Frag

McTankin for McDavid

Bernier just pulled a Toskala to start the 3rd. Wow!

True. Even the stats suggest that Pederson has higher upside than Dahl, combined with lower risk. According to that link, only Betts has higher long-term potential value than Pederson using last season's data. It's pretty ridiculous that some rankings don't have Pederson higher up on their lists, barring him not being eligible.

Dahl over Pederson is a head-scratcher for me. Sure, Dahl probably has slightly higher upside, but Pederson is far less risky a prospect.

Can anyone explain why JJ's minutes suddenly went down? Depth?

To be fair, at least the Leafs got a good return for Beauchemin.

http://oi60.tinypic.com/2wd4ins.jpg

http://oi60.tinypic.com/2wd4ins.jpg

http://sportsrants.com/eveningthescore/files/2013/06/Homer-soon.jpg

I'm not sure I'm getting you. 1st round picks tend to play more games than picks in later rounds for the reasons you specified (plus the GM giving 1st round picks more benefit of the doubt relative to later picks). However, the reason why such players play more games could also be due to the fact that they are actually talented players (Forwards picked in the 1st round have a higher career NHL PPG than forwards picked in later rounds). If you want to look at whether such players actually play NHL games in the long run, then GP is the measure you look at (until hockey comes up with its own WAR-like stat). There are players who don't make the NHL despite being picked high by GMs, too. Also, I'm not sure baseball is a good example of what you were getting at. The GM of the baseball team could technically rush prospects to the major league level. They just don't do so most of the time because it could ruin the prospect.

This is a fair point. I really miss Extra Skater's CHL statistics, since it included even strength points/G and P/60.

I think this is more of an issue with the study than Nox pointed out (which is more random variation than bias) and is something I did ask the author about.

Testing for GP is not dumb. If you want to test whether the player you pick will even play NHL games, then GPs is a fine way to look at it. If you want to look at quality of those picks, then you are right.

I feel like we misunderstood each other here. I didn't say Crouse shouldn't be drafted, as I think he's still 1st round material. I just don't think he's worthy of a top 10 pick. What is the right way to think about it with regards to CHL players in your opinion? All we have are scouting reports and a few statistics, some of which need to be inferred (eg. eP/60). Where scouting is concerned (at least, scouting from the CSS), the CSS in the past has done a far worse job of predicting whether prospects will play at least 200 NHL GP than simple draft year points per game. As well, read this recent article from the same author about Crouse. He is given a lot of ice time (mind you, he kills penalties, which shoots up his TOI) and plays with good teammates, yet still isn't producing the point totals you expect from a top 10 pick. That's concerning to me, even if he's been unlucky with the assists. That quote about size in the article sums up why scouts love Crouse so much, and it has less to do with his skill set and more how well he hits and kills penalties. Even though I think Crouse will be better, that gives me Tyler Biggs flashbacks.

Did you see that link I posted? Anyway, even if his assist totals regressed (in the past, he mostly had more goals than assists in seasons, but not in the level it currently is; plus, scouting reports mostly rave about his goal scoring, not his passing), would you say he's worth picking in the top 10 of this year's draft? I wouldn't. Also, Crouse is not a dman. Edit: So, I counted how many primary/secondary assists Crouse had in each game this season by boxscore stats (thankfully, OHL posts who got first and second assists). So far, he has 3 primary assists and 4 second assists this year. Last year, he had 8 primary assists and 4 secondary assists.

I do, too. Secondary assists are very low in value unless you're Tyler Bozak.

The issue is that we don't have the numbers to look at Crouse's play better, like teammate WOWY and whatnot (this is where I miss Extra Skater). It could be he's unlucky or it could be he's not the best passer (or both). However, going by the information we currently have, his point totals have not matched up to what is expected out of a supposed top 5 pick in the upcoming draft and that's worrisome. Edit: FWIW, there is one site that has estimated P/60. Crouse is currently sitting at around 1.71 eP/60.

Doesn't shock me. Andrew Thomas has done tremendous work in building War-On-Ice after Extra Skater went down as well as working on a replacement for CapGeek.

It is true, but unlike McDavid and Marner who are limited by the upper limit of the study, Crouse's PPG is within the limits (10% chance of playing 200+ NHL GP). That's concerning. Also, and this is unrelated but funny anyways, draft year PPG was more highly correlated (R = 0.41) with NHL GP than CSS ranking (-0.19!). That's nuts! Before you say that it's The Hockey Writers, the author is Josh Weissbock, the same guy who did this.

He ranked 24th among CHL forwards after adjusting for height. There's definitely reason for concern when it comes to drafting Crouse in the top 10.

This shows why you don't draft Lawson Crouse in the top 10.

Haha you made an ot

Welp

Ah, so the Dinosaur League. Gotcha!

What league is this, anyway?