Comments for Do You Believe in Magic? (West 2010) at http://hockey.dobbersports.com , comment 1 to 13 out of 13 comments http://hockey.dobbersports.com Tue, 21 May 2013 09:43:47 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6783 Naw no worries Mabus, I have pretty thick skin unless it's a personal attack with no facts to back it up then I get miffed. I think your comments are definitely fair. To me I think 4th year is where players tend to surpass the point-per-game + plateau, which is kinda what you're after in a 1 year pools IMO. If you look at the charts it's where those "big named" guys really start to take off. Granted Getzlaf potted 82 in his 3rd year, but 91 in his 4th which gives it that extra umph. Same deal with Kovalchuk 87 to 98, that extra little umph. But on a whole you kinda see the players that cracked the 55-65 point mark in their 3rd years crack the 80 in their 4th year's and that's what I'm after. Unfortunately there isn't too many from the western conference that are under that category this season. Kane is pretty much a Getzlaf/Kovalchuk example who might go from 88 to 95-100, Toews is probably the only one that has 68 to 85-90 point potential, but his playoff run pretty much put him on the radar that you can't get him for cheap anymore. Mueller and Ryan might be interesting cases if they maintain top-line/top PP time, they both could have point-per-game potential and are worth the risk. That information is definitely worth it. I'm after the big fish the ones that go from 50 points to 80 points with huge breakout potential. I don't really care if they are a 35 point player and go to 60 point mark, cause to me I can list off 50-60 guys that are in that range and it'll pretty much keep you on par with your competition. It's the 55-60 point players that jump to point-per-game that will gain you an edge over your competition. Yes I know that only a handful of guys will hit that 80 point mark, but that's what I'm after. Last year I did a similar article and listed Kopitar and Stastny as my big fish and it turned out alright. Pavelski and Eriksson as my secondary fish and Gilbert and Edler as my D. If you were lucky enough to land one or a couple of those guys you probably were ecstatic. So I'm just trying to go back to the well once again this season. - Ryan Ma Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:05:17 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6773 Yea, sorry about that Ryan - was in a surly mood yesterday and this year 4 thing is one of my pet peeves - I just don't see a stronger correlation between increases at year 4 than I do at year 3 or year 5. 15 is absolutely an arbitrary number. I chose it because most of the top names on my list saw at least one jump of over 15 points over their careers, and multiple jumps over 15 points were rare. Also, predicting point increases less than 15 points is much easier through most formulas than the ones over 15 points. Finally, a player's fantasy value is significantly different before the breakout than after, so predicting when this milestone occurs is probably one of the most valuable pieces of information to a fantasy owner. You are also correct that looking at point change is valuable but provides a different value than the absolute numbers. I just think the average person probably values players based on their previous year's points or a two or three year average with some some sort of "upside" modifier. This is why predicting when someone will hit a new career high is so important. It not only affects a the 2 or 3 year average calculations, it also affects perception of upside. I don't understand the comment about 80 points though, because it doesn't look to me like 4th years are more likely to pass this mark. Mabus - Mabus Wed, 30 Jun 2010 06:06:16 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6761 The 26 vs 30 split could be an interesting one. The 30 could be due to the late bloomers or bigger physical power-forwards? Also we're not really looking for peak production, because if we're after players at peak production you might be too late... Much like playing with stocks, you kinda want to get the player while they're starting the bump of the curve. You want to grab a player in the 12th or 15th round and equate that to a 3rd or 4th rounder and generally speaking it's during their 4th years. - Ryan Ma Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:45:18 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6758 RE: Mabus I think it depends on what your opinion of breakout is. Mine is when a player reaches that point-per-game plateau (80 point mark) or as close to it as possible. Not a lot of players hit that mark (roughly around 20 players hit that mark per season), which is why it starts to separate the fantasy studs from the duds. This article is more about listing off players who have the potential to get to that mark rather than percentage of point increase. Here's the way I'm thinking about it. Gagner hit 41 points last season, if we're using your numbers of 15+ point increase as a breakout, he really only needs to hit 56 points to consider next season as a breakout. Where as Kane needs 103 in order for that to be considered a breakout. 68 players hit that mark for Gagner's goal, where as 3 hit that mark for Kane's goal. So setting a a target of 15 points as a breakout point I don't think is really fair. Kane's say 95 point production would be much more valuable than Gagner's 55 in fantasy pools. Which is why I'm suggesting that you look at overall production rather than point increase in order to judge success of 4th year players. Also the age thing could be an interesting find, the problem is if you look at the past 20 years the numbers could be skewed as well as times are changing. Generally speaking the "newer" generation (post-lockout) has resulted in younger draftees being rushed into the NHL earlier and forced to produce at an earlier age compared to the late 90's and early 2000s, where a lot of the youth went through the slower development process. The Sedin's, Lecavalier's, Thornton's, Spezza's have had a much different development process than Crosby, Ovechkin, Kane. Also in the late 90s and early 2000's defense was the name of the game, and now the game is evolving back towards offense which is why you see bigger numbers from younger kids. So it's probably not hard to find that production peaks at 26 for older generations, but if you look at the recent trends (4 of the top 5 scorers this year is under 24 and 5 of the top 10 being under 24) it's trending towards the youth movement. Keep in mind this is probably more effective for 1-year leagues drafting in Sept. If you are in a keeper league, you pretty much know all of this information already and it's just redundant. - Ryan Ma Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:32:08 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6757 Assuming S. Kostitsyn signs with Nashvile, on which of the above lists would you place him? - Dicks Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:08:40 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6756 RE: Andrew Definitely the magical breakout year does happen, the problem is when does it occur, I think there is a strong compelling case for 3rd year as well as 4th year, but generally speaking I think the 4th is where we really see the "spectacular" numbers. If you look at the 2nd chart that's where the solid evidence exists. All 10 pretty much broke into the 80 point (point-per-game) range during their 4th years. I won't discount year 3 as being a possible breakout year, but I think there's stronger evidence for 4 rather than 3. But with everything you have to take a case by case scenario and you can't really lump everyone into the same boat. Just wanted to write an article to point out a few 4th yearers to keep an eye on for drafts this season. - Ryan Ma Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:55:18 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6755 RE: Backstrom/Krecji I just do my half of the NHL which is the west. Russ does the East and I've given him a list of East players, so he should mention them both coming Thursday. - Ryan Ma Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:48:16 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6753 You guys have the right idea here, but if you look at the metrics involving players hitting their peaks/improving from year to year, its more about the age of the player than the number of years in the league. If anything, there is more magic as to many forwards (from what I have seen) getting a statistical bump at age 30 than the fourth year. The age 26 is historically a players peak age statistically, but it seems major players receive a bump at 30 as well. - Rob Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:26:19 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6752 It's a great article, but one I disagree with. Lets pretend you were trying to make the case for a "Magical third year" instead with your first table. 6 of the 7 had larger increases in their third year than they did in their fourth, and the one exception is Crosby, and he was injured. If you want a breakout, from your own chart, look at the third year. My data only goes back 20 years, but the correlation between production and years in the league is weaker than the correlation with age. Also, according to my data, average and median point increases also aren't largest during the 4th year, so the years of service argument is only valid if combined with age or years since draft information. Is it fair to call a breakout someone that increases their previous best by 15 points? This is what I generally refer to a breakout. If we use that terminology, and I focus on guys that have been top scorers and top recent draft picks in the league, 2nd year breakouts in my table are Stamkos, Toews, Backstrom, Kopitar, Malkin, Staal and Sakic. 3rd year breakouts include Kane, Kessel, Getzlaf, Kovalchuk, Spezza, Zetterberg and Jagr. 4th year breakouts are Carter, Parise, Perry, Nash, Heatley, Datsyuk and Hossa. 5th year breakouts are the Sedins and Lecavalier. Iginla and Thornton didn't break out until their 6th years. These numbers are also skewed by external factors - for instance, one external factor was the lockout. From this list, Staal, Kovalchuk, Spezza, Heatley, Sedin, Sedin, Zetterberg and Datsyuk all "broke out" the year after the lockout. If you focus on the 4th year guys, just be aware that they will probably already be on my protected list. Mabus - Mabus Tue, 29 Jun 2010 12:42:47 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6748 First let me start by saying, you/this site has made me believe in the breakout year and I think this is a great article. That being said the top chart doesn't convince me itself. To count sedin going from 39 to 42 points as a break out, it sounds more like steady growth. To count crosby's 102 as a breakout when he had 102 as a rookie and 120 as a sophomore, sound more like a rebound from a slump in year 3. Similar deal for Ovechkin, increased by 1 point, not a break out. I think this chart however might be an example of how the elite-elite talent actually breaks out in year 3. The best of the best figure it out just a little sooner. Ovechkin year 2 to year 3, up 20 points. Backstrom up 13 points, St. Louis up 22 points, Richards up 12 points, Thornton up 19 points, kane up 18 points. Even a number of the guys in the next chart have big year 2 to year 3 jumps, then some of them jump again in year 4. Just a thought. - Andrew Tue, 29 Jun 2010 06:10:27 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6746 Great article. I'm curious to know what you think about Krejci too. After reaching 73 last year and his production dropping this year, do you think breaking out to ppg is out of the question? - Raja Tue, 29 Jun 2010 05:38:12 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6745 sick article. - Chandan Singh Tue, 29 Jun 2010 05:00:05 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/amato/2905-do-you-believe-in-magic-west-2010#comment-6742 Great article! Interesting take on Kane too. I've never really given him much credit which is a mistake I'm sure but he comes across as such an arrogant little jerk. Nothing says you can't let arrogant little jerks help you win hockey pools though so I'll slide him up my draft list ;-) What about Backstrom though? Are we poised to see something "magical" this year or will he hover around the 95-105 mark? Thanks! - lcbtd Tue, 29 Jun 2010 03:46:45 +0100