MattJVD Posted July 5, 2018 Share Posted July 5, 2018 3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Shinkaruk also looked different at that first camp (where he was a standout and got a lot of us, including myself, pretty excited). I can remember many positive reactions as he seemed to show a lot of fearlessness and jam and certainly didn’t avoid contact or the tough areas. He just never quite recaptured that potential. Yeah, I was pretty high on him after that camp too. He was skating hard and making great plays; even beat Lundqvist clean over the shoulder. It's encouraging to hear that Madden is showing some offensive skills in camp, I thought he was more of a defensive forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johngould21 Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 I'm going out on a limb, we've got another gem with this kid. Two years of development, I'm guessing. In that scrimmage last night, Palmu, Lind, Woo, McMaster, Hughes, and DiPietro were noticeable, as was Madden. Honorable mention Gunnarsson. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 6 minutes ago, johngould21 said: I'm going out on a limb, we've got another gem with this kid. Two years of development, I'm guessing. In that scrimmage last night, Palmu, Lind, Woo, McMaster, Hughes, and DiPietro were noticeable, as was Madden. Honorable mention Gunnarsson. Madden has elite skills. He’s got his dad’s compete too. Like you say, he’s going to be a gem. JB is amazing at finding these guys! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post reyezone Posted July 6, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 6, 2018 That goal Madden scored was an NHL goal that beats NHL goalies. I'll take suspect contracts on bottom six forwards all day if Benning keeps piling up above average talent in the prospect pool. 2 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 Sorry, it is Kuzma, but the player quotes are good... https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/kuzma-tyler-madden-makes-his-mark-in-canucks-annual-summer-showcase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted July 6, 2018 Share Posted July 6, 2018 Was surprised at his speed, which was as good as anyone on the ice. Only 150lbs, but he only needs a couple strides to accelerate. Can make plays and showed he knows how to score. Already attacks the net and plays a feisty game, so just wait until he starts gaining muscle and gets to his dad's size or bigger. He's in a great development situation going to Northeastern (especially with Gaudette's entire line graduating) and with his father guiding things. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) On 6/23/2018 at 10:05 AM, Down by the River said: I think Adam Gaudette had similar posts back in the day... "Not a lot of information on style of play. PCS numbers are pretty awful with a 1.4% comparable success rate. Craig Smith is the only statistically similar guy to make the NHL. Will have to show significant growth in the next couple of seasons to be considered a legitimately solid prospect." https://canucksarmy.com/2015/06/27/canucks-finish-draft-pick-up-5-more-players/ "Gaudette’s statistical profile suggested he was a reach, even as late as 149th. In the context of draft rankings, it wasn’t an especially curious move, but given his slight stature and tame counting numbers, it didn’t satisfy our qualitative proprieties anywhere near as much as we’d hoped from a player in that range." Edited July 10, 2018 by oldnews 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gaudette Celly Posted July 10, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted July 10, 2018 50 minutes ago, oldnews said: "Gaudette’s statistical profile suggested he was a reach, even as late as 149th. In the context of draft rankings, it wasn’t an especially curious move, but given his slight stature and tame counting numbers, it didn’t satisfy our qualitative proprieties anywhere near as much as we’d hoped from a player in that range." Their assessments would certainly be more reliable and accurate if they were to simply... ...watch players actually play hockey. 1 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Hutton Wink said: Their assessments would certainly be more reliable and accurate if they were to simply... ...watch players actually play hockey. Fair criticism. Although to their credit, most of the current CA prospects writers do watch a fair amount of hockey (Ryan Biech especially), several have played the game at lower levels, and I believe a couple of them are even currently coaching minor hockey teams. So they’re not just a bunch of calculator boys working out of their mom’s basement (even if it seems like it sometimes). But they freely admit that they don’t have the same resources as NHL clubs and simply can’t watch games for every prospect they rank. And for what it’s worth, Rhys Jessop (author of that article) remains a paid amateur scouting consultant for the Florida Panthers, so he’s probably watched a fair amount of hockey (just not any pre-draft Adam Gaudette). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 7 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Fair criticism. Although to their credit, most of the current CA prospects writers do watch a fair amount of hockey (Ryan Biech especially), several have played the game at lower levels, and I believe a couple of them are even currently coaching minor hockey teams. So they’re not just a bunch of calculator boys working out of their mom’s basement (even if it seems like it sometimes). But they freely admit that they don’t have the same resources as NHL clubs and simply can’t watch games for every prospect they rank. And for what it’s worth, Rhys Jessop (author of that article) remains a paid amateur scouting consultant for the Florida Panthers, so he’s probably watched a fair amount of hockey (just not any pre-draft Adam Gaudette). Certainly some do, but much of the time their comments belie the fact that they do not (Gaudette being one of many). Their whole stat narrative is fine, but when they do not at all balance it with the real world (watching them play, their deployment, taking into consideration their play styles, personality, leadership, etc.) then they need to minimally come out and effectively say "this analysis is strictly based on numerical data and absolutely nothing else to do with the player." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 5 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Certainly some do, but much of the time their comments belie the fact that they do not (Gaudette being one of many). Their whole stat narrative is fine, but when they do not at all balance it with the real world (watching them play, their deployment, taking into consideration their play styles, personality, leadership, etc.) then they need to minimally come out and effectively say "this analysis is strictly based on numerical data and absolutely nothing else to do with the player." As an ex stats ( not sports ) person, I can tell you that the variables are key to 'statistical confidence'. In my world of stats, zero business decisions would be made using stats with this many variables. Accountants and insurance actuaries would be throwing themselves on their sharpened pencils ! To quote Ben Disraeli ( we all remember him......right ? ) 'There are 3 types of liars......liars, damned liars and the worst, statistics ! '. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Yes, and there would be no need for them to continually have to come out and recant on their prognostications if they would simply disclose when their analysis is one-dimensional; that is, based on statistics only. It would not be necessary if they would either (1) stop making bold predictions based on stats only and/or (2) openly state that their conclusions are ONLY based on that single factor. "Admittedly we have never seen this player play the game..." or "the eye-test tells us something very different (or corroborates our conclusion) from the stats" would certainly be more helpful than "we thereby determine that Bo Horvat projects to be a third line NHL center who may score 40-50 points once in his career" or "Zack MacEwen is a waste of a contract" then be proven wrong within even less than a year. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attila Umbrus Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Hutton Wink said: Yes, and there would be no need for them to continually have to come out and recant on their prognostications if they would simply disclose when their analysis is one-dimensional; that is, based on statistics only. It would not be necessary if they would either (1) stop making bold predictions based on stats only and/or (2) openly state that their conclusions are ONLY based on that single factor. "Admittedly we have never seen this player play the game..." or "the eye-test tells us something very different (or corroborates our conclusion) from the stats" would certainly be more helpful than "we thereby determine that Bo Horvat projects to be a third line NHL center who may score 40-50 points once in his career" or "Zack MacEwen is a waste of a contract" then be proven wrong within even less than a year. You can’t garnish everything about a player by measuring and calculating his counting stats and watching video, then come up with bold predictions with out ever watching the player in real time, live at the rink. How does the player do while the camera isn’t following him?? Is he floating? Is he sitting on the bench sulking? We don’t know. You have to be there in person to see the full spectrum of the athelete you are assessing. Scouting has really turned towards the selection of “high IQ” athletes that can process the game at higher levels, the rest of the kinks they can train out. But IQ is so important nowadays. And the best place to find your answers is at the rink. Not at home in front of your tv/computer. They do entertain me from time to time, but find them too biased in one approach to take them 100 % seriously. At least like you said they warn you at the beginning that they “haven’t seen this player in person but...” lol 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 Part of the issue with PCS/pGPS, and therefore CA since they derive a lot of their views from those "player comparability" metrics, is that the USHL is really starting to churn out quality talent with regularity which was previously not the case. CA also laid a giant egg on Brock Boeser for the exact same reason: https://canucksarmy.com/2015/06/27/first-look-canucks-draft-brock-boeser-23rd-overall/ I don't begrudge CA for using these models as heavily as they do given their limited resources. They even regularly acknowledge that the lack of comparables in certain leagues (Allsvenskan, MHL, USHL, Finnish Jr Liiga) is a big hole in their predictions. Yet they never outright discount the results of those models. At most they will say "Well a player could be slightly worse/better than PCS predicts" and I think that's a matter of pride. From what I've seen of many of their writers, that's not something I expect to change any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted July 11, 2018 Share Posted July 11, 2018 (edited) On 7/10/2018 at 1:41 AM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Fair criticism. Although to their credit, most of the current CA prospects writers do watch a fair amount of hockey (Ryan Biech especially), several have played the game at lower levels, and I believe a couple of them are even currently coaching minor hockey teams. So they’re not just a bunch of calculator boys working out of their mom’s basement (even if it seems like it sometimes). But they freely admit that they don’t have the same resources as NHL clubs and simply can’t watch games for every prospect they rank. And for what it’s worth, Rhys Jessop (author of that article) remains a paid amateur scouting consultant for the Florida Panthers, so he’s probably watched a fair amount of hockey (just not any pre-draft Adam Gaudette). There is also the fact that the PCS system was really developed as a way to bring stats into predicting prospect success, it is meant as a statistical model/experiment and not to supplant scouting. Take it for what it is, and that is all CA has ever asked you to do. Again, I recognize that there is some value to advanced stats but in my world they usually just represent the tools of a bunch of know-it-alls that like to throw them out to try to win an argument that really doesn't matter that much in the end anyway. The more stats that you can generate the more likely you can cherry pic them to say what you want. "Oh people can come up with statistics to prove anything Kent. Forfty percent of all people know that." Homer J. Simpson Edited July 11, 2018 by DrJockitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: 5 out of 4 mathematicians say this is incorrect and that PCS proves it. Jim Madigan is clearly 83% inaccurate and likely someone who doesn't recycle either. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vannuck59 Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 Mumbo jumbo you got to watch them play, who is the go to guy , who gets it done, who does the coach lean on . Scouting its not rocket science some guys have a eye for talent some don't. Predicting a bust or a top pick takes a special knack to get it right. Right now JB and staff are above average. Its not how you pick in the first round its all the other rounds that count. Edmonton and Toronto would be bottom dwellers if it wasn't for lottery luck. Vancouver needs some luck with the ping pong balls. Getting number one or two this year would help. I would take a center and the fill up with D prospects. Back on task, Tyler Madden, think Mike Peca 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyHarry Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 1 hour ago, vannuck59 said: Tyler Madden, think Mike Peca Did you watch Mike Peca play? I honesty can say I haven’t seen Tyler Madden play yet but I really don’t think it’s possible he’s a 2nd coming of a Mike Peca. i would love to watch the Tyler Madden vs Quinn Hughes games this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 I am very curious as to why Madigan would say "he has very good skill, hockey sense and size." He was considered small at the draft by many on CDC (152 lbs). Has he added weight and height since the draft? 6'1" and 210 lbs now??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now