Can you do like a Datsyuk or other late-round gem in retrospect? Maybe walk us through the process of how you get such a precise score?
This "astro bingo score" as one poster put it is just a way to measure ability of top athletes. When I do some random person chart it is quite obvious does he have any talent for sport or not, but in this case more precise system was needed because all these players have what it takes to be on draft level at least.
I myself don't need it in numerical form because I can let's say see how one person is comparable to others. It was designed with person not having any knowledge of astrology in mind. You really don't need to know about various aspects in Crosby's chart etc. beleive me. Ordinary fan just want to know if this guy named Crosby is any good and howe he compares to for example Ovechkin. All that matters I don't get this numbers from my head they are calculated by computer according to exact(measurable) things in player's chart so I can stay as objective as possible.
Main thing is that 2007 Ovechkin and 2007 Crosby compare to each other quite differently than 2012 Crosby and 2012 Ovechkin, so I should take periods in consideration. Rating is just some core attribute but not exist independently from periods (time).
Rating is exponential so there is way more difference between 70 and 80 than between 250 and 240. I consciously made it that way in order to have more room towards top.
As for Datsyuk it is good idea, i will make him, but step by step explanation is not possible because 1)it will be overwhelmingly big
2) I don't want to share my system
Main mechanics in such gems are periods from my experience or they are just underscouted.
Busts have 2 things in common. It will be quiet lengthy, sorry. How can most professional scouts be SOOO wrong about player, let's say Daigle? No way. They are not wrong. They just can't see his talent inside out, they look on play. And so happens that period for player is so good that his play is elevated beyond measure. And after draft picture changes and player fail to make any progression at all or even worse regresses. It doesn't matter what happens - lack of work ethics, injury plagued etc. It's one way. But in Daigle's case it was different. He has exceptional chart, but not in sport itself - 1)in sport related money 2)good sport abilities in CHILDHOOD. My rating for him btw was 77 because it doesn't take such things in consideration.
If we combine the King Wen sequence of the I Ching and Cuprum's astrology, though, we get a different picture.
Cuprum ranks Drouin as 5.
Hexagram 5 is named 需 (xū), "Attending". Other variations include "waiting", "moistened", and "arriving". Its inner trigram is ☰ (乾 qiŠn) force = (天) heaven, and its outer trigram is ☵ (坎 kǎn) gorge = (水) water.
Waiting sounds like he might not be a star immediately. If the 乾 (force) of 天 (heaven) makes a 坎 (gorge) between Drouin and the 水 (water [ice?])) then perhaps it will take some time.
edit: breakthrough: the force of heaven makes a gorge due to water, though? The I Ching is big on the dynamic balance of opposites, this has to be the universe saying the terribly unfortunate flooding (water) that has affected Calgary (flame) will be balanced by Drouin.
That would be interesting to see Drouin land in Calgary. The Flames would probably have to move up otherwise it would be a surprise to see Drouin drop to them. I guess we'll see on Sunday.
I'm curious to revisit this method of projection in the future to see how players turn out compared to their astrology, or in this case the I Ching. As I understand it though these methods can vary in accuracy because interpretation can be misunderstood. If these methods could be utilized to accurately assess interuptions in a player's career such as injury they could be invaluable to teams' draft considerations.
Also I wouldn't worry about people bad mouthing this stuff. Haters gonna hate. Also people can get awfully uncomfortable when their beliefs are challenged, even if it is for something fun like this where at the very least it's an entertaining alternative way to project players' potential.
I made analysis of Datsyuk as requested. His rating is 205, best period June 2007-October 2009.
As for his "gemness", there is simple explanation that he was underscouted, but then again a question raises, if he was so good why was there no hype about him to make at least a few scouts to take a look on him?
Not so simple answer is that he began to becoming the player we all know and love only in summer of 1999, when his astro period changed from very bad one to good and coincided with something logical, probably coaching or increased understanding of hockey or something else, and it was a full year AFTER the draft, and he was passed twice before the draft. So his 205 rating took effect in full swing only in 1999, most prominent period of which was June 2007-October 2009.
But it is of limited usefulness because of all this hindsight thing etc. so prediction about future is coming
This season will be good for Dats and most importantly in such periods his team tends to do very well, so I expect good(slightly above his standards) play with better leadership than usual from him and good run from Red Wings, much better than their roster indicates. Unfortunately it will be last good season for Pavel, I honestly expect big decline in 2014-2015 season for him.
Also people can get awfully uncomfortable when their beliefs are challenged, even if it is for something fun like this where at the very least it's an entertaining alternative way to project players' potential.
Yes, clearly that is the main reason why people would display the incredulity that they have.
Suggestion: now do a reading on some players expected to go much later in the draft but less is known about them. if one of those players ends up with a career similar to your analysis it could prove more.
I created this thread in order to ask help from community regarding info about later projected draft picks. I can't make analysis without birth time. If I have enough info about dates of life-changing or career changing events in player's history I can make educated guess about his birth time, more info = better probability of correct timing( but still margin for error unfortunately).
However it is difficult to find info even about prospects projected to go high, for example Darnell Nurse - known only his date of birth, that he is very big, from family with sport background. And nothing more. No dates of major injuries, transfers, personal life events.
Some poster above provided info about Marko Dano, turned out this info was enough, and turned out the player himself is very average.
Absolutely BS! Ridiculous.. All projections based on stats are just waste of time. There's only one working scouting method and that's simple: watch prospects play, no need for rocket science.
your statement is absolutely bs. players bust all the time, especially those that have been watched under microscopes for years. The list is too long to name, but though traditional scouting is still the way to go, stuff like this is awesome to read and might one ay hold some value when it comes to a team picking between two players they have rated the same.
I have been on HF for years now and man has it been a long time since I have read something fresh and unique on here.
Regardless if this goes down as complete nonsense, 100% enjoyed the read and time you took putting this together. I do find it interesting with the things you say as sometimes I truly believe we are born with certain talents that come and go at different times.
I would love to see more work done on other players, but like you stated the information isnt as easily available as the top prospects.
If anybody has information needed on different prospects for Cuprum to create more projections on, please give that info to him as I would love to see how this plays out through a bigger scope.
Dont mind the haters, all theroies and ideas are welcome here, especially those that are good hearted like this one. Enjoying the read and looking forward to more players discussed.,
Interesting thread and I'm not sure what goes into your system but I would encourage you to pull data without names so your results aren't tainted by preconceptions. IE, someone give you a top ten collection of the numerics you needed, you then make your own draft order based on your projections, and then compare them to the popular opinion once the players have been named.