rakii's draft thread

[rakish]

SabreSpace:  So rakish, why your own thread?

rakish:  Well, there's a few reasons, but mostly, trying to data porn the draft makes people angry, so I'm trying to stay out of the way.

SabreSpace:  Why post at all?

rakish:  In the end, I need stuff dated.  This process might work, or it might be a disaster, but if it works, I need a date on it.

SabreSpace: So what nonsense do we have today?

rakish:  Total nonsense.  What you are looking for in the draft is increase in productivity.  So I'm trying to see who is good next Summer by how much better they are in the Spring related to their Fall.

SabreSpace:  So these are the 10 players you don't want?

rakish:  Absolutely, not yet anyway.

SabreSpace: Any qualifications?

rakish:  Well, I don't have many NLA players in the database, and Matthews has been injured, so his score is more meaningless.  Chychrun doesn't score enough, so he'll never get the model's love.  I'm thinking the smalls are overvalued, because there's so many of them.

SabreSpace: How does this compare to last year?

rakish:  Well Eichel and McDavid were over a 1000, Marner was at 850, Strome was about 625.  So as an early look, expecting the Matthews rating to be way off, then replacing Matthews with Eichel or McDavid, pretty much the same, except for one star instead of two.

SabreSpace: So one less McDavid, and two more Marners?

rakish: yep

 

Keller: 891

Matthews: 853

Bitten: 710

Tkachuk: 676

DeBrincat: 662

Nylander: 553

Dube: 537

Burke: 527

Mascherin: 497

Rubtsov: 473

Pethrus: 471

[Weave]

Love these.  Keep them coming.

[WildCard]

SS: Your data is awesome

 

rakish: Shut baby, I know it

Edited December 11, 2015 by WildCard

[woods-racer]

So DeBrincat scores out at 5th overall?

 

Never thought with his size he would get that high.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

SabreSpace: So rakish, why your own thread?

rakish: Well, there's a few reasons, but mostly, trying to data porn the draft makes people angry, so I'm trying to stay out of the way.

SabreSpace: Why post at all?

rakish: In the end, I need stuff dated. This process might work, or it might be a disaster, but if it works, I need a date on it.

SabreSpace: So what nonsense do we have today?

rakish: Total nonsense. What you are looking for in the draft is increase in productivity. So I'm trying to see who is good next Summer by how much better they are in the Spring related to their Fall.

SabreSpace: So these are the 10 players you don't want?

rakish: Absolutely, not yet anyway.

SabreSpace: Any qualifications?

rakish: Well, I don't have many NLA players in the database, and Matthews has been injured, so his score is more meaningless. Chychrun doesn't score enough, so he'll never get the model's love. I'm thinking the smalls are overvalued, because there's so many of them.

SabreSpace: How does this compare to last year?

rakish: Well Eichel and McDavid were over a 1000, Marner was at 850, Strome was about 625. So as an early look, expecting the Matthews rating to be way off, then replacing Matthews with Eichel or McDavid, pretty much the same, except for one star instead of two.

SabreSpace: So one less McDavid, and two more Marners?

rakish: yep

 

Keller: 891

Matthews: 853

Bitten: 710

Tkachuk: 676

DeBrincat: 662

Nylander: 553

Dube: 537

Burke: 527

Mascherin: 497

Rubtsov: 473

Pethrus: 471

Chz: 69

 

I kid....

 

Good stuff. Always thinking and looking.

 

I have no clue about this group but am a good 10 games away from wanting to learn.

[rakish]

So DeBrincat scores out at 5th overall?

 

Never thought with his size he would get that high.

 

It's early.  He certainly won't be drafted that high.  It will help a lot if he stays for the World Juniors break, to see how he does without Strome.  I haven't even looked yet as to who he plays with.  The point of this isn't to find Debrincat's drafting position, it's to get a baseline on his season.  If he rates a 1000 the last third, I know he's getting better, which is a good thing.  It's also really hard to tell with players playing with men, so Pul-etc isn't ranked very high.  I'll have to rely a bit on his age 16 year, which I haven't looked at yet.

[spndnchz]

I kid....

 

Good stuff. Always thinking and looking.

 

I have no clue about this group but am a good 10 games away from wanting to learn.

 

goDD: 01

 

That's no one around and your own finger up your a$$

 

I kid...

[TrueBlueGED]

If there's one thing I love it's data port.

 

I see no love for the Finnish wingers, Puljujarvi and Laine. Is that just due to a data shortage?

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

goDD: 01

 

That's no one around and your own finger up your a$$

 

I kid...

At least you posted!

 

And I prefer the thumb....more girth....

[rakish]

If there's one thing I love it's data port.

 

I see no love for the Finnish wingers, Puljujarvi and Laine. Is that just due to a data shortage?

 

I talked a little about Puljajarvi upthread.  It's hard to tell with people playing with men.  He's playing Liiga.  Laine has right about the same numbers, also in Liiga.  In the end I'll compare big forwards to big forwards, and defensemen to defensemen of the similar size.  But I'm not there yet.

 

It ends up that the 6'1 210 player gets underdrafted, and the 6'4" player gets overdrafted, especially outside of the first 15 picks.

[woods-racer]

I read it all over again.

 

 

You just did a baseline test and gave it to us.

 

Cool.

[WildCard]

So besides Matthews, is there any player in here ready to make the jump to the NHL next year?

[rakish]

So besides Matthews, is there any player in here ready to make the jump to the NHL next year?

 

In my system 1000 pretty much means you are ready, so I would say no.  Even then, Nykvist (sp?) on Detroit spent a couple years in the minors while over 1000. 

[Neo]

Rakish - Awesome and thank you. The idea of a point in time and change is very cool.

 

My memory tells me you explained your system to us some time ago. Am I correct? If so, can you point me to the post or copy it here?

 

I'll search, too. My interwebs skills!

[rakish]

Rakish - Awesome and thank you. The idea of a point in time and change is very cool.

 

My memory tells me you explained your system to us some time ago. Am I correct? If so, can you point me to the post or copy it here?

 

I'll search, too. My interwebs skills!

 

 

It's quite basic.   How you score at 17 correlates strongly to how you score later in your career, but there are a lot of thing that affect your scoring.  DeBrincat's a good example.  He is scoring a lot because he's a good player, and also because Erie as a team scores a lot.  He's too small to be considered a 3rd or 4th line player by current NHL thinking, so he will need to score as a top six player.  What the model tries to do is separate how good DeBrincat is from how his stats are affected by playing for Erie.

 

We also have to adjust for how old the player is, since their scoring increases about 50% per year, an August born player (who is young) gets bonus points, a January born player gets some deduction.  It's also very important to be getting better, which is why I did an early season valuation to compare to the rest of the season.

 

So in the end, will DeBrincat score as P Kane, or Ennis, or Nylander, or Marner?  This, of course, misses big things on whether someone is a good hockey player or not. but so does going to games and watching kids play.  The model loves William Bitten, check his team stats, he's outpointing his teammates by a half a point a game.  That's a huge number.  If he was bigger, it would be better for him as a prospect, but as of now, most top prospect lists don't mention him.  McKeen's has him at 22.

 

As Liger will ask when people talk about drafting best player available, how exactly are you comparing the value of forwards to the value of defensemen?  Even for this board, there's a spectrum of opinions on the value of Weber, Ennis, Pysyk, even Risto.

 

There are guys out in Vancouver doing the same thing, they write for nhlnumbers.com

[woods-racer]

This is a must watch thread when we are locking in a high 1st round draft pick....again :beer:

Edited December 12, 2015 by Woods-Racer

[WildCard]

In my system 1000 pretty much means you are ready, so I would say no.  Even then, Nykvist (sp?) on Detroit spent a couple years in the minors while over 1000. 

I'm curious to see how the score was for late drafted talent that boomed, like ROR, Getzlaf, Weber, etc.

[rakish]

I'm curious to see how the score was for late drafted talent that boomed, like ROR, Getzlaf, Weber, etc.

 

At least for O'Reilly, you wouldn't draft him based on his offensive expectation.  I try to take defensive play into consideration when I did my draft board last year.  For instance, my first pick (using Winnipeg's draft position) I got Harkins at 17 partially because of his reputation as a defensive player, therefore I placed him fairly high on my draft board.  It's interesting for me that Harkins didn't get selected until 47 because the NHL didn't value this defensive reputation, or maybe the reputation was wrong.  This is why it's hard to backdate players because there is a certain level of buzz that has to be listened to (for instance, Vainio doesn't play much defense, because only looking at his offense, Vainio would have been a top 10 pick).

 

Getzlaf is interesting because most players on that level don't spend that much time in development, about 2 1/3 years.  Many of the bigtime players played in the NHL immediately, either as a top pick, or the team immediately realizing what they had, like O'Reilly or Bergeron.  Benn spent a little less time in development than Getzlaf.

 

I think, Wildcard, it's a different process that ends up finding different types of players.  Pysyk, for example, didn't score much in junior, but people love watching him skate.  McCabe scores much better, always has.  So this process will end up with players like McCabe instead of players like Pysyk because I'm trying to predict how they will score. That might a good thing, or it might not.

[rakish]

OK, a new year is here.  I'm not done with the work, but the question of Caggiula has time pressure, so I thought I put out an early chart even though it's not strictly draft related.

 

So in case you're new here, I contextualize scoring (it does matter that Caggiula plays with Brock Boeser, if that is not true, let me know and I'll rethink this) and come up with a valuation for each season (anything over 10 games played, so sometimes a player has 2 or 3 seasons in a year). I wanted to use players you have a better sense of, therefore Luke Adam, Catenacci, Grigo.  I also used comparables that I think you are trying to compare Caggiula to Panarin, Gaudreau. Thirdly, I used one player I think is a very good comparison, Sabres' prospect Victor Olofsson, and fourthly, I tossed in some of the current NCAA stars, Connor, Boeser, Letunof, JT Compher,.  If you want to see different comparables, I can use anyone drafted after Sidney Crosby.

 

The left axis is my raw number, the bottom axis the age.  The colored lines are regression lines for each of the players.

 

Edited April 22, 2016 by rakish

[LGR4GM]

So Brock Boeser is awesome and what is your conclusion on Caggiula?

[rakish]

I wouldn't be excited about putting Caggiula into a top-six for a team trying to make the playoffs.  Unfortunately,  you might not have the option of sending him to Rochester. I think he'll get a one-way contract from someone with some assurance he plays in the NHL next year.  I'll work through each draft since 2005 once I get the math a bit better, but at this point Caggiula's 2015 year was 50th best among the his draft year, and about 50 players from each draft have a reasonable NHL career, therefore I expect him to get some games in the NHL.

 

I think my takeaway from this is that he's not Panarin or Gaudreau, but, like Bailey, he's getting better.  If I was to slot him in the pipeline for forwards, I would say behind Bailey, near Olofsson and Cornel, even though Caggiula is the oldest of the four. I guess signing him is fine, but I would expect him to be in Rochester next year if he does sign.

[Taro T]

I wouldn't be excited about putting Caggiula into a top-six for a team trying to make the playoffs.  Unfortunately,  you might not have the option of sending him to Rochester. I think he'll get a one-way contract from someone with some assurance he plays in the NHL next year.  I'll work through each draft since 2005 once I get the math a bit better, but at this point Caggiula's 2015 year was 50th best among the his draft year, and about 50 players from each draft have a reasonable NHL career, therefore I expect him to get some games in the NHL.

 

I think my takeaway from this is that he's not Panarin or Gaudreau, but, like Bailey, he's getting better.  If I was to slot him in the pipeline for forwards, I would say behind Bailey, near Olofsson and Cornel, even though Caggiula is the oldest of the four. I guess signing him is fine, but I would expect him to be in Rochester next year if he does sign.

Not if he's under 25 years old he won't.

[rakish]

Not if he's under 25 years old he won't.

 

I certainly agree he shouldn't, and you might be right that he won't, but it seems a lot of teams are standing in line, and looking at the world from his agents perspective, what differentiates the multiple offers?

[Taro T]

I certainly agree he shouldn't, and you might be right that he won't, but it seems a lot of teams are standing in line, and looking at the world from his agents perspective, what differentiates the multiple offers?

He CAN'T get a 1 way offer if he is under 25. (Which seems extremely likely as he is in college.)

 

Doesn't really matter how many teams might be willing to give him a 1 way deal nor how many might be willing to give him more than the rookie max. They are barred from making that offer.

[rakish]

Ah, i misunderstood your previous post, thank you