• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Around the League 2019-2026 Edition

the math by Mindz Eye is real, and it’s an overpayment, especially if you don’t know who will be there BUT maybe this is a prelude to another deal…. We’ve seen this movie with Hughes before

Ie…#21 might be headed somewhere else
 
CH1 said:
the math by Mindz Eye is real, and it’s an overpayment, especially if you don’t know who will be there BUT maybe this is a prelude to another deal…. We’ve seen this movie with Hughes before

Ie…#21 might be headed somewhere else
Click to expand...
Leaf board blowing loads before the end? That's new.
 
axlsalinger said:
This is a ridiculous argument. As you yourself said, trade value is virtually equal.
Click to expand...

Wait...wtf?

Yes, the historic trade value is more or less even. But there is a significant spread between the real value and the trade value in these situations. Trading down is the "by the numbers" win for that reason.

Historically, the 26+57+198 picks return over 1.5x the player value combined, than the 21 pick does.

Nothing about that is a ridiculous position.
 
Habsy said:
Leaf board blowing loads before the end? That's new.
Click to expand...

It can both be an overpayment, and turn fine for the Habs in the end. It's all probabilities. We did it "wrong" a few years ago when we traded down from the Konecny slot to take Dermott and stuff that didn't pan out. But the numbers are the numbers. Maximize your chances whenever possible.
 
I would assume they have a strong top 15 or so, maybe a little more, and they're way more likely to have 1 of those guys on the board at 21 than at 26.
 
If they really get Demidov or Lindstrom most fans won't give a shit. Next year they're stacked with 7 picks in the first 3 rounds.
 
Habsy said:
No but it's all metrics without information.

Hughes has information
Click to expand...

It has tons of information. Literally the actual, real world returned value of every pick made in modern NHL draft history. Way, way, way more information than Hughes has on any one of these kids.

and it's cool if you think you Hughes can beat the system. Just like it's cool to sit down at a blackjack table and have a feeling that you shouldn't split your aces this time because the moon is in the 4th house of jupiter or whatever. You can still win the hand despite not making the optimal play. Do it 1000 times though and you'll lose more than you should, that's it, that's all.
 
MindzEye said:
It has tons of information. Literally the actual, real world returned value of every pick made in modern NHL draft history. Way, way, way more information than Hughes has on any one of these kids.

and it's cool if you think you Hughes can beat the system. Just like it's cool to sit down at a blackjack table and have a feeling that you shouldn't split your aces this time because the moon is in the 4th house of jupiter or whatever. You can still win the hand despite not making the optimal play. Do it 1000 times though and you'll lose more than you should, that's it, that's all.
Click to expand...
That's not information. They're statistics which are used in place of concrete fact. The only facts are metrics. We don't know what other information they have.
 
MindzEye said:
It has tons of information. Literally the actual, real world returned value of every pick made in modern NHL draft history. Way, way, way more information than Hughes has on any one of these kids.

and it's cool if you think you Hughes can beat the system. Just like it's cool to sit down at a blackjack table and have a feeling that you shouldn't split your aces this time because the moon is in the 4th house of jupiter or whatever. You can still win the hand despite not making the optimal play. Do it 1000 times though and you'll lose more than you should, that's it, that's all.
Click to expand...
Not arguing your theory mate, I specifically said in this scenario.
 
MindzEye said:
Wait...wtf?

Yes, the historic trade value is more or less even. But there is a significant spread between the real value and the trade value in these situations. Trading down is the "by the numbers" win for that reason.

Historically, the 26+57+198 picks return over 1.5x the player value combined, than the 21 pick does.

Nothing about that is a ridiculous position.
Click to expand...

I think this is right. The only exception I would make is that I would gladly trade that draft haul for #21 if a kid my scouting room pegged as 12th was still there.

Of course, that’s a trade you make in real time…..so we’ll see
 
Habsy said:
That's not information. They're statistics which are used in place of concrete fact. The only facts are metrics. We don't know what other information they have.
Click to expand...

lol wut

This is a word salad that doesn't actually mean anything. C'mon, you're going to criticise the lack of "concrete fact" when supporting an argument for what is basically horse trading and feels.
 
CH1 said:
I think this is right. The only exception I would make is that I would gladly trade that draft haul for #21 if a kid my scouting room pegged as 12th was still there.

Of course, that’s a trade you make in real time…..so we’ll see
Click to expand...
Information leaks. Maybe they have a solid thumb on who teams will take
 
CH1 said:
I think this is right. The only exception I would make is that I would gladly trade that draft haul for #21 if a kid my scouting room pegged as 12th was still there.

Of course, that’s a trade you make in real time…..so we’ll see
Click to expand...

Yeah, that tracks. I'm not a fucking robot, I understand that there's a human element to this, some weirdo game theory stuff, etc. But the default position should be to play the numbers right up until the point the perceived potential value is just too good to pass up, like the scenario you describe.
 
MindzEye said:
lol wut

This is a word salad that doesn't actually mean anything. C'mon, you're going to criticise the lack of "concrete fact" when supporting an argument for what is basically horse trading and feels.
Click to expand...
Though you were first. Sure sounded like it. Too many people use statistics as fact. They're stats. That's the only fact of them. They don't depict other independent variables involved because they're not used in the regression.
 
MindzEye said:
Yeah, that tracks. I'm not a fucking robot, I understand that there's a human element to this, some weirdo game theory stuff, etc. But the default position should be to play the numbers right up until the point the perceived potential value is just too good to pass up, like the scenario you describe.
Click to expand...
If you're Vulcan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top