Top 10 defense prospects not in nhl

[lomiller1]

@lomiller1
Has there been a study to quantify age differential that fully accounts for the confounding variable of the extra season of experience post minor midget/ U16 that the vast majority of 4th quarter birthdays have in their draft year?

Not that I know off. (The lack of such means it would be inappropriate to assume these are of any consequence.)

What is know is that having a birthday in the last 3 months of the year means you are significantly less likely to play in the NHL then if you were born in the first 3 months. NHL players with a Jan birth month are ~60 more common than those with a Dec birth month. The likely reason for this is lower levels of hockey using birth year to separate age groups so players born late in the year are being matched up with older players at every stage of development and therefor get less ice time and less access to high level coaching.
Something worth considering is that because draft year is based off NHL season, the differences in birth month more or less balance out. Players born 6 months into the NHL season are older than ~1/2 their draft class and younger than ~1/2 their draft class. This would not be the case if you based it on birth year.

This appears to happen mostly before players hit the NHL radar. What the research on NHL prospects does exist shows that at 18 years old each month of age results in ~1.5% difference in productivity in their respective leagues. There is no evidence I know of that where they were developing matters much unless you are talking some very low level of play, or someplace with sub-par coaching.

Some people argue that it’s best to play at the highest level where you will get significant ice time. But my own preference is to see players play at a leave where they can be top players it affords them the opportunity to try new things. A player who is a middling player in their league won’t be afforded much opportunity for mistakes and when they try something new it probably won’t work against better players which would tend to dissuade them from trying new things. This, IMO, tends to lead to a player that makes fewer mistakes but be more risk averse and therefor less high end creativity.

 

[4thline]

Not that I know off.

I figured as much. That 1.5% pet month study is useless if it fails to even attempt to account for the fact @18.0 some prospects have 1.5 years of junior experience and others 2.5. It' bad expire mental design.

I suspect that a "months since September of u17 year" variable would out perform raw age.

The damage of RAE is done early, but for the survivors the transition to junior is a fresh start.

 

[CraigBillington]

Well Kylington's name certainly doesn't belong in this thread.

Yea leave to the Flames faithful to think they have 3 of the top 10 defense prospects in the league .

 

[DieTomi]

1. Heiskanen (DAL)
2. Makar (COL)
3. Juolevi (VAN)
4. Brännström (VGK)
5. Liljegren (TOR)
6. Fox (CGY)
7. Jokiharju (CHI)
8. Niku (WPG)
9. Timmins (COL)
10. Clague (LA)

 

[lomiller1]

I figured as much. That 1.5% pet month study is useless if it fails to even attempt to account for the fact @18.0 some prospects have 1.5 years of junior experience and others 2.5. It' bad expire mental design.

Do you think players just stop playing hockey for a year because they were born in the wrong month? Players do not stop developing just because they happen to be in a different league.

I
I suspect that a "months since September of u17 year" variable would out perform raw age.

I suspect you are pulling this out of you’re a** and have no evidence to support your invention. There is evidence to support the impact of relative age on prospect performance. There is no evidence whatsoever to support your pet theory. When building a model, It’s pretty standard to not include things that are not know or even reasonably expected to exist.

The damage of RAE is done early, but for the survivors the transition to junior is a fresh start.

The underlying basis for the bias against players born late in the calendar year is physical maturity compared to the peers they are matched up against. Since 16-18 years is big for development of size and strength in males the notion that the effect would suddenly disappears when you hit the CHL is absurd.
For funsies
From what you are saying it seems like you think players born in 1997 should be lumped together, even if they are from different draft classes. Player with the late birthday will be developmentally a year ahead of players born in 1998 and therefor have a large inherent advantage over them and should be expected to outperform them by a significant amount even thought they may not be as talented? Can you confirm?

 

[4thline]

From what you are saying it seems like you think players born in 1997 should be lumped together, even if they are from different draft classes. Player with the late birthday will be developmentally a year ahead of players born in 1998 and therefor have a large inherent advantage over them and should be expected to outperform them by a significant amount even thought they may not be as talented? Can you confirm?

Yes, I lump players by birthyear, and make projections and comparisons based on what "U-xx" seasons a given performance level takes place in. If a player is notably raw physically I take that into account. And yes, I have higher expectations for the late born cohort in their draft year. Holding all else equal a 3rd year / U19 junior should be better than a 2nd. Unless a player is good enough to make the NHL at 20 being a late birthday doesn't materially impact their development relative to the rest of their cohort. What it does give you is another year of data to track against historical comparables, and of each players invidual progression. The fact that a player can play three CHL seasons and have to wait an extra year to be drafted compared to the AAA teamates they've played alongside since the age of 10 should be clue enough.

For funsies
Do you think that if the NHL went to a 19 year old draft age as rumoured do you think they'd maintain the Sept 15 cutoff and force late borns to wait until after their last season of junior eligibility to be drafted, or move to a calendar year system so that all players are drafted after their U19 season?

For funsies 2
Students are admitted to school based on YOB, Jan 1 cutoff. A scholarship is based on a standardized test taken upon the conclusion of your 16 year old year, determined by a Sept 15 cutoff. Is that a fair scholarship, pitting students that have completed grade 12 against those of 11?

PS. I think that the entire hockey and school system standardizing around a Sept cut off would make sense, but that's not they way the world is.

 

[ITM]

1. Heiskanen (DAL)
2. Makar (COL)
3. Juolevi (VAN)
4. Brännström (VGK)
5. Liljegren (TOR)
6. Fox (CGY)
7. Jokiharju (CHI)
8. Niku (WPG)
9. Timmins (COL)
10. Clague (LA)

Definitley not enough love on the boards for Sami Niku. Looks outstanding. Fantastic pick by the Jets.

 

[NHL RankKing]

Here are the top 20 NHL defensemen prospects based on PNHLe(an age-, league- and position- adjusted stat that looks at prospect point production):

This isn't a projection of how good a player is and disregards many important aspects of point potential (simply because they aren't available for many leagues) i.e. defensive partners, time on ice, situational usage etc.

 

[Kcb12345]

Here are the top 20 NHL defensemen prospects based on PNHLe(an age-, league- and position- adjusted stat that looks at prospect point production):View attachment 97705
This isn't a projection of how good a player is and disregards many important aspects of point potential (simply because they aren't available for many leagues) i.e. defensive partners, time on ice, situational usage etc.

Very interesting

 

[Breakers]

I'm surprised how many people have Juolevi as high as they do.

I don't see it, and this is coming from a canucks fan.
Also not very high on Valimaki. He was hands down the worst of top 4 d-man for Finland.

 

[ITM]

Here are the top 20 NHL defensemen prospects based on PNHLe(an age-, league- and position- adjusted stat that looks at prospect point production):View attachment 97705
This isn't a projection of how good a player is and disregards many important aspects of point potential (simply because they aren't available for many leagues) i.e. defensive partners, time on ice, situational usage etc.

Why is Kale Clague listed twice (1st and 9th)?

 

[landy92mack29]

Why is Kale Clague listed twice (1st and 9th)?

he was traded so it's from 2 teams

 

[FinPanda]

I'm surprised how many people have Juolevi as high as they do.

I don't see it, and this is coming from a canucks fan.
Also not very high on Valimaki. He was hands down the worst of top 4 d-man for Finland.

I thought Välimäki was the best or at least the second best Finnish D in the tournament. I think he played his worst game in the QF though. Jokiharju was the best. Juolevi played one good game in the whole tournament, but it was when it mattered.

 

[nickdawg95]

lol no guhle ?

 

[Mr Plow]

Juolevi is being overrated. He was over drafted to begin with and his development has been anything but smooth. I still hope he can cream our team in the next two years but he'd be in tough to make a top 20, let alone a top 10.

 

[lakai17]

Brannstrom in my top 2.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Juolevi is being overrated. He was over drafted to begin with and his development has been anything but smooth. I still hope he can cream our team in the next two years but he'd be in tough to make a top 20, let alone a top 10.

How exactly do you want him to ”cream” your team...?

 

[Dack]

I'm surprised how many people have Juolevi as high as they do.

I don't see it, and this is coming from a canucks fan.
Also not very high on Valimaki. He was hands down the worst of top 4 d-man for Finland.

He was injured. After the tournament he didn't play for Tri City for a month. Also he was arguably their best D man (Jokiharju) through the first three games the last two just were really bad. Also his WHL time is a lot more important than 5 games he played while injured.

 

[Breakers]

I thought Välimäki was the best or at least the second best Finnish D in the tournament. I think he played his worst game in the QF though. Jokiharju was the best. Juolevi played one good game in the whole tournament, but it was when it mattered.

Nah the numbers showed Valimaki and Heiskanen struggled.
They were the worst in their own zone, and the shot differentials for Valimaki were the worst.

Juolevi and Jokiharju were substantially better in every aspect, thats why they got switched to the 1st unit PP, and shut down pairing.

 

[DieTomi]

I'm surprised how many people have Juolevi as high as they do.

I don't see it, and this is coming from a canucks fan.
Also not very high on Valimaki. He was hands down the worst of top 4 d-man for Finland.

I think he warrants a spot in the top 10 and at times this year has looked top 5. His development hasn't been the best but every time I've seen him play I've been very impressed by him. Great skater and fantastic passer, has pretty good offensive instincts but needs to work on his effort level in the d zone. IMO he has all the tools to become a top pairing defender even if he isn't going to be that elite #1. Canucks fans should be patient instead of pronouncing him a failed pick.

 

[Mr Plow]

How exactly do you want him to ”cream” your team...?

For some reason Swype doesn't work for me on this site. If I try to select a word it will often put something else in or try to combine the two words. I need to stop commenting from my phone.

 

[Calgareee]

Seeing a lot of Fox and Valimaki for the Flames mentioned. Honestly would rate Rasmus Andersson higher than both. Realistically he should be playing in the NHL right now...

 

[jalperi]

Here are the top 20 NHL defensemen prospects based on PNHLe(an age-, league- and position- adjusted stat that looks at prospect point production):View attachment 97705
This isn't a projection of how good a player is and disregards many important aspects of point potential (simply because they aren't available for many leagues) i.e. defensive partners, time on ice, situational usage etc.

What website is that?