uh....
Headlines: 'Fancy stats' to be used in arbitration - Sportsnet.ca
Pronman actually wrote about this. I guess you should read the articles and not just the tables on tweets. He had Quinn as a late riser because his skating improved. But, it should also be noted that Corey Pronman is one human and even if he watched 10 hours of film per day, every day, he isn't going to be able to watch every game. As a result, he tends to not have big shifts in his rankings. He acknowledges this. He was actually very high on Quinn.
He really doesn't. For a stat guy, he routinely down-ranks players like, for instance, Matthew Savoie because he worries that he won't be able to physically handle the NHL. Size ends up factoring into his rankings quite a bit (more than I think it should)
Sure, fine, you watched a lot of 67's games. So Quinn was progressing quite a bit. For every late bloomer like Quinn that continues to progress after the draft, there are 2 or 3 guys like Henrik Borgstrom or Mark Jankowski, where they bloom late, but also peak early. The point of stats isn't that they tell you matter of factly, "Marco Rossi is better than Jack Quinn," and people like me will seem to argue the opposite, but at the root of statistical based argumentation is the idea that nobody can predict the future, and scouts get it wrong half the time or more, because it's incredibly hard to figure out how a player will progress, but stats give you probabilities. And most of the good teams right now are good because they placed a lot of high probability bets. Quinn was a High Risk, high reward. But Rossi and Lundell, imo, were low risk, high reward, which is why I favored them. Again, nobody can predict the future, but the better the stats, the more good bets you can make.
