The avoidance of CHL players

[shrader]

Median is probably a better way to go about it. As to why he'd say it if it's not true...people say things in interviews. Could have been a harmless slip up. Or it's possible that "b word" distorting reality... :P ;)

 

The leagues aren't that big.  Someone could simply count the number of players over a certain age and then look at the percentage of the league over that age.  But anyway, it's kind of pointless since it's going to change from year to year.  I'm amazed at the conclusion we've reached in this thread.  These leagues have an age range of 3 or 4 years and the average age is very similar across the board?  Wow, who could have seen that coming. :doh:

[LGR4GM]

The leagues aren't that big.  Someone could simply count the number of players over a certain age and then look at the percentage of the league over that age.  But anyway, it's kind of pointless since it's going to change from year to year.  I'm amazed at the conclusion we've reached in this thread.  These leagues have an age range of 3 or 4 years and the average age is very similar across the board?  Wow, who could have seen that coming. :doh:

Then why did the AGM of the Sabres go out of his way to describe the league as older than the CHL? That's the point. 

 

People in this thread say there isn't bias, I don't buy it. The AGM of the Sabres just said they view the USHL differently and implied that difference was a favorable one. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Skurk Liger

[That Aud Smell]

People in this thread say there isn't bias, I don't buy it. 

 

Not for nothing: I don't feel that you ever meaningfully responded to the distinctions I was making about the difference between bias and preference. (If you did and I missed it, sorry.)

[Neo]

Not for nothing: I don't feel that you ever meaningfully responded to the distinctions I was making about the difference between bias and preference. (If you did and I missed it, sorry.)

Preference is when my kid reasons. Bias is when yours does!

[LGR4GM]

To d4rk's point, though -- all bias has a connotation of being unfair or in some way irrational, not grounded in sound thought processes.

 

I don't get the sense that JBOT's biased in this regard. He has views and preferences, but they appear based in reasoned decisions. And I also don't get the sense that he'd pass over a CHL player his scouts had ranked significantly higher in favour of a lesser ranked Swedish prospect, or whatever. But, when things are generally "equal," it sounds like he chooses to skew away from the CHL. 

 

That's fine by me. He just needs to make it work.

I assume you mean this post.  The problem is the narrow definition of bias you are using. You are implying that bias has to be implicit and not rational. This assumes that if a person has a rational reasoning for their bias that it is a preference then. The issue being that most bias are reasoned out in the bias persons mind to be rational. Preference could be a form of bias. If you want to argue that the Botterill admin has a preference for USHL and SHL players you could. Still that is a form of bias. They are prejudice against CHL players because of years of development and a conscious belief that the CHL is not as good. You can both prefer and be biased against something. You can also just prefer something. I prefer Coke over Pepsi. I have no bias against Pepsi. If you offered me a Pepsi I would drink it. At this point we are arguing semantics. I view the way the Sabres are approaching the CHL as bias. You view it as showing a preference. It is splitting hairs.  I am bias in this conversation because I see the CHL as on par with the USHL and in some cases better. That changes my view of the words the AGM said. They passed on players they shouldn't have in my mind for the 2nd year in a row and that also forms a bias in my own mind. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by Skurk Liger

[That Aud Smell]

I assume you mean this post.  The problem is the narrow definition of bias you are using. You are implying that bias has to be implicit and not rational. This assumes that if a person has a rational reasoning for their bias that it is a preference then. The issue being that most bias are reasoned out in the bias persons mind to be rational. Preference could be a form of bias. If you want to argue that the Botterill admin has a preference for USHL and SHL players you could. Still that is a form of bias. They are prejudice against CHL players because of years of development and a conscious belief that the CHL is not as good. You can both prefer and be biased against something. You can also just prefer something. I prefer Coke over Pepsi. I have no bias against Pepsi. If you offered me a Pepsi I would drink it. At this point we are arguing semantics. I view the way the Sabres are approaching the CHL as bias. You view it as showing a preference. It is splitting hairs.  I am bias in this conversation because I see the CHL as on par with the USHL and in some cases better. That changes my view of the words the AGM said. They passed on players they shouldn't have in my mind for the 2nd year in a row and that also forms a bias in my own mind. 

 

Well, wait. I think that's a false paradigm. Something can be implicit and rational. Or explicit and rational. Or implicit and irrational. Or explicit and irrational.

 

My basic point with bias is that, to me, it connotes a mental inclination being unfair or poorly reasoned, or an implicit inclination that's not capable of withstanding reason.

 

I think you're right, though. Probably, mostly, just bickering about semantics at this point.

 

One additional wrinkle/offering: If JBOT has indeed developed a preference for players from certain systems or leagues and he has done so based on current data, information, and observations, then that, to me, is a preference and not a bias.

 

However, if JBOT continued to hold that preference indefinitely, without any regular and meaningful reassessments of the preference (i.e., fresh looks at more current data, information, and observations), then that would become a bias.

[shrader]

Then why did the AGM of the Sabres go out of his way to describe the league as older than the CHL? That's the point. 

 

People in this thread say there isn't bias, I don't buy it. The AGM of the Sabres just said they view the USHL differently and implied that difference was a favorable one. 

 

Older is a subjective term and you're not going to describe it by looking at one year's rosters.

[Thorner]

I think this is right.

 

The eyebrow-arching and even borderline hand-wringing over JBOT's tactic strike me as over-wrought.

 

Just because it's an arguable strategy doesn't mean it should be above scrutiny. The merits of an anti-Russian bias can be argued as well, as Russians are more likely to bolt for the KHL. Doesn't mean it's a good strategy (or necessarily a bad one, even).

 

And Liger is correct in that bias doesn't necessarily have to be portrayed in a negative light. My Politics professor always used to say that bias is only inherently negative when that bias goes unacknowledged by the party in question. In the end it's just another word for preference. 

 

As far as I am concerned, Botterill has as good as outright admitted his bias/preference. Whether it's beneficial or detrimental remains to be seen.

Edited June 27, 2018 by Thorny

[That Aud Smell]

I acknowledge that the term bias has many meanings — especially in specialized fields.

 

Commonly understood, it connotes something negative.

 

I just hope that JBOT’s approach works out.

[Thorner]

I acknowledge that the term bias has many meanings — especially in specialized fields.

 

Commonly understood, it connotes something negative.

 

I just hope that JBOT’s approach works out.

 

:beer:

[GASabresIUFAN]

I acknowledge that the term bias has many meanings — especially in specialized fields.

 

Commonly understood, it connotes something negative.

 

I just hope that JBOT’s approach works out.

I agree.  I like the term emphasis over bias.  

 

There is some anecdotal evidence from recent Sabres draft history that this approach may be the right one for the later rounds.

 

I mentioned part of this earlier, but here are the players we drafted that played primarily in Sweden or the NCAA/USHL in their draft year in the 3rd rd or later from 2006 to 2015.

3rd rd 2007 Corey Tropp (USHL) - 146 NHL games to date

6th rd 2009 Conner Knapp (NCAA) - 2 NHL games

6th rd 2012 Linus Ullmark (Sweden) - 26 NHL games and backup in Buffalo 2018

5th rd 2013 Cal Petersen (USHL) - AHL last season and seen as a top G prospect

5th rd 2013 Gustav Possler (Sweden) - 0 NHL games (never came over)

6th rd 2013 Sean Malone (USHL) - AHL last season, 1 NHL game and looks like a potential depth NHL player

3rd rd 2014 Jonas Johansson (Sweden) - ECHL/AHL last season - will likely be full time in the AHL next season

7th rd 2014 Victor Olofsson (Sweden) - AHL next season after being the leading goal scorer in SHL last season.

 

Although no stars yet, this is a much better track record that our CHL drafting during the same period.  Only 2 confirmed busts (Knapp and Possler), with one marginal NHLer (Tropp), One current Sabre (Ullmark) and 4 players with legit NHL potential, including 3 current Amerks, in Malone, Olofsson, Johansson and the one that got away, Petersen.

 

By contract we went 4 for 29 on CHL players taken in rounds 3-7 from 2006 to 2015. The 4 are Foligno, McNabb, Byron and Baptiste.  Sadly we gave away McNabb and Byron before they could make much of an impact for the Sabres.

Edited June 27, 2018 by GASabresIUFAN

[erickompositör72]

Sorry if this has already been stated-

 

JBot's whole philosophy of building a team through the AHL affiliate is undermined by the CHL agreement. I can understand why there could be both practical reasons and political reasons for his preference.

 

I also know from a personal source that, at the start of last season, he was dying to trade Reinhart- a guy that was not "allowed" to develop Jbot's preferred way (in the AHL) due to the CHL agreement.

 

Would it be a stretch to say Reinhart may have had a more positive development curve if he had developed in the AHL? I'm not sure, but I do think that the CHL agreement is short-sighted and may damage Canadian hockey/prospects in the long run. I hated it from the beginning- Canadians need to bolster their precious junior leagues, to the detriment of world-class prospects, and possibly the NHL.

[LGR4GM]

What stopped the Sabres in 2015 from sending Reinhart to the AHL? He had played all 4 years of juniors. 

[North Buffalo]

Sorry if this has already been stated-

JBot's whole philosophy of building a team through the AHL affiliate is undermined by the CHL agreement. I can understand why there could be both practical reasons and political reasons for his preference.

I also know from a personal source that, at the start of last season, he was dying to trade Reinhart- a guy that was not "allowed" to develop Jbot's preferred way (in the AHL) due to the CHL agreement.

Would it be a stretch to say Reinhart may have had a more positive development curve if he had developed in the AHL? I'm not sure, but I do think that the CHL agreement is short-sighted and may damage Canadian hockey/prospects in the long run. I hated it from the beginning- Canadians need to bolster their precious junior leagues, to the detriment of world-class prospects, and possibly the NHL.

Any other way to work it, say two years in college then two years in chl or vice versa?

[Eleven]

What stopped the Sabres in 2015 from sending Reinhart to the AHL? He had played all 4 years of juniors. 

 

Lack of good players in Buffalo.

[LGR4GM]

I am confused. What in the CHL agreement prevented the Sabres from sending Reinhart to Rochester in 2015? 

Reinhart had played A) 4 years and B) was old enough not to go back to the CHL. He had not 1 but 2 of the necessary pieces to never play in the CHL again in the summer of 2015. 

I also know from a personal source that, at the start of last season, he was dying to trade Reinhart- a guy that was not "allowed" to develop Jbot's preferred way (in the AHL) due to the CHL agreement.

Would it be a stretch to say Reinhart may have had a more positive development curve if he had developed in the AHL? I'm not sure, but I do think that the CHL agreement is short-sighted and may damage Canadian hockey/prospects in the long run. I hated it from the beginning- Canadians need to bolster their precious junior leagues, to the detriment of world-class prospects, and possibly the NHL.

The CHL agreement had 0 impact on Reinhart's ability to play in the AHL. None. Jbot as gm would have sent him back to the WHL his first year post draft. He then could have sent him to the AHL the very next season, 2015. 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Skurk Liger

[Eleven]

I am confused. What in the CHL agreement prevented the Sabres from sending Reinhart to Rochester in 2015? 

Reinhart had played A) 4 years and B) was old enough not to go back to the CHL. He had not 1 but 2 of the necessary pieces to never play in the CHL again in the summer of 2015. 

 

There is no confusion; you are correct.  Many of us wanted to see him moving between Rochester and Buffalo in 2014, however.

[LGR4GM]

There is no confusion; you are correct.  Many of us wanted to see him moving between Rochester and Buffalo in 2014, however.

I don't think he was ready. He did good to work on his game in the WHL and came into Buffalo in 2015 in a much better place. I think there is this assumption that the CHL after age 18 is useless for development and that is not true. Alex Nylander is a great example. He should have gone back to the CHL for his 19yr old season or gone back to Europe. He was not mentally or physically ready to be the youngest player in the AHL. 

[Eleven]

I don't think he was ready. He did good to work on his game in the WHL and came into Buffalo in 2015 in a much better place. I think there is this assumption that the CHL after age 18 is useless for development and that is not true. Alex Nylander is a great example. He should have gone back to the CHL for his 19yr old season or gone back to Europe. He was not mentally or physically ready to be the youngest player in the AHL. 

 

It's not useless for development for most 18 year olds.  It is useless for most second overall picks, though.

[LGR4GM]

It's not useless for development for most 18 year olds.  It is useless for most second overall picks, though.

Maybe. Still doesn't explain the OP's post. Alex Nylander was cited by the AGM the other day for basically playing in a league before he was ready, that being the AHL. He said roughly that people would be less worried about Nylander if he had play in the OHL and put up 140 points as opposed to being the youngest player in the AHL. That indicates Jbot's preferred development path is to only promote players to the next league when he feels they are ready. 

Edited June 27, 2018 by Skurk Liger

[shrader]

It's not useless for development for most 18 year olds.  It is useless for most second overall picks, though.

 

It's not useless for any of them.  They still have plenty to gain at that point.  The only thing interfering with that is ego.  Each case is different, obviously, but even those higher talent guys still have plenty to gain.

[Eleven]

It's not useless for any of them.  They still have plenty to gain at that point.  The only thing interfering with that is ego.  Each case is different, obviously, but even those higher talent guys still have plenty to gain.

 

I'd love to see a new agreement with the CHL where NHL teams can assign their first round picks to the AHL (and call them up to the NHL) as they see fit without any of this ten game nonsense.  A lot of them would benefit much more from experiencing their new team's system and playing against men than they would sitting in the CHL.

 

Of course, several people in this thread have opined that the CHL is not as talented as it once was, and this would further deplete those leagues of talent, so I'm not holding my breath.

[LGR4GM]

the 10 game thing is just for their pro contract. 

[shrader]

I'd love to see a new agreement with the CHL where NHL teams can assign their first round picks to the AHL (and call them up to the NHL) as they see fit without any of this ten game nonsense.  A lot of them would benefit much more from experiencing their new team's system and playing against men than they would sitting in the CHL.

 

Of course, several people in this thread have opined that the CHL is not as talented as it once was, and this would further deplete those leagues of talent, so I'm not holding my breath.

 

Why would the CHL ever agree to that?  They gain absolutely nothing from it.  The two leagues have always had a relationship and the NHL is not going to risk that for a rule that focuses on only a handful of players.

[Eleven]

Why would the CHL ever agree to that?  They gain absolutely nothing from it.  The two leagues have always had a relationship and the NHL is not going to risk that for a rule that focuses on only a handful of players.

 

I know.  That's why I said I'm not holding my breath.  Although really, the CHL doesn't have to agree to anything; the NHL can do whatever it wants.  But it will protect the relationship, as you say.