Draft Day Megathread (BS-APPROVED, NO DOUBTERS ALLOWED!)

[FlyTimmo]

But how does that translate to Risto scoring 7 points on the Flyers? Are you suggesting that he would have the exact same percentage points across teams and that would be static for everyone? No matter how bad you think he is you know he would not actually score 7 points on this team.

I'll admit it is a very poor way of assessing points across teams and I retract that. But, what I don't retract is on the Flyers at least, I doubt he scores more. Maybe even a lot less.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

It's tough to understand Ristolainen's influence, too.

I strongly dislike how much of a flashpoint his name has become because there are a whole bunch of interesting discussions to be had about a player with those metrics. It could be a learning point if the hockey community could stop arguing long enough to have honest conversations.

 

[FlyTimmo]

I disagree with the methodology as it doesn't isolate Ristolainen's contributions. You subtract Ristolainen's 41 points, yet keep all of the points influenced by him? At least, that's what I'm guessing ( 527-41 = 486). It's tough to understand Ristolainen's influence, too. He was on the ice for more than half of Buffalo's total goals (101)--in 73 games no less!

Yeah, I'm stupid. Forget that shit lol.

What I tried to do was just simply find out how many points the Buffalo team would have had they scored the same amount of goals as the Flyers, then used the 9% to find the difference. And Risto would add ~7 points to his current total had Buffalo scored the same amount of points as the Flyers did. Of course there are a lot of things wrong with my reasoning and too many factors that influence it.

 

[BigToe]

Welcome to Philly, Matthew Boldy!

2019 NHL Mock Draft - NHL - DraftSite.com

Caufield

 

[wankstifier]

I strongly dislike how much of a flashpoint his name has become because there are a whole bunch of interesting discussions to be had about a player with those metrics. It could be a learning point if the hockey community could stop arguing long enough to have honest conversations.

I agree, a blind analysis would be more useful.

Not sure what metrics you're referring to, though.

 

[wankstifier]

Yeah, I'm stupid. Forget that **** lol.

What I tried to do was just simply find out how many points the Buffalo team would have had they scored the same amount of goals as the Flyers, then used the 9% to find the difference. And Risto would add ~7 points to his current total had Buffalo scored the same amount of points as the Flyers did. Of course there are a lot of things wrong with my reasoning and too many factors that influence it.

I get your point, though. Ristolainen is an underwhelming point producer. Still, I feel that both the Capitals and Golden Knights would've been happy to have him in the playoffs in at least a middle pairing role.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I agree, a blind analysis would be more useful.

Not sure what metrics you're referring to, though.

Combination of metrics probably would have been a better way to describe it.

• Horrendous possession metrics at ES
• Consistent partner last year of a higher quality than the 3 he was bounced between the previous year
• Low difficulty QoT
• Moderately high difficulty QoC
• PP production and how it weighs into overall value
• The relationship between his personal SH% and oiSH%
• Basically at par for HDCF% for 2015-16 and 2016-17

There are real discussions to be had beyond Points vs Possession.

 

[wankstifier]

Combination of metrics probably would have been a better way to describe it.

• Horrendous possession metrics at ES
• Consistent partner last year of a higher quality than the 3 he was bounced between the previous year
• Low difficulty QoT
• Moderately high difficulty QoC
• PP production and how it weighs into overall value
• The relationship between his personal SH% and oiSH%
• Basically at par for HDCF% for 2015-16 and 2016-17

There are real discussions to be had beyond Points vs Possession.

Ah, I see now. Where do you look up HDCF%?

I wonder how Ristolainen would do with fewer minutes. He's been deployed like a top 10 defender for the past 3 seasons, receiving as much icetime in all situations as elite top pairing defenders. Obviously he's not suited to the extreme usage on such a poor team. There might be only a handful of defenders that can find success in such an environment, no?

 

[Striiker]

Jesus, could you imagine if Buffalo got Jack Hughes too?

I predicted Montreal winning a lottery spot this past year, so my next prediction is Vancouver gets the 2019 1st overall.

 

[FlyTimmo]

Ah, I see now. Where do you look up HDCF%?

I wonder how Ristolainen would do with fewer minutes. He's been deployed like a top 10 defender for the past 3 seasons, receiving as much icetime in all situations as elite top pairing defenders. Obviously he's not suited to the extreme usage on such a poor team. There might be only a handful of defenders that can find success in such an environment, no?

You can find it here: Natural Stat Trick

 

[FLYguy3911]

First of all, your numbers are off. He had 41 points, 18 ES and 23 PP, which is a five point swing like I said..."almost" 50/50.

But that's a lot. That was the largest difference in the league for players with 20+ points.

 

[Chinatown88]

I predicted Montreal winning a lottery spot this past year, so my next prediction is Philadelphia gets the 2019 1st overall.

FTFY

 

[Striiker]

FTFY

31st*

 

[Chinatown88]

31st*

Why not both?

 

[Striiker]

Why not both?

Good compromise.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

But that's a lot. That was the largest difference in the league for players with 20+ points.

If that's true and that is the worst (which I am not disputing I just don't know where to look that specific stat up), I still don't care. He's still scoring about half his points at ES and PP, and even if it was 100% power play...he's still putting up 40+ points per year! The new thing these days is this ES v. PP points thing like there is some kind of difference in value of these points. If a guy scores 50 goals, he scores 50 goals whether they are all ES or all PP or some combination. I remember Tage Thompson at the draft a year or two ago people were all very concerned because he only had 1 ES strength goal or something like that so people didn't want to draft him in the first round. Goals are goals and points are points. You don't rack up points by accident.

I mean, Deryk Engelland scored 23 points all at ES. Is he some kind of even strength superstar? That's more than Duncan Keith!

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Eugh, even Ghost was only slightly better than 50/50 on the PP! If -5 points is terrible at even strength, surely +1 isn't much better!

 

[deadhead]

If that's true and that is the worst (which I am not disputing I just don't know where to look that specific stat up), I still don't care. He's still scoring about half his points at ES and PP, and even if it was 100% power play...he's still putting up 40+ points per year! The new thing these days is this ES v. PP points thing like there is some kind of difference in value of these points. If a guy scores 50 goals, he scores 50 goals whether they are all ES or all PP or some combination. I remember Tage Thompson at the draft a year or two ago people were all very concerned because he only had 1 ES strength goal or something like that so people didn't want to draft him in the first round. Goals are goals and points are points. You don't rack up points by accident.

I mean, Deryk Engelland scored 23 points all at ES. Is he some kind of even strength superstar? That's more than Duncan Keith!

There's a huge difference in value between ES and PP, Marchand is a good example, he didn't suddenly improve, he just got PP minutes that added 20 points to his scoring total, same player, better opportunities. We saw this when Schenn left, no impact on PP1 scoring.

ES scoring (and PP/60 since it accounts for usage) is the litmus test. It's what you do 90% of your time on the ice (and CF and xGF, because it also matters what the other team does when you're on the ice).
PP scoring is a matter of opportunity, which depends both on the player's skill and the depth of the team.
A few players have exceptional PP skills, Giroux and Ghost as playmakers, Simmonds in front of the net, but most are generally interchangeable. Just about any top 9 forward will get 15-20 points a year just by playing on the top PP unit.

 

[FLYguy3911]

If that's true and that is the worst (which I am not disputing I just don't know where to look that specific stat up), I still don't care. He's still scoring about half his points at ES and PP, and even if it was 100% power play...he's still putting up 40+ points per year! The new thing these days is this ES v. PP points thing like there is some kind of difference in value of these points. If a guy scores 50 goals, he scores 50 goals whether they are all ES or all PP or some combination. I remember Tage Thompson at the draft a year or two ago people were all very concerned because he only had 1 ES strength goal or something like that so people didn't want to draft him in the first round. Goals are goals and points are points. You don't rack up points by accident.

I mean, Deryk Engelland scored 23 points all at ES. Is he some kind of even strength superstar? That's more than Duncan Keith!

But when we are talking about acquiring Ristolainen. 40 points in Buffalo doesn't equal 40 points in Philadelphia because of that Ghost kid. He's not getting the same usage here.

Tage Thompson didn't get top PP time in St. Louis and put up 9 points in 41 games. He scored in the 9th percentile of forwards with 400+ minutes 5v5. So maybe people were fair to criticize his lack of ES production in College.

Eugh, even Ghost was only slightly better than 50/50 on the PP! If -5 points is terrible at even strength, surely +1 isn't much better!

Gostisbehere: 5v5 P/60 1.06
Ristolainen: 5v5 P/60 0.62

Big difference.

 

[FatTugboatFlahr]

Your first mistake was trying to convince DFF to change his opinion.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Only real rumors for tomorrow’s Import Draft that seems to be going around is that there’s going to be a fair amount of goalies selected.

Saint John has the top pick so as a bigger club in the CHL it probably will be a big ticket name whoever it is.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Wait just so we are clear, I am not talking about adding Ristolainen (though I certainly would be in favor it). This all started because I mentioned him being part of a deep Sabres team if the Sabres wind up with Jack Hughes next season.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

Wait just so we are clear, I am not talking about adding Ristolainen (though I certainly would be in favor it). This all started because I mentioned him being part of a deep Sabres team if the Sabres wind up with Jack Hughes next season.

He might not necessarily be there as his name has been in the rumor mill.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

He might not necessarily be there as his name has been in the rumor mill.

Oh for sure, and so too might a lot of guys on that roster (hell, ROR might wind up here if the rumors are to be believed).

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

There's a huge difference in value between ES and PP, Marchand is a good example, he didn't suddenly improve, he just got PP minutes that added 20 points to his scoring total, same player, better opportunities. We saw this when Schenn left, no impact on PP1 scoring.

ES scoring (and PP/60 since it accounts for usage) is the litmus test. It's what you do 90% of your time on the ice (and CF and xGF, because it also matters what the other team does when you're on the ice).
PP scoring is a matter of opportunity, which depends both on the player's skill and the depth of the team.
A few players have exceptional PP skills, Giroux and Ghost as playmakers, Simmonds in front of the net, but most are generally interchangeable. Just about any top 9 forward will get 15-20 points a year just by playing on the top PP unit.

See I disagree with this though. There is not a huge difference in value. If we need a goal to win, it doesn't matter if it is on the PP, SH, or ES. Just like the Jeff Carter "only scores in blowouts" mythos. I don't care. 40 goals is 40 goals. Obviously more PP time means more points. More ice time in general typically means more points too. And while I agree with the sentiment that just about any top 9 will get more points by playing on the top PP unit...THEY STILL HAVE TO BE ON THE TOP PP UNIT. If Ristolainen was a terrible as people are saying, he would not be getting 26+ minutes per night and would not be getting top power play minutes. That's my whole point here. Someone said he was a #5 defenseman. Show me a #5 defenseman that would put up 40+ points three years in a row on ANY team. I don't care what stat or metric you are using, if you are defenseman putting up 40+ points a year at 23 years old, even if your defense leaves a lot to be desired, you're not terrible. I'll take that player any day of the week on my team.