comes it on the program I built? I am HFBoards can I just be entitled to have an opinion. I hope every other time someone makes any form of projection/guess like projects a prospect to be 2nd liner in the NHL with whatever floor you would ask strong supportive logic, reasoning, and evidence to stay consistent. For now, if you want more you can look at how players from different leagues and different quality of linemates compare and if it seems to make reasonable read I guess. You can ask me more precise questions if you want, like yes I entered USHL, NCAA, and international play separately to come to Caufield final score instead of assuming it wasn't and makes my guess "thin foil hat territory" and that I am the one making false assumptions.
"Years of results won't give you the ability to look back and prove it either." Yes, years from now we will know if the software projected within reasonable range OHL players correctly relative to USDP players, adjusted with teammate support, (and more broadly the strength of all of the results) since I am getting to a large sample size over the years, therefore we will know within a reasonable level of certainty if the equivalent conversion were accurate (the numbers I gave in the OHL with average linemates for Caufield give him the same final score).
Last edited:
William H Bonney
Registered User
Yes, your projection is likely wrong because it's statistically highly unlikely that you would accurately project Caufield's goals, assists, and points perfectly. That's a sound statistical foundational theory to adopt and one I'd stand by.
I have yet to hypothesize OHL numbers for him, despite your pleading. Yes, I think it's fair to suggest he is an elite goal scorer. That is irrespective of how many OHL goals one may hypothesize for him in a season that will never happen. What I did was provide a short list of assumptions you may be overlooking because you're the one that theorized his point totals would go down after I claimed your "software" was tin foil hat territory:
I understand why you want to move the goal posts now, but I never "clearly suggest[ed]" that his projected OHL goal totals "should be higher." I don't know how I could make it any clearer for you than in the opening two sentences of my response to your aforementioned post, which was the first inkling of any methodology to your point projections.
By all means though, assume way.
You're not required to do anything. And you're entitled to your opinion. And I'm entitled to my opinion of your opinion. I typically do ask them for their supporting evidence, especially if they claim to have some type of proprietary software.
Not unless you've successfully built regression models to unpack the relevant variables necessary to accurately predict future production of a player as they move through different leagues (i.e. NTDP -> NCAA -> NHL) and done so successfully for a multitude of possible development paths. Hence why I asked if you could predict his points next year at Wisconsin. And you said you can't. Because if you did that scale, you could reasonably and accurately predict that 72 goals in the NTDP -> X goals in the NCAA -> Y goals in the NHL, at which point you could work backwards from Y goals in the NHL -> X goals in the OHL based on your ability to accurately predict X goals in the OHL -> Y goals in the NHL. Thus, you'd be able to predict what 72 goals in the NTDP would have been in the OHL had the player been in the OHL instead. And if you've done that, congrats and well done, you just reinvented the NHL and you're going to be very rich. But if you haven't, you'll never be able to verify the accuracy of your conversions. A conversion algorithm is meaningless without a way to validate the accuracy of the conversions. Which means you either need to:
- reverse engineer those conversions by predicting the separate development paths to a shared league so you can work backwards to convert a player's totals from league a to league b and vice versa, i.e. see above.
- start getting a lot of players switching leagues (i.e. NTDP -> OHL) in the middle of the season - where the number of games played in each league in the same season is a large enough sample size for appropriate weighting - in order to accumulate data that is verifiable based on player data from both leagues in the same season.
- realize if you've already cracked another potential verification model that you don't need to wait years to accumulate data to validate your conversion algorithm; you have plenty of historical data to use to calibrate your model and you don't need to wait for future data that will be just as volatile as historical data.
Last edited:
- Status
