LW Lawson Crouse - Kingston Frontenacs, OHL (2015 Draft)

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Yeah, I was going to say if you don't understand how rarity and value go hand in hand you probably should probably take a quick glance at some econ 1000

You do understand the distinction between rarity and scarcity, don't you? Maybe you should take some intro econ classes.

 

[Random Forest]

There aren't a lot of limbless prospects around, therefore they must be more valuable than Mitch Marner.

Lol, pretty much sinks that stupid argument. This deserves to be at the top of the new page.

 

[JawandaPuck]

You do understand the distinction between rarity and scarcity, don't you? Maybe you should take some intro econ classes.

The rarity has to be the result of demand. What is the demand for limbless hockey prospects by NHL teams?

 

[Random Forest]

The rarity has to be the result of demand.

What? Why? Again, you aren't understanding the distinction between rarity and scarcity. How rare something is has nothing to do with how much is demanded.

Lucic-type players are more of a "rarity" than Claude Giroux types. But there's a larger scarcity for the latter, and hence, more value.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

The rarity has to be the result of demand. What is the demand for limbless hockey prospects by NHL teams?

This post makes literally no sense.

 

[Semantics]

Are we talking zero limbs here, or just missing a single limb? Big distinction.

 

[JawandaPuck]

What? Why? Again, you aren't understanding the distinction between rarity and scarcity. How rare something is has nothing to do with how much is demanded.

Lucic-type players are more of a "rarity" than Claude Giroux types. But there's a larger scarcity for the latter, and hence, more value.

There is a "scarcity" of Lucic type players and as a result their value is higher on average.

Better?

 

[Random Forest]

There is a "scarcity" of Lucic type players and as a result their value is higher on average.

Better?

Are you saying Lucic is scarcer than Giroux or Getzlaf? Are you saying Lucic has more value than those two because his skill set is scarcer? That's very wrong on two separate levels.

The rarity of Crouse's skill set in itself does not make him inherently more valuable.

 

[JawandaPuck]

Are you saying Lucic is scarcer than Giroux or Getzlaf? Are you saying Lucic has more value than those two because his skill set is scarcer? That's very wrong on two separate levels.

The rarity of Crouse's skill set in itself does not make him inherently more valuable.

No, I am simply trying bring some clarity to the confusion over valuation determinants: "I don't understand what rarity has to do what value."

 

[Random Forest]

No, I am simply trying bring some clarity to the confusion over valuation determinants: "I don't understand what rarity has to do what value."

There is no confusion other than yours. Rarity has NOTHING to do with value otherwise, as WYTD pointed out, limbless hockey players would be worth a premium.

 

[Menzinger]

How valuable is the actual Lucic anyways? A couple high goal scoring seasons (one where he had a bunch of empty-net goals even). It's not overly impressive, his contract at present seems downright awful.

 

[JawandaPuck]

There is no confusion other than yours. Rarity has NOTHING to do with value otherwise, as WYTD pointed out, limbless hockey players would be worth a premium.

Perhaps the confusion is mine. But I think I understood you correctly when you suggested that value is impacted by scarcity?

To me scarcity and rarity can be used interchangeably (perhaps mistakenly).

Regardless, I'm done beating the the dead horse now.

 

[Random Forest]

Perhaps the confusion is mine. But I think I understood you correctly when you suggested that value is impacted by scarcity?

To me scarcity and rarity can be used interchangeably (perhaps mistakenly).

Regardless, I'm done beating the the dead horse now.

No worries, to clarify a bit more, rarity has only to do with the frequency of something occurring. It has no inherent implication on value. Something can be one of a kind, but totally worthless.

But relative value DOES change as a function of scarcity. They're not interchangeable. If the demand exceeds the market supply creating a scarcity, the price will rise.


Now, the whole point is that a Crouse-type player may be more "rare" than a Marner or Strome...but that doesn't make him more "scarce" nor is it reason, in itself, for his value to be any higher than it would be purely on merit.

 

[cgf]

Not that this should change any of your evaluations. But Crouse won't fall past 10 if he somehow managed to slide that far. He's absolutely everything patrick Roy has talked about adding to our organization and pretty much a dream fit if he were somehow still there at #10.

 

[BillDineen]

1Cs are scarce. Look how long it took Calgary to get a potential one. Any Lucic-type power forward could have all the intangibles ever imagined and a team like Arizona would take the potential 1C over them every day of the week.

Regardless of how rare you see a true potential power forward (winger, not a C like Lindros), teams would still prefer to build around a true 1C.

 

[Woodhouse]

[nhl]827996[/nhl]

 

[Roo Mad Bro]

Damn he's a big son of a gun.

 

[fahad203]

Damn he's a big son of a gun.

Really built like a footballer.

 

[Larry44]

Damn he's a big son of a gun.

Impressive kid.

 

[shane1342o]

Is Lawson Crouse worthy of a top-10 pick?

Crouse is a heavily debated prospect, as his scouting reports are glowing but his numbers are mediocre. Here's a look at why Crouse's numbers weren't as high as one would expect, and what that should mean for his draft standing.

http://alongtheboards.com/2015/06/lawson-crouse-worthy-top-10-pick/

 

[Kamiccolo]

Would you take ROR in the top 10? Guys like Barzal might only be a #2 C and Crouse is a big two way threat that projects as a top 6 winger. Those guys >> Guys like Bozak.

 

[BoDacious Horvat]

Absolutely, I think his ceiling is similar to Landeskog's offensively/physically, can't say he's got the leadership qualities because I don't know too much about him. But a strong, mean LW with a pretty good scoring touch and puck control is worth a top 10.

 

[tfong]

Don't think he is a top 10 pick. Lesser Landeskog or more like a Radek Faksa.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

Nope, he doesn't have the hands.

 

[Marlon Brando]

The Flyers could take a flyer on him.