Quote:
Originally Posted by saillias
To the first paragraph yes definitely. The weakness with the model is there can always be extenuating circumstances about their production and how their talent translates from one league to the next. Fans of teams with prospects who outperform the model are always in Bader's replies letting him know.
To the second part, no it's not a fallacy. It's literally just - players who produce like this, at this level, at this age, in their D+X, have become a star X% of the time. Opinions of coaches don't invalidate the model come on. What are you saying, the model is invalid because this prospect is driven? be serious.
|
Fair enough, "fallacy" was poorly used.
I'm mostly just saying two things, that Coronato and Farabee are poor comparable's because they play a different style of game, so I don't love the way the model is used in that context. But again, I do love the Bader system to see prospects, I think it's used really well sometimes but after literally watching Farabee on our team the last 20+ games I don't think it's a great comp.
Secondly, yes I do think Suniev's drive/motivation/intangibles will increase his chances of being a more impactful player than the model suggests. Coming over to NA as young teen from Russia, moving from BCHL to NCAA and improving every year at every stop is impressive. Also the fact he put on like what, 10-15 pounds since being drafted? That's great to see, and intangibles like that make me think he's got a better than 1% shot as the model suggests.
"be serious"? man it's just my hockey opinion out here on the internet, don't hurt yourself thinking too hard about it