View Single Post
Old
12-14-2012, 12:22 PM
  #32
Yossarian54
Registered User
 
Yossarian54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Perth, WA
Country: Australia
Posts: 1,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind View Post
mmhmm... i always thought this was probably the case which was why i found so many past draft studies very frustrating as they'd go to macro, usually only breaking down by round. This is fine for the 2-7th rounds i think, (i'd like more info on the second round, but i definitely think you get to a pretty general wash by the 3rd/4th round) but I was fairly certain their'd be quite a but I really wanted to see the returns pick by pick within the first.
and thanks a lot to DG for doing the D man - Forward -Goalies numbers, very cool
It could potentially be biased by teams - if they rank choices by the 'round' they estimate them to go in as opposed to a straight forward list. You may see some small differential between say pick 62 and pick 82 in round 3. But as you say, pretty much all the analyses are round by round, making it impossible to tell.

I also think that the abberations seen in pick 16, and the odd variation in blocks 5-10, 11-15, 16-20 and 21-25 are most likely due to the small sample size. Which is really unavoidable here.

Otherwise really good. Ideally a spilt could be done - chance of being elite, chance of being good, chance of being mediocre, chance of busting.

Yossarian54 is offline   Reply With Quote