Fantasy Mock Voting (Standings Posted #178)

[hockeynorth]

Ottawa really wasn't ever going to win this if we're being honest

 

[Horse McHindu]

@LatvianTwist ,

I definitely understand and appreciate your frustration and wish you the best in your next fantasy draft. I think for me, I wasn’t quite sold on your top two centers (Larkin and Thomas). They are both very good centers, but I just don’t know if they compared favorably to some other top two centers in the league. I loved your top D pairing, but felt that your D after that was a little average, and that an average goalie like Grubbauer (sic) probably wouldn’t be able to bail them out. I didn’t have you ranked at the bottom to my recollection, but I didn’t have you in my top 3 either. I think you were 4 or 5 in that division for me but for whatever it’s worth, I found the entire Atlantic to be difficult to grade. Toronto, and my good bud RIP Botchford ended up destroying the division but he wasn’t my top team (ie soft team, questionable goaltending, and no real top notch shut down dmen).

 

[Horse McHindu]

Ottawa really wasn't ever going to win this if we're being honest

Agreed.

I feel for Panda as he put a lot of work into his analysis’ and was quite proud of his team, but there is such a thing as being graceful in defeat and showing respect to those that qualified. This is all for fun and so there’s no point getting bent out of shape about it.

 

[LT]

@LatvianTwist ,

I definitely understand and appreciate your frustration and wish you the best in your next fantasy draft. I think for me, I wasn’t quite sold on your top two centers (Larkin and Thomas). They are both very good centers, but I just don’t know if they compared favorably to some other top two centers in the league. I loved your top D pairing, but felt that your D after that was a little average, and that an average goalie like Grubbauer (sic) probably wouldn’t be able to bail them out. I didn’t have you ranked at the bottom to my recollection, but I didn’t have you in my top 3 either. I think you were 4 or 5 in that division for me but for whatever it’s worth, I found the entire Atlantic to be difficult to grade. Toronto, and my good bud RIP Botchford ended up destroying the division but he wasn’t my top team (ie soft team, questionable goaltending, and no real top notch shut down dmen).

Larkin and Thomas as a 1-2 punch is fairly easily in the top half of center duos for a 31-team league.

You’d think having Kucherov, a top 3 forward in the game, would help too, but I guess not.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Larkin and Thomas as a 1-2 punch is fairly easily in the top half of center duos for a 31-team league.

You’d think having Kucherov, a top 3 forward in the game, would help too, but I guess not.

I think it’s likely that you would have made the playoffs being in a different division. The Atlantic was insane in my opinion. Your top was definitely in the top 16 imo. Best of luck next time.

 

[Panda Bear]

Well maybe in your hypothetical version of this league but they didn't here.

Just take the L and move on dude.

Always next draft.

If I do this again, I'll have to find a way to factor in player reputations because it's become obvious to me that this isn't as analytics-heavy/results-oriented as I had anticipated.

 

[Joey Moss]

Larkin and Thomas as a 1-2 punch is fairly easily in the top half of center duos for a 31-team league.

You’d think having Kucherov, a top 3 forward in the game, would help too, but I guess not.

I rated you as a top team but gonna have to disagree on the center comment

 

[hockeynorth]

If I do this again, I'll have to find a way to factor in player reputations because it's become obvious to me that this isn't as analytics-heavy/results-oriented as I had anticipated.

I'm analytics + reputation, not just analytics. I like what you tried to do and with a better 1C I think you'd have finished MUCH higher. It hurt you the most. My suggestion would be tier guys off into groupings of above the same, and then go off best analytically in that tier. Even some of your picks likely could've been had later by tiering them off. Say make your algorithm then tier off top 30/50/100 etc and take the best in the range or fallers by name value + analytic combination. I think your time against elites may have actually hurt you the most, because some good players get away from elites by line matching.

 

[Nucker101]

If I do this again, I'll have to find a way to factor in player reputations because it's become obvious to me that this isn't as analytics-heavy/results-oriented as I had anticipated.

You definitely need a blend that’s closer to 50/50 than 100/0

 

[Ainec]

If I do this again, I'll have to find a way to factor in player reputations because it's become obvious to me that this isn't as analytics-heavy/results-oriented as I had anticipated.

You definitely need a blend that’s closer to 50/50 than 100/0

you can go full analytics and still win... you just have to recognise guys like Shattenkirk can be picked 2 rounds later

 

[Horse McHindu]

Agreed, he could have been like you and trolled the commissioner into submission (Lucbourdon) and then rage quit the entire draft

that was fun

I never trolled the commissioner into submission nor did I quit that particular draft. What had happened was that I made a trade with a poster where I accidentally traded a pick that was no longer in my possession because the commissioner at the time had failed to update the board in a timely manner. I do admit that I acted childishly (when this draft took place three years ago) and attempted to trade my players away for pennies on the dollar to another team (which was veto’d thankfully). Looking back on it, I realized that I acted like an idiot and let the emotions get the better of me. I speak from personal experience rather than from a pedestal when giving advice to others to not get caught up in a game meant to be for fun. The fact that you remember my conduct from three years ago is proof that acting like a poor sport is terrible for one’s rep. Anyways, we can take it to PM if you’d like to discuss this further.

 

[Panda Bear]

@hockeynorth I felt sick after I took Panarin instead of Eichel or Barkov, but figured it was the right choice because he had the best season of the three. Boy did I ever underestimate how much people love their 1C when I went for Hellebuyck and Slavin next.

@Ainec
That's where reputation comes in as part of a formula, though. Strome, Shattenkirk and Weegar were all taken too early, so lowering their values from some quantification of relative reputation (likely from other fantasy hockey draft lists) would reduce their scores and assign them to a better draft slot.

 

[Messrules11]

I finished in 30th! Woo Hoo! Feels like a win. You mother****ers better look out next time

 

[Panda Bear]

Hey Panda,

Do you have NHL 20 by any chance? If so - would you mind creating a simulation based on the rosters that we created in this draft? I’m curious to see how our teams did over there and whether the rankings on there were similar to that on here.

Sure don't! Are NHL 20 ratings even that good?

There's Eastside Hockey Manager too where there are far more player variables.

Plus I've already spent way too much time on this for little p(l)ayoff.

 

[Ainec]

@hockeynorth I felt sick after I took Panarin instead of Eichel or Barkov, but figured it was the right choice because he had the best season of the three. Boy did I ever underestimate how much people love their 1C when I went for Hellebuyck and Slavin next.

@Ainec
That's where reputation comes in as part of a formula, though. Strome, Shattenkirk and Weegar were all taken too early, so lowering their values from some quantification of relative reputation (likely from other fantasy hockey draft lists) would reduce their scores and assign them to a better draft slot.

it's not just reputation though

centers deservedly are premium positions because there is a limited amount of established 1Cs in the league compared to wingers and dmen

 

[Ainec]

I never trolled the commissioner into submission nor did I quit that particular draft. What had happened was that I made a trade with a poster where I accidentally traded a pick that was no longer in my possession because the commissioner at the time had failed to update the board in a timely manner. I do admit that I acted childishly (when this draft took place three years ago) and attempted to trade my players away for pennies on the dollar to another team (which was veto’d thankfully). Looking back on it, I realized that I acted like an idiot and let the emotions get the better of me. I speak from personal experience rather than from a pedestal when giving advice to others to not get caught up in a game meant to be for fun. The fact that you remember my conduct from three years ago is proof that acting like a poor sport is terrible for one’s rep. Anyways, we can take it to PM if you’d like to discuss this further.

no I found it hilarious

you make these drafts fun #legend #hof

tryamkin too even though he's a terrible drafter but a god at trading

 

[Messrules11]

it's not just reputation though

centers deservedly are premium positions because there is a limited amount of established 1Cs in the league compared to wingers and dmen

But goalies mean shit..., whatever man

 

[Nucker101]

you can go full analytics and still win... you just have to recognise guys like Shattenkirk can be picked 2 rounds later

To an extent, but analytics would probably suggest going with an elite winger over an average 1LC but voters typically don't feel the same way.

Also, some voters who claim to be into analytics sometimes aren't as invested as they claim to be, they fall into the trap of player reputations as well, some analytic darlings have 2-4 seasons where they develop a rep as a "possession monster" or "play driver" but then they suddenly they have a couple of years where those underlying numbers decline but the voter still identifies that player as being a strong possession/play driver based on all the posts he's seen over the years.

No matter how you shake it, player rep will always play a factor in these drafts. Analytics probably would have preferred for me to draft a top winger over Seguin as my 2LC and draft Danault or someone similar as my 2LC instead of drafting Hoffman later, and if I were building this team for an actual real life playoff run I would probably do that as well, but I don't think voters agree with that strategy.

 

[Addison Rae]

panda i love you bro

 

[Panda Bear]

it's not just reputation though

centers deservedly are premium positions because there is a limited amount of established 1Cs in the league compared to wingers and dmen

Ah, yes. I agree.

My final team rankings included a premium on centres for that reason, but my drafting worksheet (which was updated on the fly the entire time with improvements) did not.

 

[Nucker101]

no I found it hilarious

you make these drafts fun #legend #hof

tryamkin too even though he's a terrible drafter but a god at trading

and scouting

 

[Ainec]

To an extent, but analytics would probably suggest going with an elite winger over an average 1LC but voters typically don't feel the same way.

Also, some voters who claim to be into analytics sometimes aren't as invested as they claim to be, they fall into the trap of player reputations as well, some analytic darlings have 2-4 seasons where they develop a rep as a "possession monster" or "play driver" but then they suddenly they have a couple of years where those underlying numbers decline but the voter still identifies that player as being a strong possession/play driver based on all the posts he's seen over the years.

No matter how you shake it, player rep will always play a factor in these drafts. Analytics probably would have preferred for me to draft a top winger over Seguin as my 2LC and draft Danault or someone similar as my 2LC instead of drafting Hoffman later, and if I were building this team for an actual real life playoff run I would probably do that as well, but I don't think voters agree with that strategy.

Analytics is subjective. If you drafted a winger over Seguin that would have been a mistake because you're not factoring into the scarcity of centers vs wingers

Seguin + Stone
or
Pastrnak + Dubois

?

 

[Nucker101]

panda i love you bro

he died for everyone's eye-testing sins.

 

[Ainec]

But goalies mean shit..., whatever man

yeah when you can draft Francouz and Petersen while people are plugging in their 4th line winger.. Goalies are DND in the top 3 rounds

plus you have people that give more leeway to goalies with historic pedigree (Crawford, Price, Dubnyk, Holtby etc) that you can reliably count on getting drafted

Samsonov + Mark Stone
vs
Holtby + Ivan Barbashev

 

[Nucker101]

Analytics is subjective. If you drafted a winger over Seguin that would have been a mistake because you're not factoring into the scarcity of centers vs wingers

Seguin + Stone
or
Pastrnak + Dubois

?

Fair enough, I'm just saying that a guy like Seguin would've been a no for me if I was drafting based on the analytics I value. But the name of the game is to draft for votes. My team would look a lot different if I was just drafting for what I thought would be the best team like Panda did.