You're still misinterpreting the argument I am making. I'm not saying 'first to {insert better league}' = better prospect. No, I'm saying that for the prospects putting up mediocre numbers in better leagues, it's hard to judge them straight across to prospects putting up great numbers in lesser leagues.
Fair point in that it is definitely 'harder' to make comparisons across disparate leagues, yet it is done all the time and I think more often than not, it is done reasonably well.
The issue comes down to precedent and pegging production against these comparables. Boeser's comps at this point are in different level than Eriksson-Ek's are.
Or if you prefer, we can use NHLe to give us a reasonable 'sense' of how their production compares:
Boeser -> 34 NHLe points (using .33 NCAA to NHL adjustment)
Eriksson-Ek -> 18 NHLe points (using .59 SHL to NHL adjustment)
http://hockeyanalytics.com/Research_files/League_Equivalencies.pdf
That isn't a small gap even factoring in the much higher SHL conversion.
How can you compare things so readily across contexts? What evaluation tools are you using? NHLE? The peculiar quirk in this discussion is that there is no OHL baseline with which to compare an NCAA player. Nothing reaching significance anyway. Even though Boeser is not assured to be any better than TJ Oshie... Or, that Ritchie tracked exactly like Landeskog by his pre-draft numbers -- even though his OHL numbers were not 'record setting' by comparison.
Well again we *can* use NHLe as a proxy to help in this discussion. The article I linked above rates the OHL to NHL at 0.3, which is on par (slightly lower) than the NCAA rate of 0.33. Even if we take the OHL and NCAA at par, Boeser's D+1 scoring rate of 1.26 is on par with Ritchie's D+1 rate of 1.29. This would support ranking Boeser much closer to Ritchie (#11) than where he was (#36)
The recency of data is colouring things here. Boeser is having an outstanding year, while Ritchie is struggling to adjust to the NHL game at 20 years of age.
Perhaps. Recency is a difficult bias to completely overcome. That said, I find Boeser's production in NCAA more 'historically rare' than Ritchie's production in the OHL. That uses precedent and comparables, something I know you have argued for in the past in other draft and prospect discussions. I think it is fair to factor that in here as well.
Side question for you: You would 'equally factor' 3 seasons (Draft + Draft(+1) + AHL) of very good production to a 22 game poor production NHL sample? I'd like to hear your rationale for this.
No, I would put much more weight on his D+1 and AHL season than his brief NHL stint. The NHL stint is only meant as a 'caution' to getting overly caught up in his very strong AHL production. I think his 'true' value lies between his low NHL production and his impressive AHL production. Similar to how Kassian put up nearly PPG in his first year in the A (albeit as a D+2), I think Ritchie has made a quick transition to the AHL level but this may not carry over fully to the NHL level.
But I am fine ignoring his NHL stint so far and focussing just on D+1 for both Boeser and Ritchie. Using that comparison alone, Boeser is easily at Ritchie's level, if not even above it. The AHL is a point in Ritchie's favour, but one that we can't see a comparable in Boeser (yet).
Do you compare OHL and NCAA competition straight across? Did you see Ritchie with the Petes? Particularly, in the playoffs? He put that team on his back.
I've seen Ritchie. I saw Boeser last year, not this year. I'm quite confident in saying that you are underrating Ritchie's skill level (and overrating Boeser's own by comparison).
To bring this back to the ground a little bit: Do you consider Oshie and/or Toews to have 'elite' skill? Further, do you project Boeser to have more natural talent than the aforementioned?
Yes I would compare OHL and NCAA straight across. NHLe supports this and I think the quality of talent to come out of both leagues suggests they are close. Of course Boeser is on the young side for NCAA, while Ritchie was on the old side for OHL. But I will give that Ritchie's play as a young AHLer probably negates this.
Am I underrating Ritchie and overrating Boeser by suggesting they should be ranked equally (or at least much much closer)? I don't think so, with my reasons for that explained above.
Do I consider Toews to have 'elite' skill? Yes. Not necessarily on par with other 'elite' players - say Crosby or McDavid - but in the pantheon of 600+ NHL players? Yes absolutely. Oshie is very skilled as well, though perhaps a notch below 'elite'. Still higher natural 'skill' than I would peg Ritchie at. I don't know that Boeser is more 'skilled' than either Toews or Oshie - those are lofty comparables - but I think it might be possible. He is certainly showing a pedigree that is in their vicinity so far. Of course he may not translate as well to the NHL as Toews and Oshie did, so that is hard to project. But so far there is a chance at least.
