MacKinnon hits 60pts, thanks!

[sasquatch]

A bit late on this, but, Nate Mack hit 60 yesterday!!
I recall a lot of haters last summer and preseason around here saying MacKinnon wouldn't get close to it.... I believe Dobber had roughly a 70point guesstimate... well, he's on 60 now and has 5 games left to play including one vs the Oil.

So, say MacKinnon ends on 63, certainly possible. I call 63 a push personally... maybe slightly less than the +/- 5 points each way, but he's a rookie so for me it would seem/it is a lot harder to predict what will happen.

Anyway, I'm very happy I drafted MacKinnon instead of Drouin last summer, how many points did Drouin get this year? (yes, Drouin will be amazing too, but, he wouldn't have helped me or anyone else at all this year). We draft straight after the NHL draft so I needed to know who WOULD play this year. What did I do? I went and read everything I could on Dobberhockey about the two. Once again, bang on target, add to that the point prediction proximity and you've got one satisfied customer here.

This is why I keep coming here and will keep coming here, Dobber simply has his finger on the pulse!

Thanks for the excellent work by all the Dobber team and the dobberite community.

[Axeman33]

and has 5 games left to play including one vs the Oil.

Whats thats supposed to mean...

Is that a dirty dig against my Oilers or something? LOL!

[MXHockey]

Whats thats supposed to mean...

Is that a dirty dig against my Oilers or something? LOL!

It means Mack still has a shot at 70.

[Axeman33]

I think the Oilers are going to go all David Backes on Nate MacKinnon's a$$!!

[mounD]

I'm in a league with Sasquatch, and I held the second overall pick in our prospect entry draft last summer. When I heard the words "Hawkz select Jonathan Drouin with the 1st overall pick" my heart exploded because I knew Mackinnon was MINE!!!!! Needless to say, it's paid off. I'm going for the three-peat, will be facing off against Sasquatch in the finals in all likelihood.

Good luck, buddy. Let's hope Mackinnon breaks 70.

[sasquatch]

Whats thats supposed to mean...

Is that a dirty dig against my Oilers or something? LOL!

Haha, don't you know it!

I'm in a league with Sasquatch, and I held the second overall pick in our prospect entry draft last summer. When I heard the words "Hawkz select Jonathan Drouin with the 1st overall pick" my heart exploded because I knew Mackinnon was MINE!!!!! Needless to say, it's paid off. I'm going for the three-peat, will be facing off against Sasquatch in the finals in all likelihood.

Good luck, buddy. Let's hope Mackinnon breaks 70.

yeah, unless my opponent pulls off some sort of goalie based miracle... it'll be you vs me my friend... may the best commissioner win!

[27Blue]

He won't pass skinner's 31 rookie goals, but he could pass his 63 rookie points to be the highest scoring rookie since p. kane. nice!

[Darren_Kennedy]

Pretty incredible number when you consider the guys already in Colorado. He has pushed his way up the line-up after receiving some sheltered minutes to start.

No reason to think he won't surpass 70 next season.

[Pengwin7]

Mackinnon is a special player, for sure.
I pegged him for only 55pts, which is still within 5pts (right now).
http://forums.dobbersports.com/showt...than-MacKinnon
I'll admit that I might miss, possibly by as much as 10pts.
***And to be very fair, I said (& bolded) that the only way that Mac hits 60+pts is if he spends significant time on the wing, which he has actually. Minimal faceoffs.
***His top two line combinations, here.
...spent most of the season at right wing...

I don't know about using the term "haters"... are you making that up or just picking a word you want to use?
I think many of us pegged him for 55-60, because he was a young rookie center and they are often shielded from high-responsibility.
I don't recall anybody pegging him for under 55.

Mackinnon has been great, no doubt.
He had 24pts when the calendar turned (about the NHL half-way point).
And he's been red-hot in January/February/March.

In general, the Avs have some pretty high shooting percentages this year.
You look at Landeskog (12.4%, typically a 8% guy), O'Reilly (14.4%, typically a 10% guy), Stastny (15.7%, typically a 12% guy), McGinn (11.7%, typically a 10% guy).
Guys like Barrie (11.8%) and Nick Holden!!! (16.7%) are also sneaking a lot of shots through.

Actually, as a team Colorado has a 10.20 shooting percentage... 2nd in the NHL.
STL & ANA (two powerhouses this year) are also north of 10%.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/st...rcentage/2013/

And I'm not sure how many people put stock in "PDO" (the "good luck with on-ice shooting" stat), but Mackinnon's PDO is 1045.
This actually ranks Mackinnon 2nd in the NHL among forwards playing 40+ games.
So... a bit lucky too...
Note that I've got TWO, count 'em TWO, pieces of statistical data backing that "luck" note.
Might be only good for 5-10pts... but take that away and what do you have for a point total???

Typically very few teams maintain an above 10% shooting percentage... and in fact, all FIVE NHL teams that were over 10% last year (a shorter year, therefore greater "range") are all below 10% this year.

Just pointing out some of the luck (similar to BABIP in baseball) that factors into team scoring.

Colorado finished last season as 27th in the NHL in shooting... at just over 8%.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/st...rcentage/2012/

So - who are the REAL Avalanche... the 8% shooting team... or the 10% shooting team... or somewhere in between.???

Anyways... congrats to Mackinnon and everybody that called him for the 60s... but even a blind-chicken is going to peck the right number every once in a while.

[mister_mcgoo]

5 pts in his last 5 games too so don't be surprised if he finishes with 64

[Dobber]

Also to be fair, everyone says the first overall pick that year will get 50 to 55 points. Maybe 5% of all people say something outside that window. So I give ZERO credit to anyone who failed to go out on a limb and I give bonus points to anyone who said under 50 or over 55 on a rookie. That 50-55 window is a safe play. I wouldn't call it a 'cop out', because it's a safe play - and accurate more often than not, so calling it a 'cop out' would be wrong of me. The common call by blind chickens on any top rookies is "he'll get 53 points, give or take three points".

Anyway, take the 10 best rookies in a given year, pick one to go above that window and pick three or four to go below. And if you feel that a rookie is really something special, it's okay to put yourself out there and say 65. And if you feel that he's generational, then give a number over 70.

I'll tell you right now that my projection for McDavid's first year will be above 70.


PS - I was looking at MacKinnon's PDO earlier today. I don't mind it. 10.67 SH% isn't that extreme when we're talking about a star. And looking a few slots below MacKinnon on that PDO list and you see a name that starts with "S" and rhymes with "Tamkos"

Bawk bawk

[fungchen3]

5 pts in his last 5 games too so don't be surprised if he finishes with 64

Nice! Would be bang on with my projections for him in the summer. MacK is a beast with so much good stuff in his game it's crazy.

[Pengwin7]

Also to be fair, everyone says the first overall pick that year will get 50 to 55 points. Maybe 5% of all people say something outside that window. So I give ZERO credit to anyone who failed to go out on a limb and I give bonus points to anyone who said under 50 or over 55 on a rookie. That 50-55 window is a safe play. I wouldn't call it a 'cop out', because it's a safe play - and accurate more often than not, so calling it a 'cop out' would be wrong of me. The common call by blind chickens on any top rookies is "he'll get 53 points, give or take three points".
...

I'll tell you right now that my projection for McDavid's first year will be above 70.

You had Mackinnon pegged for 72pts.

I know we have differing opinions on "credit".
IMO, points are awarded for how close you can peg somebody - because in drafts (specifically one-year drafts) you are looking to get best-value out of a draft pick.

If you peg somebody for 72pts... then a keen fantasy hockey poolie knows that he should look to reach for Mackinnon with the 65pt crowd of players is on the board.
If somebody does that... and gets Mackinnon's 65-ish points... they simply got about what they invested.
Now... IMO... THAT is "zero credit"... because you've provided no "value" with that high prediction.
Patrick Marleau (currently 67pts) & David Krejci (currently 66pts) were on the board and you've swayed somebody into reaching for Mackinnon (currently 60pts). Bah.

You've got to NAIL the prediction.
Now let's say you call for "65pts" and then people go and draft him with the 60pt guys... if he's there.
Then, when he gets +5pts over that range of players... now, now my friend - you have added value. Points. Credit.

With my prediction of 55pts... it only means that somebody might not have selected him when there were 60pt players on the board.
Well, if they got a 60pt player, maybe they lose -3pts if Mackinnon hits 63pts... but they also lost -2pts if they drafted Mackinnon for 72pts among a 65pt crowd of players.
Same difference.
Being off is... being off.
No points for being BOLD... c'mon.

(As an aside: Keeper-discussion not important.)

Going out on a limb... that's nothing to be proud of... IMO.
Perhaps if you want to stand out among 1000 fantasy hockey writers, maybe you make the MOST-BOLD-PREDICTION.
And I assume this is possibly your motive for being BOLD.
In a big society, people love to award credit to the extremists... never to the guy that is simply consistently close.
Ah, well... people don't really give huge credit to the wealthy barber either.

I don't know.
I want "value".
Peg a guy accurately.
That's real "credit"... because if you peg him at 65... and I draft him at 60pt group... then I'm thanking you for helping.

ps. "Blind chicken" comment wasn't meant for you. A more generic comment directed at those that show up to tout the horse race they picked correctly. Predict enough horse races, you'll have a winner you can reference. Applies to a lot of people, myself included sometimes... though I admit my lumps too... I miss that about Angus & Ma. Not enough people willing to look back on stuff they got wrong.

[sLeePickeR]

I buy Dobber's guide for the insight and bold predictions. I like the fact he is highlighting a player who may be special and to keep an eye out at draft time. I don't like magazines that play it safe and give every freaking player 50-55 points. I get value from his predictions and give Dobber "credit" even if Mac does not reach 70.

Keep doing what you are doing, Dobber, this is what I come here for.

[Pengwin7]

^Psh, c'mon.

Let's say Dobber pegs McDavid for 70pts.
Are you going to go running to the next Fantasy Hockey Website guy that announces "I peg McDavid for... Seventy FIVE points".
And then go running to the next Fantasy Hockey Website guy that steps up to say "I peg McDavid for... EIGHTY points!".

See where this is going...
There should be no "credit" in simply making a prediction that is more extreme than somebody else's prediction.
"Credit" should go hand-in-hand with accuracy.
Don't make this more complicated than it should be.