|
Post by Avs on Dec 2, 2011 20:15:29 GMT -5
Disregard. Clearly our prospects are in good hands. lol
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Dec 2, 2011 20:25:00 GMT -5
The propect creations are fine they are better then before.If your going to use nhl experience while creating you probably should be used at the end of the nhl season
|
|
|
Post by leafs on Dec 2, 2011 20:31:28 GMT -5
Guys, The point of the thread isnt to question if Tom is favoring his prospects over everyone else. There is an issue, but its towards all prospects. I have an issue w/ Adam Larson who has little NHL experience, same as RNH, and Larson isnt on Ottawa. The issue is, do we use NHL stats as a way to create prospects? My vote is no. I gave my reasoning above. I have no issue w/ Tom making his own prospects. I just think all prospects need to be made the same. At this point, I dont think all are. I think active players in the NHL like RNH, Larson are getting favor over guys not in the NHL, like Huberdeau and Hamlton. Yet all possess nearly the same talent/skill and will wind up franchise type players. Ya fair enough I agree with that too
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Dec 2, 2011 20:39:05 GMT -5
Guys, The point of the thread isnt to question if Tom is favoring his prospects over everyone else. There is an issue, but its towards all prospects. I have an issue w/ Adam Larson who has little NHL experience, same as RNH, and Larson isnt on Ottawa. The issue is, do we use NHL stats as a way to create prospects? My vote is no. I gave my reasoning above. I have no issue w/ Tom making his own prospects. I just think all prospects need to be made the same. At this point, I dont think all are. I think active players in the NHL like RNH, Larson are getting favor over guys not in the NHL, like Huberdeau and Hamlton. Yet all possess nearly the same talent/skill and will wind up franchise type players. Even if you don't use nhl stats to create players,Hopkins should get special attention regardless of what he's done in the nhl.He was the number 1 pick for a reason in the nhl and in this league.The rating system is flawed because you guys value a 8.c player the same as a 8.d player.You notice alot of 7.5 d guys drafted in the second and third rounds in the nhl when there 7.0c going in the 1st? Why you bitchin about Larsson he was the highest rated player 9.0c in this draft? This is another reason why there should be 1nhl rerate for young players every year.
|
|
|
Post by LosAngelesGM on Dec 2, 2011 20:50:18 GMT -5
Edm, I don't want to be a smart ass but my point isn't that Larson or RNH shouldnt be rated somewhat high. My point is all prospects should be evaluated on the same system. Not half on NHL stats and half on HF ratings.
|
|
|
Post by sensgm on Dec 3, 2011 8:48:28 GMT -5
I’ll try and answer in bullets point but I think there is one fundamental problem/Misunderstanding.
That is the only two prospects I have based ratings from their playing time in the NHL is Nugent-Hopkins and Larsson, which I did not think was a problem as they were drafted first and second overall in our draft (and the NHL), and as Edmonton and PJ have pointed out they should be rated that little bit higher. Also it is clear that in real life they are better/more developed that the rest of the draft class as they are the only two prospects to be given key roles on their respective NHL team at such an early stage of their career.
Now as for the other points:
1. I did speak to Nick several times about basing rating on NHL performance... however that was more for prospects in previous drafts and the more outstanding prospects in this draft class (e.g. Nugent-Hopkins and Larsson) who it is clear are a cut above the rest.
2. I hold my hands up! I’ve gone and fucked up on creating Hamilton... he should be made better in some stats in order to keep on line with the other 8.5 prospects (basically the top 5 drafted). I can only apologise as to how I’ve created him! But I think I can explain why he turned out the way he did. These points would be:
a) I was kind of tired and stressed (I had a test the next day which I have already failed 3 times) when I created Hamilton and therefore may of affected my judgement. Again for which I can only apologise.
b) Creating players like Hamiltion is difficult because they are solid in most categories, therefore if I was to make him say 70 in every stat his OV would like 74 and not 72. As a result of trying to create him as an OV72 I would say I have under valued his DF rating. I believe it should have really been DF70 however this would naturally mean other stats would be reduced in order for this to occur.
c) When I compare Hamiltion with Larsson I am happy with all the other stats, he is rated that little bit lower... which I believe is correct because he was not taken 2nd overall and he is not rated 9 by HF. But I do agree I rated his DF wrong!!!!
3. In regards to all the other prospects I have created, I think they have all be created fairly and to the best of my ability. Hamiltion’s DF is the only thing I am not happy with.
4. As already pointed out with Hamiltion... prospects who have a good all round game are difficult to create because the way the sim creates calculates OV is somewhat of a mystery and a well rounded player will get a higher OV.
5. Now PJ one of your comments as annoyed me a bit, and maybe I’m misreading it but your comment of “We have ratings, you can access tons of info on players on multiple sites, so lets rate guys according to their skill sets and around their HF Rating” I really have a problem with. For two reasons... One believe I have been creating players around that skill sets and their HF rating. And two... if you expect me to research something like 3-4 sites for each prospect your having a laugh! I have generally gone by the comments on HF, although for some prospects I have looked elsewhere because HF didn’t provide much info or I wasn’t completed satisfied with their review. If GM’s want to send me a link’s from well know websites I will read their reviews and base their ratings on what I have read! But am certainly not going to be searching the web for every prospect just to satisfy everyone – I hope people can understand that I’m saying!
6. If GM’s really have a problem with how their prospects have been created, they could have tried to contact me and maybe I would have been able to give them an explanation as to why they have turned out the way they did – or cases like Hamiliton I would e-mailed Nick and said I made a mistake (after all I am only human).
I have tired my best to explain my thought processes and what was going through my mind when creating the prospects. As to whether we should use NHL figures that is not a decision for me to make... that is up to Nick! All I can say is I don’t think I would have rated Hopkins and Larsson much differently because as all ready pointed I believe (as do others) they should be that little bit better.
I look forward to you all rating my 1000 word essay on this topic... lol
|
|
|
Post by LosAngelesGM on Dec 3, 2011 9:22:02 GMT -5
Hey Tom,
Hit me up on MSN. We will chat. Point #5 is not meant as "you need to do this or that." It was a general statement. We will talk.
|
|
|
Post by redwings on Dec 3, 2011 9:38:25 GMT -5
"I think active players in the NHL like RNH, Larson are getting favor over guys not in the NHL, like Huberdeau and Hamlton. Yet all possess nearly the same talent/skill and will wind up franchise type players. "
OK first and foremost, if Huberdeau possessed the same talent and skill as RNH, he'd be in the NHL right now.
To your point, there is a very good chance guys like Huberdeau or Hamilton never make the NHL as well...you can't just say that because the HF ratings say they are an 8 they are on the same level as a guy like RNH.
Basing everything on OV is a very dangerous way of doing things as well, because it's not an accurate way of judging how a player will do.
Tom you're doing a great job, I have no issues with how you're doing prospects.
|
|
|
Post by LosAngelesGM on Dec 3, 2011 9:53:29 GMT -5
"To your point, there is a very good chance guys like Huberdeau or Hamilton never make the NHL as well"
Are you serious? lol. I dont think this even warrants a response.
|
|
|
Post by redwings on Dec 3, 2011 11:01:12 GMT -5
all i'm saying is there are no guarantees with prospects....there's a chance Huberdeau could be a first liner, and there's a chance he could be a third liner....it's just the way historically prosects go...they aren't always guaranteed to be top line NHLers.
RNH has proven already he's a top line player and should be rated as such.
|
|