Exactly. Anything (1,2,3,4,5,6) could happen. Yet you chose the one that had the greatest odds.

In the Habs-VGK series, anything could happen, but VGK started strong odds faves. If you had to make a prediction, similarly, you would choose VGK, just like you chose 1-5 as the option.

Most of the times, this strategy would be the correct one (choosing the option that Vegas favors). Else, Vegas as a business would collapse. Would it be a perfect strategy? No: Vegas frequently gets it wrong. Would it be the best one? Yes. Because it beats all alternatives.

Coming back to our original point, you don't want Flyers to just enter last 4. You want them to enter last 4 as the ones with the best odds.
- PT21

Yes If I was betting I would choose Vegas because I think they are the better team. But all I am doing in predicting based on what I value as important to my decision. This does not mean the outcome I predict will in fact happen. So yes its more likely Vegas will win the Cup, but that does not mean they will win the cup, in fact past history shows they have a good (not a better) chance to not win the cup. When you have a small sample size, any outcome can occur, in this case any team in the final 4 has a chance to win it all.

I don't understand why you are putting yourself in this position, of being caught in a silly lie. Would you like me to post a screenshot of your deleted comment?

What happened to the Howard Cosell claim? Are you claiming you didn't make that too? If so, your post, which is mercifully still up, is in quotes. Who is that quote from, MJL?
- PT21

You absolutely can post a screen shot. Knock yourself out. You brought up the Sixer tanking into this, not me. LOL. Classis strawman.

How does that show fletcher moves players up??? BEcause he did it with HArt, its really simple. You can counter about provy, but maybe chuck wouldve had him up a year sooner, you dont know that. Quit being a hextall appologist
- bradster

Again, losing sight. The context of the conversation is not that Fletcher moves players up. The context is that Fletcher's picks show more promise or that he promotes players faster than Hextall. Your comment that I'm being a Hextall apologist is laughable. I've made the comment numerous times in this conversation that the comparisons can't be mead simply because Fletcher hasn't been the GM long enough. His picks are younger and less developed than Hextall's. Which means Hextall has the advantage here! LOLI'm doing the opposite of being a Hextall apologist. I'm giving you the facts.

The fact that O'Brien has not played an NHL game at this point in time does not suggest or support that he will not make it to the NHL. That is unknown. If Pronman was so good at player evaluation, he'd be doing something different.
- MJL

Pronman is like any other national media guy, he talks to a few sources that he might know within a given organization and reports what they tell him. I guarantee you Pronman is not at BU games, or Michigan games, or Ohio State games, or at Phantoms game to make up his own mind on what he sees. He simply would not have the time to do so, even if he wanted to, which I highly doubt he does. How many times have we seen/heard national analysts simply state the Flyers suck because Carter Hart is having a bad year? None of those "analysts" are watching all the games, or even fragments of single games. They look at the standings, look at some stats, maybe talk to a few people and then come on the broadcast and try to pass themselves off as knowing everything hockey because they played 20 years ago. Meanwhile people like us who suffer through watching these games know what is really going on. Pronman is no different.

O'Brien had a setback in his development. He got injured (like so many of Hextall's picks unfortunately) and then had issues with the Providence head coach. O'Brien to his credit decided to take a step back, by moving from college back to juniors in hopes of resetting himself, and then took two steps forward by moving into the BU program, the same program Farabee and so many other NHL stars have come from. O'Brien's first year was stellar, lead the team in goals and PP goals, and tied for the team lead in points. He will spend another year at BU and I expect will be even better, and then be playing for the Flyers directly; I don't see him playing for the Phantoms at all. When Hextall drafted O'Brien he knew he was a bit of a project given he came from Thayer academy high school, but he also knew he would not be there in the 2nd round so with two picks, he jumped at the chance to draft O'Brien, and I believe it will pay off for the Flyers bigtime. And I've seen a lot more of O'Brien play then Pronman has, I can tell you that for sure.

I offered him as an "expert" eh? Oh, news to me I did that, but that's his job and he studies the prospects.

Anyway im tired of this. HEs a miss until proven otherwise to me, and not you, he isnt a miss until......when you say so, maybe when hes 30, who knows
- bradster

Yes, you tried to offer Pronman's ranking as proof for supporting your opinion. It failed in that regard. His ranking is really irrelevant. By your standard, every player is a miss until he makes it. Here are a few simple questions to ask yourself. Does O'Brien still have a potential of making it to the NHL? A miss is permanent. It does not change. If O'Brien still has a chance to make it to the NHL at 21 years of age,, then he couldn't possibly be labeled a miss

I do have a question for you and JD can jump in there to. DO you think a draft pick is more valuable if they can play in the NHL at a younger age, to get more years out of the player? Or would you dismiss that?
- bradster

To a point. Ultimately, what decides a players ultimate value is how good of a player he is at his apex. There are also negatives to making it to the NHL earlier.

To a point. Ultimately, what decides a players ultimate value is how good of a player he is at his apex. There are also negatives to making it to the NHL earlier.
- MJL

I agree with this, I never thought of the number of years a player plays or how soon they play are a strong determining factor one way or another. For example, historically speaking, we know very few defenseman and goalies will make their respective NHL teams within the first 2 years and significantly impact their clubs. On the contrary we have tons of examples of 19 year old forwards that have had great impact right away. So I am not worried if a Dman or goalie takes a few years to develop as long as I see them progressing nicely from juniors or college to the AHL and eventually to the NHL. With forwards I do get worried if by year 3 they are not in the NHL or seriously challenging for a roster spot on the big club, only because forwards develop faster. With O'Brien I a not worried because I know his story (he is local to Boston) and I see that progression I mentioned. On the other hand, much to MJLs dismay I think, I have posted NoPa is a bust quite regularly, but that is because I have seen him play for 3 seasons now and see with my own eyes what he is, and is not.

I agree with this, I never thought of the number of years a player plays or how soon they play are a strong determining factor one way or another. For example, historically speaking, we know very few defenseman and goalies will make their respective NHL teams within the first 2 years and significantly impact their clubs. On the contrary we have tons of examples of 19 year old forwards that have had great impact right away. So I am not worried if a Dman or goalie takes a few years to develop as long as I see them progressing nicely from juniors or college to the AHL and eventually to the NHL. With forwards I do get worried if by year 3 they are not in the NHL or seriously challenging for a roster spot on the big club, only because forwards develop faster. With O'Brien I a not worried because I know his story (he is local to Boston) and I see that progression I mentioned. On the other hand, much to MJLs dismay I think, I have posted NoPa is a bust quite regularly, but that is because I have seen him play for 3 seasons now and see with my own eyes what he is, and is not.
- jd250

I would have no issue with anyone calling Patrick a miss. Not sure why you think that would be to my dismay. I posted just a few minutes ago that even if Patrick sticks as a bottom 6 role player, that doesn't make it a good pick with the 2nd overall. The expectation is far higher. That is way different than calling a 21 year old player a miss because he hasn't made the NHL yet.

You absolutely can post a screen shot. Knock yourself out. You brought up the Sixer tanking into this, not me. LOL. Classis strawman.
- MJL

Of course I was the one who brought the Sixers tanking into this. Your subsequent deleted comment made reference to the tanking being 6 years ago. I am sure zillions of people saw it. I have no desire to humiliate you dude, so I will refrain from posting further on the deleted comments.


Here is the remaining issue then:

1. You have posted zillions of times that you would never support a team than tanked. Sixers are the most deliberately tankingest team of all time. Yet you wrote "Go Sixers". If that is not support of a tanking team, would you please clarify what that is?

2. You consistently avoid explaining your Ali quote comment. Its still there. I asked who made the quote, you said Cosell during a live commentary, and then deleted it. Never mind the damn deletion and Cosell. Who said the damn thing? Because it makes ZERO sense! Indeed, I don't think anyone ever made that comment.

I would have no issue with anyone calling Patrick a miss. Not sure why you think that would be to my dismay. I posted just a few minutes ago that even if Patrick sticks as a bottom 6 role player, that doesn't make it a good pick with the 2nd overall. The expectation is far higher. That is way different than calling a 21 year old player a miss because he hasn't made the NHL yet.
- MJL

Just referring to some past debates where you thought at the time it was premature to call Patrick a bust, where I was already there in my opinion.

Of course I was the one who brought the Sixers tanking into this. Your subsequent deleted comment made reference to the tanking being 6 years ago. I am sure zillions of people saw it. I have no desire to humiliate you dude, so I will refrain from posting further on the deleted comments.


Here is the remaining issue then:

1. You have posted zillions of times that you would never support a team than tanked. Sixers are the most deliberately tankingest team of all time. Yet you wrote "Go Sixers". If that is not support of a tanking team, would you please clarify what that is?

2. You consistently avoid explaining your Ali quote comment. Its still there. I asked who made the quote, you said Cosell during a live commentary, and then deleted it. Never mind the damn deletion and Cosell. Who said the damn thing? Because it makes ZERO sense! Indeed, I don't think anyone ever made that comment.



- PT21

I'm sorry to bud in, but I am a big Ali historian, and was just wondering what comment about Ali you are referring to, Only because I might know who said it.

To a point. Ultimately, what decides a players ultimate value is how good of a player he is at his apex. There are also negatives to making it to the NHL earlier.
- MJL

Totally disagree, but thats not surprising. If a player gets 150points one year, but every other year is a 50 point player. then i dont grade him at his apex. You see things more black and white, while i see things grey. To me the more good years you can get out of a player, its a big difference to me, not you. So we disagree as usual. And if i get those years younger, before free agency sets in, all the better.

Again, losing sight. The context of the conversation is not that Fletcher moves players up. The context is that Fletcher's picks show more promise or that he promotes players faster than Hextall. Your comment that I'm being a Hextall apologist is laughable. I've made the comment numerous times in this conversation that the comparisons can't be mead simply because Fletcher hasn't been the GM long enough. His picks are younger and less developed than Hextall's. Which means Hextall has the advantage here! LOLI'm doing the opposite of being a Hextall apologist. I'm giving you the facts.
- MJL

This convo has bounced all over from moving players up too quickly, whos drafter better, and what/when defines a miss of a player which you wont answer. I also never said fletcher shows MORE promise. I said he doesnt have the misses that Hextall has. You keep changing what i am saying. IT would be easier to go back and forth if you quit doing that.

I also dont think you need to wait 5 years or however long to judge drafts, you can judge right away, and then change it next year accordingly. Most people thought Hextall drafted well 2 years ago, but now they have a different opinion. Thats how the real world works. You reassess accordingly

Of course I was the one who brought the Sixers tanking into this. Your subsequent deleted comment made reference to the tanking being 6 years ago. I am sure zillions of people saw it. I have no desire to humiliate you dude, so I will refrain from posting further on the deleted comments.


Here is the remaining issue then:

1. You have posted zillions of times that you would never support a team than tanked. Sixers are the most deliberately tankingest team of all time. Yet you wrote "Go Sixers". If that is not support of a tanking team, would you please clarify what that is?


- PT21

Incorrect. I have posted a zillion times that I would never support a team tanking.

2. You consistently avoid explaining your Ali quote comment. Its still there. I asked who made the quote, you said Cosell during a live commentary, and then deleted it. Never mind the damn deletion and Cosell. Who said the damn thing? Because it makes ZERO sense! Indeed, I don't think anyone ever made that comment.



- PT21

Why on earth would I need to explain that? To satisfy your need? It's a simple comment that gave an obvious implication. You have now made a simple comment of go Sixers into this! It's embarrassing. The comment of Ali has him on the ropes, makes all the sense in the world. It's now become all the more obvious.


This has long since been over.

Totally disagree, but thats not surprising. If a player gets 150points one year, but every other year is a 50 point player. then i dont grade him at his apex. You see things more black and white, while i see things grey. To me the more good years you can get out of a player, its a big difference to me, not you. So we disagree as usual. And if i get those years younger, before free agency sets in, all the better.
- bradster

I see your point. There is always going to be a variance between year to year for players. Where I think you go wrong and maybe I did not explain well enough is that I wouldn't be looking at a one year slice. I would be looking at how good of a player he is over his career that determines how much he was worth. For example, Giroux has been a Hart trophy finalist over his career. He's not at that level anymore but that doesn't mean when looking at the player and his ultimate worth that we don't account for that. That may not be his current worth, but his worth overall is encompassing.
Do you account that if a player breaks out earlier, that affects his salary and cap hit. It affects how quickly he reaches free agency and has that contract leverage.

This convo has bounced all over from moving players up too quickly, whos drafter better, and what/when defines a miss of a player which you wont answer. I also never said fletcher shows MORE promise. I said he doesnt have the misses that Hextall has. You keep changing what i am saying. IT would be easier to go back and forth if you quit doing that.


- bradster

Again, here it is in black and white. Copied and pasted from YOUR post

https://hockeybuzz.com/bo...?thread_id=173066&page=15

"Might be too soon for some to judge Fletchers drafts. But I will, i think they look more promising than Hextalls."

I also dont think you need to wait 5 years or however long to judge drafts, you can judge right away, and then change it next year accordingly. Most people thought Hextall drafted well 2 years ago, but now t
hey have a different opinion. Thats how the real world works. You reassess accordingly
- bradster

So you think a player can be a miss and then not be a miss? Why am I not surprised!


The real world in hockey does not label a player a miss at 21 years of age. That's how the real world actually works. People's thoughts or opinions do not affect whether a player is an actual miss or not. You have the opinion that O'Brien is a miss. It's a bad opinion. In my opinion.

I see your point. There is always going to be a variance between year to year for players. Where I think you go wrong and maybe I did not explain well enough is that I wouldn't be looking at a one year slice. I would be looking at how good of a player he is over his career that determines how much he was worth. For example, Giroux has been a Hart trophy finalist over his career. He's not at that level anymore but that doesn't mean when looking at the player and his ultimate worth that we don't account for that. That may not be his current worth, but his worth overall is encompassing.
Do you account that if a player breaks out earlier, that affects his salary and cap hit. It affects how quickly he reaches free agency and has that contract leverage.
- MJL

I havent even got into salary, but most people earn their salary. If they are good, the money comes. Some guys like Eichel got his salary before he earned it. thats bad on buffalo for doing that. Some guys like coots should earn more. Those are the exceptions. Most earn what they should. But the bridge deals like Sanheim is good for the teams, and the young guys. Same with TK.

Again, here it is in black and white. Copied and pasted from YOUR post

https://hockeybuzz.com/bo...?thread_id=173066&page=15

"Might be too soon for some to judge Fletchers drafts. But I will, i think they look more promising than Hextalls."




So you think a player can be a miss and then not be a miss? Why am I not surprised!


The real world in hockey does not label a player a miss at 21 years of age. That's how the real world actually works. People's thoughts or opinions do not affect whether a player is an actual miss or not. You have the opinion that O'Brien is a miss. It's a bad opinion. In my opinion.
- MJL

Ya for sure i do, you shouldnt be surprised i think that. Things arent static, things change. Skinner had a great year, 40 goals, that was a good player, then he sucked. Things change. I wouldnt label him great, just because he got 40 goals one year.
JOB is a miss untul proven otherwise to me. You can label him an inconclusive if you want. But at his stage, i want some pro games, and he isnt even getting you that next year. So thats a miss in my books. But he can change that later as i previously said

I havent even got into salary, but most people earn their salary. If they are good, the money comes. Some guys like Eichel got his salary before he earned it. thats bad on buffalo for doing that. Some guys like coots should earn more. Those are the exceptions. Most earn what they should. But the bridge deals like Sanheim is good for the teams, and the young guys. Same with TK.
- bradster

If a player scores 30 goals and 70 points with a 3M cap hit versus a players who scores the same but broke in earlier and has a 6M cap hit. Who is the more valuable player? There are many, many variables when coming to that conclusion.

Ya for sure i do, you shouldnt be surprised i think that. Things arent static, things change. Skinner had a great year, 40 goals, that was a good player, then he sucked. Things change. I wouldnt label him great, just because he got 40 goals one year.
JOB is a miss untul proven otherwise to me. You can label him an inconclusive if you want. But at his stage, i want some pro games, and he isnt even getting you that next year. So thats a miss in my books. But he can change that later as i previously said
- bradster

Skinner has been a proven NHL player with as you said, has had a 40 goal season. He can't possibly be declared a miss as a draft pick. That's the context of the conversation.

Again, I'll say with that standard, every draft pick is a miss until proven otherwise. Your reasoning makes zero sense here. The standard by which you're labeling him a miss is not reasonable in my opinion. Do you think anyone in the Flyers brain trust thinks he is a miss? I know you can't answer that factually but just opinion wise.

If a player scores 30 goals and 70 points with a 3M cap hit versus a players who scores the same but broke in earlier and has a 6M cap hit. Who is the more valuable player? There are many, many variables when coming to that conclusion.
- MJL

I have no idea, player value TO ME has more to do with than getting points. Sorry but i cant compute that hypothetical. Like you said, lots of variable.

Skinner has been a proven NHL player with as you said, has had a 40 goal season. He can't possibly be declared a miss as a draft pick. That's the context of the conversation.

Again, I'll say with that standard, every draft pick is a miss until proven otherwise. Your reasoning makes zero sense here. The standard by which you're labeling him a miss is not reasonable in my opinion. Do you think anyone in the Flyers brain trust thinks he is a miss? I know you can't answer that factually but just opinion wise.
- MJL

I dont really care if you cant comprehend what im saying. Ive said it clear enough where most can grasp where i cam coming from. To me its plenty good reason to label him a miss, you disagree. Good for you.

Skinner has been a proven NHL player with as you said, has had a 40 goal season. He can't possibly be declared a miss as a draft pick. That's the context of the conversation.

Again, I'll say with that standard, every draft pick is a miss until proven otherwise. Your reasoning makes zero sense here. The standard by which you're labeling him a miss is not reasonable in my opinion. Do you think anyone in the Flyers brain trust thinks he is a miss? I know you can't answer that factually but just opinion wise.
- MJL

You must really have a hard time with all the thousands of sites that rate drafts the minute they are complete . How do you deal with that? Before anyone has played a pro game, and the drafts are rated.

I have no idea, player value TO ME has more to do with than getting points. Sorry but i cant compute that hypothetical. Like you said, lots of variable.
- bradster

It's simple. Bringing up a player later can add value due to he doesn't reach a higher level of salary and cap hit until later. He might reach UFA status giving him contract leverage at 27 instead of at 26.

I dont really care if you cant comprehend what im saying. Ive said it clear enough where most can grasp where i cam coming from. To me its plenty good reason to label him a miss, you disagree. Good for you.
- bradster

You're misguided to think that I don't grasp what your saying or can't comprehend what you're saying. I simply don't think you are correct.