Comments on: NHL 2009 Entry Draft Aftermath: Comparing The Draft Ranking Services http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/ All things NHL. All the time. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:54:31 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Christopher Ralph http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/comment-page-1/#comment-2734 Christopher Ralph Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:36:15 +0000 http://thehockeywriters.com/?p=7686#comment-2734 That's great Kevin! Yeah - I noticed those review at HF as well. Join me at Twitter: http://twitter/hockeyspy or Facebook Group: The Hockey Spy http://www.facebook.com/s.php?ref=search&sid=3374cfd3a23764b1297ba3d832d92992&init=q&q=kevin%20hopson#/group.php?gid=60905528656&ref=ts Cheers! Happy Canada Free Agent Frenzy Day! That’s great Kevin! Yeah – I noticed those review at HF as well.

Join me at Twitter:
http://twitter/hockeyspy

or Facebook Group: The Hockey Spy
http://www.facebook.com/s.php?ref=search&sid=3374cfd3a23764b1297ba3d832d92992&init=q&q=kevin%20hopson#/group.php?gid=60905528656&ref=ts

Cheers!

Happy Canada Free Agent Frenzy Day!

]]> By: Kevin Hopson http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/comment-page-1/#comment-2728 Kevin Hopson Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:47:11 +0000 http://thehockeywriters.com/?p=7686#comment-2728 Chris, I think I was quoted a few times in the McKeen's Draft Guide regarding a couple of American players I covered (Drew Shore and Jeremy Morin). Like I said, I help contribute to some extent but most of my coverage is geared towards prospects already in the system. When I wrote for Hockey's Future, we would do annual reviews of each organization's draft from five years prior. It was a good way to evaluate their draft success and find out who the busts, gems and diamonds in the rough were. Chris,

I think I was quoted a few times in the McKeen’s Draft Guide regarding a couple of American players I covered (Drew Shore and Jeremy Morin). Like I said, I help contribute to some extent but most of my coverage is geared towards prospects already in the system.

When I wrote for Hockey’s Future, we would do annual reviews of each organization’s draft from five years prior. It was a good way to evaluate their draft success and find out who the busts, gems and diamonds in the rough were.

]]> By: Christopher Ralph http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/comment-page-1/#comment-2726 Christopher Ralph Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:14:40 +0000 http://thehockeywriters.com/?p=7686#comment-2726 Kevin, Do you help out with the McKeens's print issue that comes out with their 150 ranked prospects, as well as prospect rankings for each team? I really that one! Kevin,

Do you help out with the McKeens’s print issue that comes out with their 150 ranked prospects, as well as prospect rankings for each team?

I really that one!

]]> By: Christopher Ralph http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/comment-page-1/#comment-2725 Christopher Ralph Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:11:52 +0000 http://thehockeywriters.com/?p=7686#comment-2725 Thanks Kevin for clarifying further - I definitely see your point. It will be even more interesting to look back at 3, 4 & 5 yrs intervals and compare the various rankings against how the NHL teams did in their drafting, once we have a better idea of how the prospects are developing. Cheers, Chris Thanks Kevin for clarifying further – I definitely see your point.

It will be even more interesting to look back at 3, 4 & 5 yrs intervals and compare the various rankings against how the NHL teams did in their drafting, once we have a better idea of how the prospects are developing.

Cheers,
Chris

]]> By: Kevin Hopson http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/comment-page-1/#comment-2723 Kevin Hopson Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:25:10 +0000 http://thehockeywriters.com/?p=7686#comment-2723 I understand what you are saying, Chris. Normally, there is not a significant variance between a service's mock draft and their actual rankings. However, I was only pointing out that there is in fact a difference in most cases, which would make for a more logical comparison. There were a few off-the-board players taken in the first round (when compared to the consensus top 30) and no one can really know what a particular organization is thinking, especially outside the top 10. Even if you know their drafting tendencies, needs, etc., it can sometimes be a crapshoot. Anyway, good job on the predictions. I understand what you are saying, Chris. Normally, there is not a significant variance between a service’s mock draft and their actual rankings. However, I was only pointing out that there is in fact a difference in most cases, which would make for a more logical comparison. There were a few off-the-board players taken in the first round (when compared to the consensus top 30) and no one can really know what a particular organization is thinking, especially outside the top 10. Even if you know their drafting tendencies, needs, etc., it can sometimes be a crapshoot. Anyway, good job on the predictions.

]]> By: Christopher Ralph http://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-2009-entry-draft-aftermath-comparing-the-draft-ranking-services/comment-page-1/#comment-2722 Christopher Ralph Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:19:18 +0000 http://thehockeywriters.com/?p=7686#comment-2722 Thanks for the comments, Kevin! I agree with you. I did state that using the rankings of a particular service was a limitation of the analysis. As I do my own profiles, I do not have the mock drafts put out by the analyzed services. If someone wants to forward those to me or to analyze them theirselves, I would welcome and appreciate that, as well. I would hope that the mock drafts are at least 2 rounds as comparing 1 round mocks is kind of futile in my opinion. Another thought on this is that no matter if the ranking service is predicting how a draft is going to actually go down, they are trying to predict and rate whom they feel the best prospects are, in a particular order. Obviously, there are variances in the pro NHL scouting teams, but until proven otherwise, they are the standard as which to judge against. Of course, the track records of some NHL teams would offer ammunition with which you could argue. I guess, what I'm getting at, is that a mock draft should not be that different from a particular services ratings. I, admittedly had some variances between my rankings, but prospects did fall or rise more than 5 positions in difference if recall. Thanks for the comments, Kevin!

I agree with you. I did state that using the rankings of a particular service was a limitation of the analysis.

As I do my own profiles, I do not have the mock drafts put out by the analyzed services. If someone wants to forward those to me or to analyze them theirselves, I would welcome and appreciate that, as well.

I would hope that the mock drafts are at least 2 rounds as comparing 1 round mocks is kind of futile in my opinion.

Another thought on this is that no matter if the ranking service is predicting how a draft is going to actually go down, they are trying to predict and rate whom they feel the best prospects are, in a particular order. Obviously, there are variances in the pro NHL scouting teams, but until proven otherwise, they are the standard as which to judge against. Of course, the track records of some NHL teams would offer ammunition with which you could argue.

I guess, what I’m getting at, is that a mock draft should not be that different from a particular services ratings. I, admittedly had some variances between my rankings, but prospects did fall or rise more than 5 positions in difference if recall.

]]>