Toggle sidebar

Winnipeg Jets Prospect Thread (Part X)

Status
Not open for further replies.
garret9 said:
But you are one person. There will always be people who peak earlier and later. We're looking for at average.

The biggest argument for your sake is younger d-men get easier minutes (alternate variable impact) and the early stages only the best get in (survivorship bias).

PS I forgot to add that the author of this article is a NHL employee :P
Click to expand...

Studies and stats are important and need to be given attention, but my personal experience and what I have seen in my life vastly supports my opinion on this matter.

At some point, you need to trust what you know, and I do. I know how I was with the puck, with my emotions, how I let situations in the game affect my performance and decision making with and without the puck when I was in my early 20's as opposed to 30's. I cannot believe that it isn't the same for many other humans just like me.

I would say it's the same for forwards too but the main difference is the step you lose in performance due to ageing is felt far more sharply as a forward. You can rely on your mind a lot more as a defenseman.

I wouldn't want NYI Chara on my team but I would salivate at the prospect of Ottawa Chara.

Winnipeg Ulanov was awful but Edmonton Ulanov was a beast.

Just to start.
 
garret9 said:
But you are one person. There will always be people who peak earlier and later. We're looking for at average.

The biggest argument for your sake is younger d-men get easier minutes (alternate variable impact) and the early stages only the best get in (survivorship bias).

PS I forgot to add that the author of this article is a NHL employee :P
Click to expand...

So why don't they conduct the analysis adjusting for difficulty (quality of competition, quality of teammates, zone starts, etc.)? That's one of my pet peeves about "advanced stats". They often really aren't that "advanced" at all. Too often they are just taking a different event (e.g. shot attempts), but fail to correct for a lot of other important variables.
 
Ya but those could just be exceptions. Pointing out your own experiences or a few guys doesn't mean everyone is like that.
The data may be wrong, or limited, but your own experiences only describe your own and can be wrongful representation of others.
 
Whileee said:
So why don't they conduct the analysis adjusting for difficulty (quality of competition, quality of teammates, zone starts, etc.)? That's one of my pet peeves about "advanced stats". They often really aren't that "advanced" at all. Too often they are just taking a different event (e.g. shot attempts), but fail to correct for a lot of other important variables.
Click to expand...

This is a bit of a non argument...

Not being "advanced" doesn't really diminish usefulness that either does or does not exist.

Other variables can and are being accounted for elsewhere, but this is not one of those cases... which is what I was alluding to in this case.

Sometimes it is a bit of an art that can influenced by other variables and subjectivity, but so is every current alternative... including "eye-test" scouting. So arguing against something that every other current alternative suffers for is kind of pointless unless discussing areas where improvement is needed... which every stat guy already knows about these.
 
garret9 said:
This is a bit of a non argument...

Not being advanced doesn't really diminish usefulness.

Other variables can and are being accounted for elsewhere, but this is not one of those cases.
Click to expand...

Is that data affected by players making the NHL as 3rd pairing pylons late in their career, or is it only on players with long tenures in the NHL?
 
garret9 said:
This is a bit of a non argument...

Not being "advanced" doesn't really diminish usefulness that either does or does not exist.

Other variables can and are being accounted for elsewhere, but this is not one of those cases... which is what I was alluding to in this case.

Sometimes it is a bit of an art that can influenced by other variables and subjectivity, but so is every current alternative... including "eye-test" scouting. So arguing against something that every other current alternative suffers for is kind of pointless unless discussing areas where improvement is needed... which every stat guy already knows about these.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing for current alternatives, but would suggest that if the "advanced" stats don't start to become more "advanced", they'll quickly become fairly mundane with lots of vagaries in the results.

(I always get a bit suspicious with the idea of there being an "art" in research. I understand the need for innovation, but it does leave open a lot for subjectivity and artifice: "figures don't lie, but liars figure". ;))
 
Whileee said:
I'm not arguing for current alternatives, but would suggest that if the "advanced" stats don't start to become more "advanced", they'll quickly become fairly mundane with lots of vagaries in the results.

(I always get a bit suspicious with the idea of there being an "art" in research. I understand the need for innovation, but it does leave open a lot for subjectivity and artifice: "figures don't lie, but liars figure". ;))
Click to expand...

Funny thing is none of the major users/developers in hockey statistics believe that the current "advance statistics" really are more than rudimentary numbers that will never be surpassed in due time.

I wasn't discussing art in research but art in application. Two different things. There is no art in the research of what Corsi does, how it indicates certain things, its relationships, factors that affect it, etc... actually I shouldn't say no... I've seen some that isn't very analytical in nature... but not the major stuff or what most have built upon.
 
garret9 said:
Individuals shot rates have very little baring on Corsi, especially when defensemen tend to take less than 15% of the team's shot attempts while they are on the ice.
Click to expand...

I could be influenced by usage changing with age though. The more mature D are trusted more and given the tougher minutes and zone starts. The younger ones are more sheltered.
 
Gump Hasek said:
Just noticed that Halifax has announced their lineup for the season, and that they list Ehlers at a whopping 176 pounds...

http://www.halifaxmooseheads.ca/article/mooseheads-announce-2014-15-roster

He was drafted at 163 pounds...
http://jets.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=724237

!!!!
Click to expand...

Nice!

Would it be accurate to think that he'll lose a bit during the season?

If so, and he ends the season at say 170ish, and can put on another 13 pounds next off-season, 183lbs might not be a bad weight next TC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom