I would LOVE if Byfield was available at #8 or in a trade-up scenario(#2-#7) but I don't think teams will trade down if he is on the board.
). Disclaimer: I teach simulation engineering at the university level.
I like Rossi because at 8 we still have a chance.
I would support trading up from 8 to 5 or 6 if he is still there, using say, a late second or a third. Based on the image below, a third might do it, although Byfield might amplify the difference between 5 and 8.
Lots of things can happen on draft day. A desperate team may fall in love with the top goalie. Another may decide that they need a PP QB above all else, and bam, #3 becomes available at #5. Someone can develop an injury that perturbs the expected arrangement or a player can drive away interest through his interviews. No one saw Hayton at 5 two years ago. Last year not only Caufield (which would make your argument), but also Newhook and Krebs went later than anticipated.
I would support trading up from 8 to 5 or 6 if he is still there, using say, a late second or a third. Based on the image below, a third might do it, although Byfield might amplify the difference between 5 and 8.
I agree that over the years they seem to pick some player too early especially player that don’t seem to have real potential and seem to target certain player and not adjust to the situation... Simulation can help with reaction or being more comfortable in the situation but can you really improve your skills, since you can pick the player you want but that might not be the right pick. even if your simulations would be very accurate determining which player each team would pick, every error would basically throw away the entire plan, not sure the simulation can really be accurate enough since the determining factor is each team list and how much they want each player. people already kinda know who like who, who they want to pick. simulation is nice and a good way to get more reps but I don’t think you need to put money in simulation, the complexity of the simulation isn’t the issue it is each teams list... if you want to improve you faith, improve the scouting or find a way to hack other teams list...There are some very talented players of average size and less (especially picking at 8 or 9, or better), but I feel that this team has to find some talented players who are above 6 feet (who also conform to the speed requirement of the modern game), assuming that St-Louis and a number of other top teams stick to their formulas for success, especially since this team already has several small players on the NHL squad. That said, it's also true that it needs more high-level talent... period.
On an unrelated note, I'm intrigued by the fanspeak website with the draft simulations. I find that my own performance, albeit based on naive considerations, improves with the number of sims that I do. I wonder if it were possible to reproduce for the Habs this type of simulation (for $100K or so), or at least update it (since fanspeak's choices are a bit dated after all), based on statistical average and variance for each draftee's value among a poll of scouts and random number generators based on those stats. It seems to me that the Habs are too inflexible about their game plan sometimes, and fail to take advantage of some surprises on draft day. Case in point, Pavel Dorofeyev, drafted 79. In my mind, Fairbrother could have waited a round, and we could have Doro at 77. The sim could also replicate trading up or down, based on typical values; to enable us to get the next Pastrnak by trading up 2-3 spots when the opportunity materializes.
I would like to see the Habs test a number of competing strategies, based on multiple runs of these sims, and hone their draft list accordingly, with a little built-in flexibility (not hell-bent on drafting only left-handed defensemen
He is almost a goal per game pace, + 48 while playing on the second line... His +48 differential is pretty indicative of the player, hard work 2-way winger with good size, good hands, high IQ, natural goalscoring skills and not a bad playmaker at all...
I personally never was that high on Pulju, but I just didn't like his style, I'm by no means a scouting reference, he just never struck me as a stud when I watched him play
The point is the simulation could help them refine their list, as well as make it more dynamic. If you just have a list, then you don't necessarily have a prescription for trading up, when Pastrnak is still available two positions ahead of you (don't wait for your traditional rivals to give you their consent, leapfrog them 1-2 positions).
I'm struck by the same impression as well. A lot of 5'8" to 5'10" players among top-rated forwards, and a surprising number among defencemen as well.
But that the thing no simulation will be accurate enough to know which player is being pick when so you can really adjust you list base on the sim info... The sim would also be partly based on list and assumesion that you already have and might not be accurate. The issues isn’t that we didn’t trade up the issue is that we didn’t properly evaluate Pasternak, to even know to trade up, if we would have trade up we might not have drafted Pasternak also even if you want to trade up to move up 2 spots to draft Pasternak you also need the other team be willing to move down.
