Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
I'm fairly confident that virtually everyone posting in this thread recognises that analytics cannot completely replace first-hand professional scouting. It is pretty ridiculous for you to mount a rant against a straw-man like this here.
|
You're right it is. I shouldn't have, but I'm a little frustrated with the continued reliance on a junk stat that I am more than confident NHL teams do not use in more than a very passing fashion.
Quote:
|
You seem not to understand the function and place of NHL-E in its proper employment. I think with your link to this article that you are suggesting NHL teams pay no heed to NHL-E because the draft order was substantially different than how these numbers play out. This is to be expected because NHL-E is not (and as far as I know never has been) intended to be a predictor of absolute NHL potential, only a metric by which to measure how a player's PRESENT performance will translate at the NHL level. You seem to think that NHL-E is meant to predict FUTURE potential; even in Kent Wilson's article, he has clearly indicated that this is a broad metric that functions only in conjunction with a host of other mitigating factors (Ugh, I can't believe you have me stooping to the level of defending Wilson).
|
I understand it is a measure of current production, but it was originally used as a measure to prove Jankowski was a bad pick with no future. You're right, no use in discussing the merit of this, and I am very sorry for making you defend Wilson, I can feel your pain. My final comment on this is I believe NHL-E, and similar stats, to all be junk science and I don't see any value in the measures. No use in tilting with this windmill any further. Excuse me while I start a new off topic thread about the validity and importance of torah code.
