2021 NHL Fantasy Draft Discussion

[Llamamoto]

Our approaches to this game are very similar and you are pretty much describing the NYI--really think Barkov, Letang, and Giroux make the team among the best.



Substitute Aston-Reese for Carrier and again this is perfectly describes NYI. In fact, given how he performed in the playoffs as an obvious 2nd pairing D-man, I really like Poolman paired with Del Zotto on the 3rd pair.

When I voted yesterday I didn't give your team enough credit.

I won't change my vote now, (and it won't affect the standings with what I have so far), but I'll be taking a deeper look when it comes to playoff matchups and you should do well there.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

When I voted yesterday I didn't give your team enough credit.

I won't change my vote now, (and it won't affect the standings with what I have so far), but I'll be taking a deeper look when it comes to playoff matchups and you should do well there.

Don't fall for this @42 jerks

I'm the only one who saw your genius.

 

[Panda Bear]

I understand the limitations of it, but what's the point then if it has to be prefaced with all those factors not being included? The exercise is to build a good team no? Not a ragtag group of the players who had the best performance according to analytics.


Well I just don't see a solid team dynamic or much cohesiveness on your team. I like teams that have a nice mix of size, skill and versatility. I don't care as much about individual performance as how a group of individuals will perform together. Having said that I also think that having 2-3 big ticket players can make a group more than the sum of its parts and my voting reflected that. In that respect I only have Point as a big ticket player on your team. I also think a large part of your squad is fairly unproven, but I assume that boils down to their underlying numbers being great and me possibly underrating some of those players. Personally I regard track records as being very important. Anyone can have a great (or bad, for that matter) season under the right (wrong) circumstances.

Taking the Rangers as a counter-example, pretty much every player there is in the right spot and serves a purpose. Top line players on the top line, 2nd liners on the 2nd, 3rd liners on the 3rd, Carrier is a great 4th liner. Rangers also have a good top pair and 3rd pair, only iffy and possible out of position player would be Lauzon, but that is kind of remedied by the fact that the 3rd pair is quite strong. Then Rask in net who is solid too.

You have Bratt and Rust on the top line centered by Point. All of which are small, which in itself might not be a problem but Bratt and Rust are not Palat and Kucherov. Bratt has never scored more than 35 points and Rust, well, he has been chained to the hip of either Crosby or Malkin in the past two seasons at least. You also have Vatrano on the 2nd line who has never scored more than 39 points and IMO is a 3rd liner or below-average 2nd liner at best and is wildly inconsistent.

Chychrun and Weegar might be a great top pair going forward, but they don't have a long track record and you also don't have a solid 2nd pair to bail them out should they struggle. Weegar in particular is someone I'm really curious to see how he will perform next season. Chychrun I think is legit. Your goaltending situation is also a big question mark for me. Swayman was great in a small sample size and has some pedigree that could suggest he'll be good going forward but again he's unproven, and Allen is very average in my book but obviously fine as a backup, but that's assuming you have a more proven starter.

But I guess this game is pretty much solely based off how you did this season so in that respect your team might be much better (in relation to this game) than I give credit for.

All I can do is throw my hands up if you don't see the merit of Vatrano, a volume shooter who's defensively aware, playing with Pavelski and Radulov. Based on this season, it's a middle sixer with two top line players.

 

[Panda Bear]

I understand the limitations of it, but what's the point then if it has to be prefaced with all those factors not being included? The exercise is to build a good team no? Not a ragtag group of the players who had the best performance according to analytics.


Well I just don't see a solid team dynamic or much cohesiveness on your team. I like teams that have a nice mix of size, skill and versatility. I don't care as much about individual performance as how a group of individuals will perform together. Having said that I also think that having 2-3 big ticket players can make a group more than the sum of its parts and my voting reflected that. In that respect I only have Point as a big ticket player on your team. I also think a large part of your squad is fairly unproven, but I assume that boils down to their underlying numbers being great and me possibly underrating some of those players. Personally I regard track records as being very important. Anyone can have a great (or bad, for that matter) season under the right (wrong) circumstances.

Taking the Rangers as a counter-example, pretty much every player there is in the right spot and serves a purpose. Top line players on the top line, 2nd liners on the 2nd, 3rd liners on the 3rd, Carrier is a great 4th liner. Rangers also have a good top pair and 3rd pair, only iffy and possible out of position player would be Lauzon, but that is kind of remedied by the fact that the 3rd pair is quite strong. Then Rask in net who is solid too.

You have Bratt and Rust on the top line centered by Point. All of which are small, which in itself might not be a problem but Bratt and Rust are not Palat and Kucherov. Bratt has never scored more than 35 points and Rust, well, he has been chained to the hip of either Crosby or Malkin in the past two seasons at least. You also have Vatrano on the 2nd line who has never scored more than 39 points and IMO is a 3rd liner or below-average 2nd liner at best and is wildly inconsistent.

Chychrun and Weegar might be a great top pair going forward, but they don't have a long track record and you also don't have a solid 2nd pair to bail them out should they struggle. Weegar in particular is someone I'm really curious to see how he will perform next season. Chychrun I think is legit. Your goaltending situation is also a big question mark for me. Swayman was great in a small sample size and has some pedigree that could suggest he'll be good going forward but again he's unproven, and Allen is very average in my book but obviously fine as a backup, but that's assuming you have a more proven starter.

But I guess this game is pretty much solely based off how you did this season so in that respect your team might be much better (in relation to this game) than I give credit for.

All I can do is throw my hands up if you don't see the merit of Vatrano, a volume shooter who's defensively aware, playing with Pavelski and Radulov. Based on this season, it's a middle sixer with two top line players.

 

[McMozesmadness]

I think these numbers are pretty pointless. Your team is a massive runaway winner here yet to me it's one of the worst teams in the mock from a roster building perspective. It's the definition of a paper tiger. It has virtually no size throughout the lineup, a rookie goalie as a starter, a top pair of two guys who just now had their breakout seasons and a 2nd pair of two guys that are small and probably would struggle quite a bit in those minutes. I see a roster that would get bullied by most teams in the NHL.

Conversely I think a team like the Rangers are incredibly well built. It's deep and has players playing in their proper positions where they can excel, but your numbers suggest they're the 11th worst team.

I agree on Pandas team being soft. But. Not a shot at Joey, but my first though when looking at the Rags is that team is butter soft. Had both in the playoffs though. My assessments change come playoffs.

I'm not the last one in the Panda Ranking, that's good enough for my first fantasy draft!

I liked your team quite a bit. Made the playoffs for me. That second line is amazing. Top pair was one of the best. Liked your depth and jam. Issues would be Yandle. I'm not sure I'd even take him in one of these, top line mix (three good players, just an odd mix, to me) and goaltending. Although I don't think it's THAT bad. Looks worse than it is. Swap Yandle out for something more useful and a better goalie option and i think you have a great team.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

All I can do is throw my hands up if you don't see the merit of Vatrano, a volume shooter who's defensively aware, playing with Pavelski and Radulov. Based on this season, it's a middle sixer with two top line players.

I mean....in the interest of fairness and accuracy a top 6 player on a sunbelt team = a 3rd liner.

 

[Carl182]

I agree on Pandas team being soft. But. Not a shot at Joey, but my first though when looking at the Rags is that team is butter soft. Had both in the playoffs though. My assessments change come playoffs.


I liked your team quite a bit. Made the playoffs for me. That second line is amazing. Top pair was one of the best. Liked your depth and jam. Issues would be Yandle. I'm not sure I'd even take him in one of these, top line mix (three good players, just an odd mix, to me) and goaltending. Although I don't think it's THAT bad. Looks worse than it is. Swap Yandle out for something more useful and a better goalie option and i think you have a great team.

I traded Zadorov for Yandle, Yandle was in the doghouse this year with Florida, not sure why..
But yeah, I learned a lot in this first fantasy. Don't wait too long for a good goalie, don't need as much depth and always go BPA.

I've put myself just outside the playoff.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

I traded Zadorov for Yandle, Yandle was in the doghouse this year with Florida, not sure why..
But yeah, I learned a lot in this first fantasy. Don't wait too long for a good goalie, don't need as much depth and always go BPA.

I've put myself just outside the playoff.

There was one year where everyone doubled up on goalies mid draft that basically screwed a lot of players at the top of the draft.

Mostly me......as I'm a stubborn jackass.

I always build the team I want to build but if you don't keep pace with the mob thou shalt be cast out.

 

[BeLeafing]

There was one year where everyone doubled up on goalies mid draft that basically screwed a lot of players at the top of the draft.

*shudders at the memory of Rinne as my starter*

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

*shudders at the memory of Rinne as my starter*

I had lord Joonas. Who will likely get in somehow as the mob selectively downplays goal.

 

[Panda Bear]

I mean....in the interest of fairness and accuracy a top 6 player on a sunbelt team = a 3rd liner.

We see third liners playing on first lines all the time. It's all about role and fit.

At least this is nominally the second line.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

We see third liners playing on first lines all the time. It's all about role and fit.

At least this is nominally the second line.

Fit is interchangeable with I like my team.

No need to bring stats up.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

We see third liners playing on first lines all the time. It's all about role and fit.

At least this is nominally the second line.

Actually nevermind,

I think you should take your model and apply some sort of injury/played games element and general fluctuation in goals or whatever you're doing, as a league share that fluctuates.

Also what you eat for breakfast modifiers that vary depending on popular breafast trends.

 

[Panda Bear]

Actually nevermind,

I think you should take your model and apply some sort of injury/played games element and general fluctuation in goals or whatever you're doing, as a league share that fluctuates.

Also what you eat for breakfast modifiers that vary depending on popular breafast trends.

I do prorate the statistics based upon games played normalized by time on ice with a cut off of nine games for sample size.

Could you expand on what you mean regarding league share?

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

I do prorate the statistics based upon games played normalized by time on ice with a cut off of nine games for sample size.

Could you expand on what you mean regarding league share?

Nevermind. It's not random enough.

 

[Panda Bear]

Nevermind. It's not random enough.

For what it's worth, I get where you're coming from regarding applying statistics to sports when it comes to predictive power.

 

[Panda Bear]

Fit is interchangeable with I like my team.

No need to bring stats up.

Well, maybe. I think every line should be built with an eye to F1/2/3 and each player's major tendencies in terms of how and where they like to make plays.

There are plenty of "I like my team" where the players on a given line don't jive like when someone rolls three left-handed perimeter playmakers who tend to be F2 or F3.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

For what it's worth, I get where you're coming from regarding applying statistics to sports when it comes to predictive power.

So what's the point then? Just release a rank of the players and automate it in order?

 

[Panda Bear]

So what's the point then? Just release a rank of the players and automate it in order?

If it were possible to perfectly adjust for (1) a player's usage through a given game, (2) the context of every shift in terms of game state, linemates and opposition, (3) break down their style of play into a series of revealing metrics followed by (4) calculating which combination of player types is most likely to win a game, then yeah, you would just rank and automate for the purposes of this game.

And then everyone would argue about the best way to build the algorithms, process the data and so on, which is why every single advanced stats website uses their own xGoals model.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

If it were possible to perfectly adjust for (1) a player's usage through a given game, (2) the context of every shift in terms of game state, linemates and opposition, (3) break down their style of play into a series of revealing metrics followed by (4) calculating which combination of player types is most likely to win a game, then yeah, you would just rank and automate for the purposes of this game.

And then everyone would argue about the best way to build the algorithms, process the data and so on, which is why every single advanced stats website uses their own xGoals model.

Which is exactly what's happening.

 

[Panda Bear]

Which is exactly what's happening.

Yeah. It works perfectly for a message board.

 

[belair]

Yep. Voting went pretty much the way I imagined. Players on their off hands and inexperienced rookies in significant roles get overlooked because of name value.

It'd be interesting to see an EA sim or something similar, but the voting in these has always been kind of silly.

 

[OB5]

I traded Zadorov for Yandle, Yandle was in the doghouse this year with Florida, not sure why..
But yeah, I learned a lot in this first fantasy. Don't wait too long for a good goalie, don't need as much depth and always go BPA.

I've put myself just outside the playoff.

Because he sucks

 

[Carl182]

Because he sucks

Well his ice time dropped by like 5 minutes per game in 2 years since Florida changed coach. His game hasn't downgrade that much in this time frame to justify such a drop in ice time. I must admit I don't follow Florida as much as other teams though.

 

[Panda Bear]

Well his ice time dropped by like 5 minutes per game in 2 years since Florida changed coach. His game hasn't downgrade that much in this time frame to justify such a drop in ice time. I must admit I don't follow Florida as much as other teams though.

Dude's slowing down, and he's not big or strong enough to offset that. Causes a whole host of problems defending the rush, evading the forecheck or even just reacting to plays.