|
Post by BluesGM on Aug 31, 2011 16:12:40 GMT -5
am i the only one extremely frustrated with the way these are done? there is no consistency or distinctiveness in the ratings. why are erik gudbranson and jacob markstrom (who were both 8.5 ratings at the time of their creations) only a 69 and 70 overall, while jared cowen (an 8.0 at the time of creation) is a 72 overall?
i'm not rebuilding, so this isn't as big a deal for me as it is for alot of other teams out there, but i thought it should be addressed. i was extremely frustrated/maddened with calvin de haan's rating, who is just as good an NHL prospect as Jared Cowen in real life. i can't imagine what some others who have much more in stock with these kids must feel like when one of their guys isn't rated accurately.
there's also no individuality with these players. they are all rated the same, mid-60's ratings throughout, no distinctive ratings. a defensive defensman prospect should have MUCH higher defense rating than PC rating, for example. a 5'6 burner prospect should have much higher speed rating than strength....but they don't. all guys are seemingly rated identically regardless of who they are.
my idea would be to do the ratings by overall and not individually as it is set up in the rules right now. a 7.0 on HF should be a 67 overall, a 7.5 should be a 68 overall, an 8.0 should be a 70 overall, etc etc. this would provide consistency in overalls so people know what they are acquiring, but also would allow more distinguished individual ratings making their real life player bio worth investing into. (AKA: if i want an offensive-dman, i'd rather have calvin de haan than alex petrovic, but they're both rated the same right now)
thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Avs on Aug 31, 2011 16:16:57 GMT -5
all guys are seemingly rated identically regardless of who they are. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by flapanthersgm on Aug 31, 2011 16:45:12 GMT -5
I was not happy about Markstrom and Gudbranson I can tell you that for sure...I just went along with it because what can I do? I am glad someone else decided to bring this up...
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Aug 31, 2011 16:54:14 GMT -5
PJ does a great job with a very tough situation. Are they perfect? No, but nothing we do is going to make everyone happy. We're pretty far into the season and have had a ton of prospects activated, there's not much we can do about it now. Every argues and disagrees on Almost everything in the league. I'm not going to change individual prospect ratings unless I'm doing every prospect activated. If I do that, then the people who traded their prospects are going to cry foul. It's the same thing I said about NHL re-rating young players, we do them all or none.
|
|
|
Post by flapanthersgm on Aug 31, 2011 16:58:30 GMT -5
We understand that Nick, I just want to know how Gudbranson a 8.5B is a 70 overall and Cowen a 8.0 becomes a 72?
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Aug 31, 2011 17:00:20 GMT -5
As far as who is rated what, only PJ can answer that.
|
|
|
Post by BluesGM on Aug 31, 2011 17:22:38 GMT -5
Nick, (and rob) i think you are misinterpreting the reason for my post. as terrible as they are, i'm not asking for petrovic or de haan's ratings to be switched. you know me and i'm not like one of these whiners in this league. whats in the past is in the past, and i'm sure every GM has been screwed with awful ratings, so i don't deserve preferential treatment. what i'm proposing is a change to the rules for the future. instead of doing the prospects on average individual ratings like is written in the rules, i think we should do it based on overall rating, this way everyone knows what they are acquiring (or drafting), and it allows for more diversity when players are activating and their actual NHL bio matters. for instance - if i have the 2nd overall pick in the draft - if i want a power forward - i'd draft landeskog. if i wanted a finesse scorer - i'd draft huberdeau. the way things are done now, that decision wont matter because all prospects are rated identically. for instance: lets use an upcoming draftee: Rocco Grimaldi. he is an 8.0 on HF, so under my proposal, he should be a 70 overall prospect. the problem to me is, Grimaldi is 5'6 and 161 lbs, soaking wet standing on a pair of phonebooks. the way PJ rates players right now - he'd probably look like this: 22 Rocco Grimaldi C R OK 68 67 71 68 68 63 65 68 67 62 68 25 25 70 when, if rated accurately, he should look something like this: 22 Rocco Grimaldi C R OK 58 77 41 68 62 63 78 65 72 57 68 25 25 70 as you can see, i lowered his strength and intensity because he is so small, and raised his speed and skating tremendously because he's a martin st.louis type player (talent wise) i think it would help cause alot less drama come draft time. if RNH goes first overall (8.5 on HF) and gets rated as a 70 overall, and huberdeau (8.5 on HF) goes 2nd overall and is a 72 overall, the person drafting first will be absolutely furious. i'm proposing to have set overall ratings based on their HF score, and then the individual ratings can be based on that individual players actual skillset. and i have no hidden agenda here. i have ZERO prospects and ZERO draft picks for the next 6 years (lol) - so i gain nothing from this. i just want to help improve the league if possible for everyone
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Aug 31, 2011 17:28:28 GMT -5
what i'm proposing is a change to the rules for the future. You and I both know that people will complain even still.
|
|
|
Post by BluesGM on Aug 31, 2011 17:32:05 GMT -5
what i'm proposing is a change to the rules for the future. You and I both know that people will complain even still. they will - but about prospect activations? i think this would be preventing a huge drama come draft time. i think GM's would prefer to know what they're acquiring, than having the uncertainty of inconsistent overall ratings. i just wanted to throw it out there as a possible idea. but if something like what i said above happens (RNH being a 70 overall picked #1, huberdeau being a 72 being picked #2) - i could see someone throwing a HUGE fuss over it and possibly quitting.
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Aug 31, 2011 17:34:59 GMT -5
I'd be willing to fix the system. It would be my preference to do all prospects by the old system. That way all prospects were treated equally.
|
|