Olympics: Team Latvia 2022

[Dofs]

Do you think there's a quota for drafted Asian players or a quota for Quebecois on Habs?

Dinamo signed 8 non-Latvian forwards, because no one wants to play for them and the rest of them are piss poor, and they don't want to finish dead last.

I am talking about a quota for the first line, not the entire team. There are four lines in the team and obviously some spaces are left for Latvians too on there, but you are claiming that there a designated spot for a Latvian in a top 3 that Jelisejevs took which is absolute BS. You even dare to argue that it's natural for native people from the region to have quotas on the team when you are perfectly aware that we are talking about first line specifically. Completely disgraceful.

I couldn't care less what happens on that team. What is your point? You just said it yourself - Jelisejevs got randomly placed on the 1st line. If he wasn't Latvian, he wouldn't be on the team in the first place.

My point is that you keep talking about the team as if you know it despite basically everything you claim being wrong, stupid and plain nonsense. If you don't know it, then just stop embarrassing yourself.

And I said myself that Jelisejevs got randomly placed on the 1st line? Show it. I'll repeat what I said previously, you don't read what you reply to and, apparently, invent your own posts you reply to in your head.

Jelisejevs played on the third line before the start of October when his line was effectively promoted to be the first. And it didn't happen randomly, it happened because at that point in the last 5 games Jelisejevs got 4 points, while the second biggest amount of points gathered in the team in that time period was literally 1. That's all there is. As I've already wrote you in this thread that you probably didn't read, Jelisejevs got put on the first line because he was scoring a lot (the only one who did any scoring at all, actually), he wasn't scoring a lot because his was put on the first line. This is a basic idea that anyone who watches Dinamo knows but you don't watch their games yet continue to talk literal nonsense because of that to people who do watch and then even try to argue with them. Simply ridiculous and embarrassing.

As I have said myself before, it's perfectly fine to be sceptical about Jelisejevs' recent success. I am cautious myself, even if I root for him. What's not fine is explaining why you are sceptical with blatantly wrong information because you didn't bother to take even a small look at facts, and then intensely arguing about it.

 

[Namejs]

I am talking about a quota for the first line, not the entire team. There are four lines in the team and obviously some spaces are left for Latvians too on there, but you are claiming that there a designated spot for a Latvian in a top 3 that Jelisejevs took which is absolute BS. You even dare to argue that it's natural for native people from the region to have quotas on the team when you are perfectly aware that we are talking about first line specifically. Completely disgraceful.


My point is that you keep talking about the team as if you know it despite basically everything you claim being wrong, stupid and plain nonsense. If you don't know it, then just stop embarrassing yourself.

And I said myself that Jelisejevs got randomly placed on the 1st line? Show it. I'll repeat what I said previously, you don't read what you reply to and, apparently, invent your own posts you reply to in your head.

Jelisejevs played on the third line before the start of October when his line was effectively promoted to be the first. And it didn't happen randomly, it happened because at that point in the last 5 games Jelisejevs got 4 points, while the second biggest amount of points gathered in the team in that time period was literally 1. That's all there is. As I've already wrote you in this thread that you probably didn't read, Jelisejevs got put on the first line because he was scoring a lot (the only one who did any scoring at all, actually), he wasn't scoring a lot because his was put on the first line. This is a basic idea that anyone who watches Dinamo knows but you don't watch their games yet continue to talk literal nonsense because of that to people who do watch and then even try to argue with them. Simply ridiculous and embarrassing.

As I have said myself before, it's perfectly fine to be sceptical about Jelisejevs' recent success. I am cautious myself, even if I root for him. What's not fine is explaining why you are sceptical with blatantly wrong information because you didn't bother to take even a small look at facts, and then intensely arguing about it.

Would Jelisejevs be on the team if he wasn't Latvian?

No, he wouldn't. Combine this with your own words: "Jelisejevs was bouncing from second to fourth, together with, well, almost the rest of the team as Zubovs was changing lines multiple times per game every game"

And what you get is a guy who ended up on the 1st line due to pure luck and has increased production due to luck and increased usage. Which is what I've been trying to tell you, but you seem to be struggling with basic logic, not just statistics and probabilities.

 

[SoundAndFury]

And, no, Krastenbergs is not a mediocre minor pro player, his production rate has been high in ECHL and ICEHL. He's better offensively than Jelisejevs as well.

He is on ~0,65 PPG in both ICEHL and ECHL. That's high? In what world?

 

[Namejs]

He is on ~0,65 PPG in both ICEHL and ECHL. That's high? In what world?

That's a high production rate in any league and puts him on the 2nd line or a lower-scoring 1st line, making him a good to above average forward relative to the forward pool of the entire league.

0,65 > 0,49 (in a slightly worse league)

 

[SoundAndFury]

That's a high production rate in any league and puts him on the 2nd line or a lower-scoring 1st line, making him a good to above average forward relative to the forward pool of the entire league.

So you would scrap a guy playing 1st line and scoring in the KHL who might not be as good as his stats indicate for a guy who definitely is a low-end top-6 forward in the ICEHL. Interesting.

Also how long are you going to use 3-4-year-old stats as the main argument when the whole point everyone is trying to make for Jelisejevs is that he has improved? At least the Sh% argument was current and had some merit to it.

To imply that his abilities have improved so much, that he is now an over 0.50 PPG guy in the KHL while being an under 0.50 PPG guy in the VHL is extremely unlikely. I have not heard of a single case in hockey that would equal this.

Have you heard about this Rashevsky kid? He made a similar jump in literally one summer. But let me guess, he is also only scoring thanks to luck and usage. Similar situation with Tertyshny.

Dorofeyev went from scoring 0.47 in the VHL to 0.54 in the AHL the very same year, no in-between.

Yaremchuk is scoring at a better pace than he did in the VHL last year.

Alexander Petunin was never really able to score in the VHL.

So yeah. Here we face the bane of your existence - things you refuse to acknowledge or "have not heard".

I actually love that Dorofeyev's example especially. If you were told those are 2 different players, one playing in the AHL and the other VHL, and shown their stats, you would undoubtedly be willing to go above and beyond to prove how one is clearly much better than the other. Because how would data ever be wrong. When it is, in fact, the very same player.

 

[Dofs]

Would Jelisejevs be on the team if he wasn't Latvian?

And you continue to dodge the point, as usual

No, he wouldn't. Combine this with your own words: "Jelisejevs was bouncing from second to fourth, together with, well, almost the rest of the team as Zubovs was changing lines multiple times per game every game"

And what you get is a guy who ended up on the 1st line due to pure luck and has increased production due to luck and increased usage. Which is what I've been trying to tell you, but you seem to be struggling with basic logic, not just statistics and probabilities.

I never claimed he wasn't lucky, he sure is lucky that literally everyone else in the team could not score. If at least some foreign forwards played as they were expected to, I am sure Jelisejevs would had not found himself on the first line.

But that it was random, lmao?

Can you also please tell me why I should listen to someone who is writing nonsense every time and is unable to conceive that he might not be correct despite not knowing or even bothering to check any facts about the topic?

Of course what you write seems to you scientific and logical, because you seem to lack common sense and refuse to listen to others when they point it out.

You are amusing but it's not worth arguing with you anymore. It's like arguing with someone who tells the Sun is square and refuses to look from the window to check himself if it's true first.

 

[Namejs]

So you would scrap a guy playing 1st line and scoring in the KHL who might not be as good as his stats indicate for a guy who definitely is a low-end top-6 forward in the ICEHL. Interesting.

Also how long are you going to use 3-4-year-old stats as the main argument when the whole point everyone is trying to make for Jelisejevs is that he has improved? At least the Sh% argument was current and had some merit to it.


Have you heard about this Rashevsky kid? He made a similar jump in literally one summer. But let me guess, he is also only scoring thanks to luck and usage. Similar situation with Tertyshny.

Dorofeyev went from scoring 0.47 in the VHL to 0.54 in the AHL the very same year, no in-between.

Yaremchuk is scoring at a better pace than he did in the VHL last year.

Alexander Petunin was never really able to score in the VHL.

So yeah. Here we face the bane of your existence - things you refuse to acknowledge or "have not heard".

I actually love that Dorofeyev's example especially. If you were told those are 2 different players, one playing in the AHL and the other VHL, and shown their stats, you would undoubtedly be willing to go above and beyond to prove how one is clearly much better than the other. Because how would data ever be wrong. When it is, in fact, the very same player.

Jelisejevs is a 0.24 PPG guy in the KHL. For comparison:
Meija 0.21 PPG
Bicevskis 0.18 PPG
Lipsbergs 0.18 PPG

Rihards Bukarts 0.42 PPG
Dzierkals 0.39 PPG (one of the bubble forwards on the Olympic roster)

Krastenbergs is not making the Beijing roster unless someone gets injured. And that's with him being a shutdown player, which is a point you seem to have conveniently forgotten about. Krastenbergs is no world breaker, he's a depth guy for us. And, yes, he is better than Jelisejevs, but not by a huge margin.

If you're bringing up junior players and trying to make a point about improvement based on someone's performance at the age of 19 (Rashevsky) in the same discussion as Jelisejevs, who is 27, I'm afraid we're going to have to return back to basics here.

Young players improve naturally, as they become more mature physically, increase muscle mass, speed and continue improving their skills. Honestly, I feel a little stupid by pointing this out and this should be obvious even to Dofs. Kids improve. Kids have no pro experience and no sample size exists to gauge their abilities. The comparison is invalid.

Dorofeyev is an NHL prospect who played in VHL at the age of 19 as well. Seriously?

You don't seem to have understood my point at all. If Jelisejevs was 20, I wouldn't be saying any of this.

All of the players you brought up played in the VHL as juniors.

 

[Namejs]

And you continue to dodge the point, as usual


I never claimed he wasn't lucky, he sure is lucky that literally everyone else in the team could not score. If at least some foreign forwards played as they were expected to, I am sure Jelisejevs would had not found himself on the first line.

But that it was random, lmao?

Can you also please tell me why I should listen to someone who is writing nonsense every time and is unable to conceive that he might not be correct despite not knowing or even bothering to check any facts about the topic?

Of course what you write seems to you scientific and logical, because you seem to lack common sense and refuse to listen to others when they point it out.

You are amusing but it's not worth arguing with you anymore. It's like arguing with someone who tells the Sun is square and refuses to look from the window to check himself if it's true first.

Your point was that Jelisejevs is no random dude who ended up on the 1st line due to external factors, but that he earned his place by showcasing his raw, unadulterated SKILL.

Literally a post later you went on to obliterate your own point by saying Zubov juggled all the lines constantly even mid-game to see what sticks.

And now I beg you to focus all of your brain cells for this: If he was on the team due to his nationality, the only reason he ended up on the 1st line was luck. This was my original point. Your point was that it wasn't based on chance and luck.

So it's not that I'm dodging your point, you destroyed it yourself and now accuse me of sounding too sciencey while pointing this out.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Dorofeyev is an NHL prospect who played in VHL at the age of 19 as well. Seriously?

You don't seem to have understood my point at all. If Jelisejevs was 20, I wouldn't be saying any of this.

It's not about their age, it's about your method of evaluation being dogshit. It seems like you are the one not understanding the point. Whatever Dorofeyev's age is, he jumped "1.5 tier" in a week simply by switching teams. Turned himself from the lowly Jelisejevs to the mighty Tralmaks. Magic.

It's like arguing with someone who tells the Sun is square and refuses to look from the window to check himself if it's true first.

Probably a sound evaluation of all of this by this point.

Jelisejevs, meanwhile, hits 10th goal. All luck, no skill /s

 

[Namejs]

It's not about their age, it's about your method of evaluation being dogshit. It seems like you are the one not understanding the point. Whatever Dorofeyev's age is, he jumped "1.5 tier" in a week simply by switching teams. Turned himself from the lowly Jelisejevs to the mighty Tralmaks. Magic.

I'm sorry, but you obviously don't understand what variance even means. The method of evaluation you're referencing is called the scientific method.

It's like talking financial markets to a 5 year old.

 

[kudla]

I saw this thread and I am now an A grade student in maths

 

[Eye of Ra]

JKH GKS Jastrzebie did good in CHL. They have 7 latvians on the team. These players could provide some depth for the Olympic team. And lets not forget that the polish league is strong.

 

[Lartsaman]

JKH GKS Jastrzebie did good in CHL. They have 7 latvians on the team. These players could provide some depth for the Olympic team. And lets not forget that the polish league is strong.

I think only Frenks Razgals has a chance if theres many injuries.

 

[Eye of Ra]

Well, Pavlovs have played many WC and even was part of the OG team in 2014.

Egils Kalns and Eriks Sevcenko got some games with Latvian NT last season.

Maris Jass has played in 5 WC. He is a veteran.

Cant count anyone of this guys out.

 

[Dofs]

Jelisejevs, meanwhile, hits 10th goal. All luck, no skill /s

1+1 in the end, what a bum The third period wasn't his best though

Still, in the last 11 games he has 11 points, 8 of which are goals. Just crazy. But, again, he is just your below average VHL-er, so I think Dinamo management should just get Jevpalovs, Krastenbergs, a couple of top guys from Latvian league (Zabusovs and Tambijevs were mentioned) - all clearly better players than Jelisejevs. Just imagine what they could do! Such a team would absolutely destroy KHL

 

[Eye of Ra]

Speaking of latvian league, Arturs Ozolins and Edgars Kulda are up there with Tambijevs and Zabusovs in PPG.

 

[Dofs]

Speaking of latvian league, Arturs Ozolins and Edgars Kulda are up there with Tambijevs and Zabusovs in PPG.

Kulda is actually in Dinamo now, playing in the 4th line.

 

[SoundAndFury]

I'm sorry, but you obviously don't understand what variance even means. The method of evaluation you're referencing is called the scientific method.

Who cares how it's called, it's flawed and doesn't work in this setting. You are so proud about trying to squeeze a square peg into a round hole, how you can tell what player is or isn't without "watching any games". No wonder even 5 year-olds realize this, they probably have more common sense than you do.

Even Latvijas very own Sasha Nizivijs only truly approached his prime (statistically) at the age of 32 or so and was forced to almost skip a season only playing half a year in the Latvian league (aka semi-pro bum league) during 03/04 but I guess that's yet another example that doesn't prove anything, that guy must have been a terrible player as well.

 

[Namejs]

Who cares how it's called, it's flawed and doesn't work in this setting. You are so proud about trying to squeeze a square peg into a round hole, how you can tell what player is or isn't without "watching any games". No wonder even 5 year-olds realize this, they probably have more common sense than you do.

Even Latvijas very own Sasha Nizivijs only truly approached his prime (statistically) at the age of 32 or so and was forced to almost skip a season only playing half a year in the Latvian league (aka semi-pro bum league) during 03/04 but I guess that's yet another example that doesn't prove anything, that guy must have been a terrible player as well.

It's impossible to discuss theoretical concepts with people who don't understand what they mean.

I understand your frustration.

Maybe an illustration will help, although I doubt it.

Every single game he has played is a data point. His showing in the last 18 games is no different in value than last year or the year before.

This is basic data analysis.

Just like a couple of cold weeks in August or a few very snowy days in October don't disprove global warming, Jelisejevs streak is in no way indicative of him being a player as good as Da Costa or Macek.

You don't seem to be able to get your head around this pretty basic principle.

Just because Girgensons has 2 points in 1 game in the NHL, it doesn't mean he's going to outscore McDavid.

 

[Namejs]

1+1 in the end, what a bum The third period wasn't his best though

Still, in the last 11 games he has 11 points, 8 of which are goals. Just crazy. But, again, he is just your below average VHL-er, so I think Dinamo management should just get Jevpalovs, Krastenbergs, a couple of top guys from Latvian league (Zabusovs and Tambijevs were mentioned) - all clearly better players than Jelisejevs. Just imagine what they could do! Such a team would absolutely destroy KHL

My offer for a bet is still open, somehow no one's willing to make it for some reason.

And, yes, Jevpalovs and Krastenbergs would all be marked improvements over their current local players.

Tambijevs was an example of a clearly mediocre player who would also be scoring goals in the KHL, if put on the PP.

This whole discussion has been a sad reflection of the irrationality of the human mind. How things can fool people and how easily fooled we are by our own wishful thinking.

 

[SoundAndFury]

This whole discussion has been a sad reflection of the irrationality of the human mind. How things can fool people and how easily fooled we are by our own wishful thinking.

Well said. Tralmaks didn't make Providence, assigned to ECHL.

Good thing his high Sh% and favorable usage never caused any concern to you.

Jelisejevs is a mediocre VHLer, which roughly corresponds to being a mediocre ECHLer. So a tier and a half below Tralmaks.

Well this quote is a banger and a half, the gift that keeps on giving.

OK, so you're telling me that Karsums will not exceed his 20/21 NHLe, correct? He's done according to your eye test. Are you willing to bet on that?

How is this bet that never was going, by the way? 2 points in 14 games, team-worst -9.. Not done, eye test wrong yet again?

 

[Namejs]

Well said. Tralmaks didn't make Providence, assigned to ECHL.

Good thing his high Sh% and favorable usage never caused any concern to you.


Well this quote is a banger and a half, the gift that keeps on giving.


How is this bet that never was going, by the way? 2 points in 14 games, team-worst -9.. Not done, eye test wrong yet again?

We both agreed on Tralmaks ceiling and the fact that his abilities are not as established as of those players who have been playing pro hockey for 5 or more years.

What this means is that the confidence interval on Tralmaks abilities is quite large. As I wrote earlier, he could be an NHL player or a below average AHLer like Jevpalovs.

Somehow you're very jubilant about him getting sent to ECHL, as if this was indicative of anything with 0 games played. Abols spent an entire season in ECHL and is probably our 2nd best C.

To gauge his abilities, we need data points and it doesn't matter if he's scoring in ECHL AHL or NHL. We can use NHLe to estimate his production rate.

If he's going to be a 0.50 PPG player in the ECHL over the course of 50 games or more, he is going to be about as good as Jelisejevs, but I find that very unlikely.

You are clinging very hard to the Karsums case, despite the fact that it was already explained to you that analytics are not very good at predicting the rate of drop off at an individual level and it takes time to aggregate data points.

Despite that, Karsums is being about as productive this season as Jelisejevs ovet the course of his career, accounting for the margin of error given the small sample size.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Somehow you're very jubilant about him getting sent to ECHL, as if this was indicative of anything with 0 games played. Abols spent an entire season in ECHL and is probably our 2nd best C.

Abols has 4 career games played in the ECHL...

Also, I wasn't jubilant, I'd say giddy is the better word. Indeed I found it very funny that the guy who is scoring in KHL is an average ECHLer and 1,5 tiers below the guy who actually is in the ECHL.

Now you are all "we need more data" when it was evidently clear as day just a week ago. This discussion wouldn't have lasted half as long if you weren't so confidently pompous about your half-assed estimations.

It was actually me who said "we can agree he isn't a lock until we see how AHL guys do" which you completely refuted at the time and yet, a week later you need "data points". You basically agreed with my initial statement after wasting all this time. And don't get me wrong, I fully understand you had to agree and would have never done so if not for this Tralmaks to the ECHL situation.

Not to mention you are back to your main horse - NHLe - which is basically a joke stat once again based on completely unreliable massive oversimplification.

Regarding the Karsums case, you didn't need to explain that to me, I knew it. One would say, that was the whole point I was making at the time. Yet what you were trying to do was say that Karsums has only declined by ~13 percent and will surely bounce back because "players don't age overnight like pears". Again, you were very confident at the time and offered me a bet instead of "taking time to aggregate data points".

Also since I re-read huge chunks of that discussion in the spring, it's absolutely hilarious how insistent you were about the things you said and Canada still ended up winning the whole damn thing You know, with the guy worse than Bukarts or Karsums on the roster.

 

[Eye of Ra]

Girgensons have 2 points in 2 games in NHL so far this season. Late bloomer? He was after all drafted 14 overall.

Jelisejevs - Girgensons- Balcers
Daugavins - Blueger - Indrasis
Ro. Bukarts- Abols - Ri. Bukarts
Kenins - Dzerins - Dzierkals
Darzins, Krastenbergs

Rubins - Balinskis
Cibulskis - Jaks
Sotnieks - Freibergs
Cukste - Zile

Merzlikins
Kalnins
Punnenovs

 

[SoundAndFury]

Girgensons have 2 points in 2 games in NHL so far this season. Late bloomer?

And Buffalo is 2-0-0, cup contender?

Also if someone legitimately prefers Ro. Bukarts over Darzins in the lineup I'm just going to assume that person is insane.