Another attempt at starting a project

[Professor What]

We discussed a new project for the board a while back, but every time it looked like we might have had a decision, there was always a dispute and it would fall away. Each time that happened, interest seemed to wane as well. I admit that I got a bit discouraged by it and quit pushing it forward. But now some time has passed and no one else has picked it up, so I thought I'd try again. Ideally, we have a discussion here and once it becomes clear that there's a favorite, that will be what we go with. I hope we'll have plenty of people on board to do whatever the group decides on.

At one point, it looked like there was going to be a renewal of the defensemen project, then it looked like the Hall of Fame, then the All-Star teams and awards was brought up. There keeps being rumbling about a women's project as well, although I'm not sure if the board is convinced that we have enough research for it yet. Personally, I feel like any of these would be worthwhile. I just want to see one of them actually get done, whichever one it is that the community latches onto. Let's pick one and do it and not let this fall to the wayside again.

Click to read more...

 

[jigglysquishy]

I'm eager to do something.

In terms of value to our collective knowledge, the women project is the most valuable, especially in light of the new interest in the PWHL season.

After that, all star teams add a ton of value. Even just in terms of giving like-for-like comparisons in an ATD setting. I think it would be a ton of fun and is aided by the research last year.

After that, nothing really makes me fall in love. The aforementioned projects are research heavy, but give us tons back.

I think a defenseman project will bring some value in a couple years. Let Hughes and Makar get established and we might be able to have a post-Pronger player in the top 20.

 

[ResilientBeast]

After that, all star teams add a ton of value. Even just in terms of giving like-for-like comparisons in an ATD setting. I think it would be a ton of fun and is aided by the research last year.

the only problem with all all-star team project is the amount of newspaper reading we'd have to do for it to be even remotely valuable on per season basis

 

[Professor What]

the only problem with all all-star team project is the amount of newspaper reading we'd have to do for it to be even remotely valuable on per season basis

I'd be game for it, but I can't really justify a newspapers.com subscription right now. I'd need to rely on others finding stuff.

 

[solidmotion]

as an observer and not a participant, i'd be interested in something along the lines of a best teams or best duos/lines/d pairs project. not so interested in all-star teams or hof which would end up focusing on the same players that get talked about all the time anyway.

 

[rmartin65]

The all stars project still holds the most appeal to me personally, but I think @ResilientBeast nailed it when he talked about how much work is going to go into that one. Personally, I'd rather hold off to make sure we do it right, especially since it seems like people don't like revisiting projects.

Women's hockey is probably the project that would cover the most new ground, but again, it is a somewhat research-heavy project. I'm curious to see how many people are actually interested.

Top defensemen is likely the most fun undertaking. There is a lot of readily available information, we get to talk about our favorites, there should still be a decent amount of movement because it has been a while, etc.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I think we should do a top defenseman just not yet. The last one was in 2012. Both Lidstrom and Pronger retired in 2012.

So since the last project no top 20 defenseman has played hockey. Karlsson and Chara in the 20-30 range. Then Keith, Hedman, Doughty in the 30-50 range. Then, Weber?

We can all recognize there is a surplus of young all star defensemen in the league right now. I wouldn't put Makar top 40 today, but in three years is he fighting for a top 20 spot? Hughes? Fox?

Compare that to centres, where Crosby and McDavid have all defined their legacy since the top centre project and would be top 10. Malkin top 25. Thornton added. That's not even getting into Mackinnon, Matthews, Draisaitl. There's way more change in that position.

Or wingers, with Ovechkin and Kane and Kucherov doing tons. Pastrnak knocking on the door.

I just think waiting on d men provides a lot more value.

 

[Professor What]

I think we should do a top defenseman just not yet. The last one was in 2012. Both Lidstrom and Pronger retired in 2012.

So since the last project no top 20 defenseman has played hockey. Karlsson and Chara in the 20-30 range. Then Keith, Hedman, Doughty in the 30-50 range. Then, Weber?

We can all recognize there is a surplus of young all star defensemen in the league right now. I wouldn't put Makar top 40 today, but in three years is he fighting for a top 20 spot? Hughes? Fox?

Compare that to centres, where Crosby and McDavid have all defined their legacy since the top centre project and would be top 10. Malkin top 25. Thornton added. That's not even getting into Mackinnon, Matthews, Draisaitl. There's way more change in that position.

Or wingers, with Ovechkin and Kane and Kucherov doing tons. Pastrnak knocking on the door.

I just think waiting on d men provides a lot more value.

Well, the centers project is 10 years old this year. I think it could use a revisiting. The goalies project is one year older though. Would there have been significant change there? Lundqvist and Luongo should have risen, and Carey Price has his fair share of supporters, so he might enter the list. Any of the positional projects might see some movement by some of the early guys after the pre-consolidation project as well.

 

[wetcoast]

2 days and 5 posters sadly seems telling and to be truthful I'd be interested in seeing a project like best centers or defenseman as quite a bit of time has passed but I'd really like to see a larger and deeper dive into the top playoff performers of all time but there just seems to be a general lack of interest right now.

Maybe in the offseason something sparks, if not sooner.

 

[seventieslord]

the only problem with all all-star team project is the amount of newspaper reading we'd have to do for it to be even remotely valuable on per season basis

But that kind of is the whole point of these projects, to uncover new info.

 

[ResilientBeast]

But that kind of is the whole point of these projects, to uncover new info.

Yes but it's a big commitment to read enough papers (presumably both home and away or neutral) to get a true sense on a players value or performance over the course of a season.

My folders of scans I have pretty decent coverage for a paper from every city with a PCHA team and did attempt to count "star" mentions and I know @rmartin65 has done something similar so how much different could a HOH voting project turn out than just doing that? How could we authoritatively overrule the people describing the games? It's different when we're talking about a player in totality over the course of their careers

It would take a long time and would need a much different framework than our previous projects.
I'm not saying we don't do it because it's difficult, just expectation setting.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Every time I've done a project it felt I knew 1/10th of what I should have known to make an informed decision, but I had to make it by the end of the week.

I will follow the project you guys decide to do with great interest, I just don't want to vote.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I would be more interested in an open-ended project, with each season having its own thread, with a central thread tying them all together.

No deadline, no voting, although we can try to reach consensus within each season's thread after enough work has been presented.

Although All-Star teams wouldn't be the only goal, it would be a focal point of interest.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Yes but it's a big commitment to read enough papers (presumably both home and away or neutral) to get a true sense on a players value or performance over the course of a season.

My folders of scans I have pretty decent coverage for a paper from every city with a PCHA team and did attempt to count "star" mentions and I know @rmartin65 has done something similar so how much different could a HOH voting project turn out than just doing that? How could we authoritatively overrule the people describing the games? It's different when we're talking about a player in totality over the course of their careers

It would take a long time and would need a much different framework than our previous projects.
I'm not saying we don't do it because it's difficult, just expectation setting.

Consolidating this in a mega-thread for each season would be a great start and a valuable resource.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

as a non-participant, i suggested that i’d be enthusiastic about year by year playoff all-star teams

here’s my reasoning: a while back there were a series of posts about best dmen playoff runs of the bourque era and i did newspaper, youtube, and statistical deep dives into 1989 macinnis, 1990 bourque, and 1992 chelios. these were runs that happened 30-35 years ago, fully documented on the internet, and we were learning stuff, for ex, how not just historically dominant the calgary PP was but also how consistent it was and how it broke the habs’ mighty defensive machine, how heroic bourque was as a one man team for the first half of the finals before he just gave out, and how you could make a reasonable case for chelios for the 1992 conn smythe in terms of tilting the ice, including in the finals sweep.

all to say, if ppl are going to want to have the same old bourque vs lidstrom or whatever arguments again, probably more worthwhile to get into this “minutia” (though i wouldn’t call it that as i’d argue this is actually the “meat” of their careers) and learn about/re-remember the games that truly mattered and cemented their legacies as opposed to generalizing over long careers, which has been done a million times before. imo it’s the best combo of learning things we don’t collectively know and arguing about the same guys we always argue about.

 

[Professor What]

Only 14 replies... Is there really that little interest? What happened?

 

[Michael Farkas]

If I had to guess:
1) We just did this thread
2) There isn't really a call to action
3) No real options are presented, it's very open ended...and people aren't always up for responding to that
4) Is the ATD going on right now?

Here's what I might do - and I'll say that it's about to be grind time for scouting season for me, so it's going to be tough to participate for me in this window before June, so feel free to ignore me.

Read the rooms (because there are other threads)...make a call and do it. And folks will join or they won't. If you feel there's going to be pretty light participation, then do a research heavy project that benefits the board but doesn't involve a lot of meaningful list making or whatever.

If you feel like participation might be heavier or at least "decent" then maybe do something superficial like the HOF remodeling project or something, where folks can come and go and it won't materially affect the product too much.

I don't think there's anything more to say, I don't think anyone is going to come up with a case and have everyone go, "ohhhhh...yeah, that's a good idea that I want to be a part of!"

 

[Professor What]

If I had to guess:
1) We just did this thread
2) There isn't really a call to action
3) No real options are presented, it's very open ended...and people aren't always up for responding to that
4) Is the ATD going on right now?

Here's what I might do - and I'll say that it's about to be grind time for scouting season for me, so it's going to be tough to participate for me in this window before June, so feel free to ignore me.

Read the rooms (because there are other threads)...make a call and do it. And folks will join or they won't. If you feel there's going to be pretty light participation, then do a research heavy project that benefits the board but doesn't involve a lot of meaningful list making or whatever.

If you feel like participation might be heavier or at least "decent" then maybe do something superficial like the HOF remodeling project or something, where folks can come and go and it won't materially affect the product too much.

I don't think there's anything more to say, I don't think anyone is going to come up with a case and have everyone go, "ohhhhh...yeah, that's a good idea that I want to be a part of!"

I tried reading the room and getting something starting a couple of time already, and there was basically an "I don't want to do that" response, even to the top vote getters, and things kind of fizzled out.

I tried to present some options at the beginning so that people could say yea or nay to them, trying to keep it from being entirely open-ended. I was really hoping that people would be willing to say which one of the previously considered projects they'd be interested in/willing to do, but there's been little of that.

I've already said that I'd be willing to take on an administrative role to, and while I'd like to have somebody to work with, that should help with the work load for most people.

The ATD going on could certainly be an issue for the right now, but I'd also point out that we don't have to start immediately. We can wait until the ATD is done, and it doesn't cost any time worth mentioning to simply say, yes, I'll take part when it's done. (I get your issue with the timing. Real life has to come first, and scouting is real life for you.)

 

[overpass]

as a non-participant, i suggested that i’d be enthusiastic about year by year playoff all-star teams

here’s my reasoning: a while back there were a series of posts about best dmen playoff runs of the bourque era and i did newspaper, youtube, and statistical deep dives into 1989 macinnis, 1990 bourque, and 1992 chelios. these were runs that happened 30-35 years ago, fully documented on the internet, and we were learning stuff, for ex, how not just historically dominant the calgary PP was but also how consistent it was and how it broke the habs’ mighty defensive machine, how heroic bourque was as a one man team for the first half of the finals before he just gave out, and how you could make a reasonable case for chelios for the 1992 conn smythe in terms of tilting the ice, including in the finals sweep.

all to say, if ppl are going to want to have the same old bourque vs lidstrom or whatever arguments again, probably more worthwhile to get into this “minutia” (though i wouldn’t call it that as i’d argue this is actually the “meat” of their careers) and learn about/re-remember the games that truly mattered and cemented their legacies as opposed to generalizing over long careers, which has been done a million times before. imo it’s the best combo of learning things we don’t collectively know and arguing about the same guys we always argue about.

Co-sign.

I will say more generally that I would prefer a project with a narrower focus, and with a broader appeal. Year by year playoff all star teams would fit this bill. So would a "Player of the year" project, where we vote on the best hockey player of the season, including regular season, playoffs, and maybe even international hockey.

 

[Professor What]

Co-sign.

I will say more generally that I would prefer a project with a narrower focus, and with a broader appeal. Year by year playoff all star teams would fit this bill. So would a "Player of the year" project, where we vote on the best hockey player of the season, including regular season, playoffs, and maybe even international hockey.

That kind of sounds like a variation of the all-star project that has been suggested. The original idea was to choose all-star teams for seasons before official ones existed/grant awards in years before they were awarded, but if that were to be done, I wouldn't have an issue with revisiting existing teams to include, say WHA and Eastern European stars.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I tried reading the room and getting something starting a couple of time already, and there was basically an "I don't want to do that" response, even to the top vote getters, and things kind of fizzled out.

I tried to present some options at the beginning so that people could say yea or nay to them, trying to keep it from being entirely open-ended. I was really hoping that people would be willing to say which one of the previously considered projects they'd be interested in/willing to do, but there's been little of that.

I've already said that I'd be willing to take on an administrative role to, and while I'd like to have somebody to work with, that should help with the work load for most people.

The ATD going on could certainly be an issue for the right now, but I'd also point out that we don't have to start immediately. We can wait until the ATD is done, and it doesn't cost any time worth mentioning to simply say, yes, I'll take part when it's done. (I get your issue with the timing. Real life has to come first, and scouting is real life for you.)

Just to be clear, I don't think you're doing anything wrong. I think you're doing something very altruistic. But you asked why you weren't getting feedback, and I'm presenting that as best as I can see.

 

[Professor What]

Just to be clear, I don't think you're doing anything wrong. I think you're doing something very altruistic. But you asked why you weren't getting feedback, and I'm presenting that as best as I can see.

Yeah, I appreciate that, and that's the way I took it. If my response didn't come across that way, I apologize. I was just trying to present some of the difficulties that had been hit so that maybe people would understand that more.

 

[overpass]

That kind of sounds like a variation of the all-star project that has been suggested. The original idea was to choose all-star teams for seasons before official ones existed/grant awards in years before they were awarded, but if that were to be done, I wouldn't have an issue with revisiting existing teams to include, say WHA and Eastern European stars.

I don't think it's the same. There are no official playoff all star teams, and there is no Player of the Year award that includes the playoffs. Even the Hart trophy isn't really for the regular season Player of the Year, as the word "valuable" puts a different spin on things for some voters So a playoff all-star project and a player of the year project would both take a fresh look without re-doing someone else's work.

TSN launched a Player of the Year award in 2008 which was awarded to the most outstanding player of the regular season and playoffs. Henrik Zetterberg edged out Alex Ovechkin in voting, and Nicklas Lidstrom placed third. That's what I have in mind. But the award is long gone by now, almost disappeared from the internet. As far as I can tell, the inaugural award was the final award.

I think doing retro awards doesn't have as broad an appeal, because not everyone in this section is interested in pre-WWII hockey. I enjoyed the pre-consolidation project, but there's something to be said for a project that includes eras within living memory of some members, with full games available for everyone to watch.

 

[nabby12]

Only 14 replies... Is there really that little interest? What happened?

It's time to take a pause for the cause on this, Prof. It's clear a new project isn't happening in the immediate future.

Breathe and focus on ATD for now.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I don't think it's the same. There are no official playoff all star teams, and there is no Player of the Year award that includes the playoffs. Even the Hart trophy isn't really for the regular season Player of the Year, as the word "valuable" puts a different spin on things for some voters So a playoff all-star project and a player of the year project would both take a fresh look without re-doing someone else's work.

TSN launched a Player of the Year award in 2008 which was awarded to the most outstanding player of the regular season and playoffs. Henrik Zetterberg edged out Alex Ovechkin in voting, and Nicklas Lidstrom placed third. That's what I have in mind. But the award is long gone by now, almost disappeared from the internet. As far as I can tell, the inaugural award was the final award.

I think doing retro awards doesn't have as broad an appeal, because not everyone in this section is interested in pre-WWII hockey. I enjoyed the pre-consolidation project, but there's something to be said for a project that includes eras within living memory of some members, with full games available for everyone to watch.

If we're going to revive awards that were handed out only a single time, my vote is for the Sheraton Road Performer. He has a Hart trophy, a Conn Smythe, and was MVP at the Olympics - but I think this is what Joe Sakic is most proud of.