TheMistyStranger
ミスト
- May 21, 2005
- 31,604
- 7,450
Who had him 217?
Some random clown who cited his 1 SHL point. It's in Baker's replies to the pick
Who had him 217?
It doesn't bother me at all, it's SHL, some young players play little time, not all are physically ready. We know that Rosen played 3-5 minutes per game, this is very little, we know that he is very talented and skilled, but not yet physically mature, we know that he has a high ceiling, skating and skills, I am in full okay with this choice. Adams said he wants to pick players who can be the best in the future, and he did. I think this was really good draft for us.I figured out what was bothering me. If 1 point in 21 games is enough for a 14th pick, how do you pass 23 in 40?
This kid is all over the place making things happen in the highlights from this tourney. But he needs to start finishing
This kid is all over the place making things happen in the highlights from this tourney. But he needs to start finishing
“Analytics”… these guys are clowns that only use their algorithms to rank prospects. Hockey has a lot of unknown and immeasurable variableshttps://public.tableau.com/app/prof...ncyandProspectProjections/ProspectProjections
His top 5 for the draft were:
1 - Eklund
2 - Sillinger
3 - Guenther
4 - Coronato
5 - Clarke
Power was 11 and Beniers was 16.
“Analytics”… these guys are clowns that only use their algorithms to rank prospects. Hockey has a lot of unknown and immeasurable variables
Exhibit A: Brayden Point
This kid is all over the place making things happen in the highlights from this tourney. But he needs to start finishing
He also played on a very low scoring team, which I think has a significant impact. I think these guys would see big improvements in their model if they factored that in, for CHL teams at least. Draisaitl, Ennis, Eberle, all prime examples. There are also counter examples like Goldobin and Shinkaruk though.I believe in his pre draft year Point had one of the higher primary points per game so if teams went by that stat, rather than his height, he would've been drafted much earlier.
This kid is all over the place making things happen in the highlights from this tourney. But he needs to start finishing
If he ends up being as good as Skinner at #14OA that would mean they made an excellent pick in that slot.So we drafted the Swedish Jeff Skinner!
I believe in his pre draft year Point had one of the higher primary points per game so if teams went by that stat, rather than his height, he would've been drafted much earlier.
He also played on a very low scoring team, which I think has a significant impact. I think these guys would see big improvements in their model if they factored that in, for CHL teams at least. Draisaitl, Ennis, Eberle, all prime examples. There are also counter examples like Goldobin and Shinkaruk though.
I figured that's where you were going but wasn't sure. There are some busts ranked ahead of him in 2014, he wasn't exactly top of the list like debrincat, so I guess the point can sort of be used to argue both sidesI thought by bringing up Brayden Point an obvious triumph of analytics over scouting I was being blatantly derisive of an asinine post.
Point's analytics were very strong his draft year clear 1st round probabilities. He only slipped because of height; which you can't teach.
If he ends up being as good as Skinner at #14OA that would mean they made an excellent pick in that slot.