Bias at HF?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Yes there is a strong bias towards Canadian and Original Six teams (with the possible single exception of Chicago). This only happens because there are so many more fans of those teams on here.

A perfect example was the hype surrounding two players a couple years ago - Edmonton's Mike Comrie and Danny Briere in Phoenix. The two had virtually identical stats in their breakthrough seasons.. right down to decimal points. Yet one was hyped as a superstar in waiting and it wasnt the player from Phoenix. I received an avalanche of scorn for even daring to compare the two.
 

Kevin Forbes

Registered User
Jul 29, 2002
9,199
10
Nova Scotia
www.kforbesy.ca
Gwyddbwyll said:
Yes there is a strong bias towards Canadian and Original Six teams (with the possible single exception of Chicago). This only happens because there are so many more fans of those teams on here.

A perfect example was the hype surrounding two players a couple years ago - Edmonton's Mike Comrie and Danny Briere in Phoenix. The two had virtually identical stats in their breakthrough seasons.. right down to decimal points. Yet one was hyped as a superstar in waiting and it wasnt the player from Phoenix. I received an avalanche of scorn for even daring to compare the two.

Was this with Hockey's Future or on HFBoards?
 

NYR469

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
5,785
0
Visit site
rec28 said:
a lot more attention is paid to flash than substance re: the rankings.

the value of quality vs quantity is debatable, you could argue that 1 franchise player is worth more than 10 good players but on the flipside you can argue that a team full of 'good' players will be a team with 1 great player and nothing else anyday. you can argue it either way and imo the only thing you can look for is consistancy if you decide to put a higher value on top end talent then keep it that way across the board don't flip-flop between the 2 between different teams.
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Kevin Forbes said:
Was this with Hockey's Future or on HFBoards?

HFBoards - I dont believe it applies to the HF staff.

The staff balance out any obvious bias in that one writer may overrate a prospect from his team, the other 15+ will not.. however there is still a tendency to rate a well-known prospects such as Grigorenko or Perezhogin over a prospect from an unrated team such as Carolina, Dallas, Minnesota, Phoenix, San Jose, Atlanta. There's no getting around such a thing, other than all the writers watching all the prospects which is completely unrealistic.
 

Slats432

Registered User
Jun 2, 2002
14,757
2,778
hockeypedia.com
Gwyddbwyll said:
HFBoards - I dont believe it applies to the HF staff.

The staff balance out any obvious bias in that one writer may overrate a prospect from his team, the other 15+ will not.. however there is still a tendency to rate a well-known prospects such as Grigorenko or Perezhogin over a prospect from an unrated team such as Carolina, Dallas, Minnesota, Phoenix, San Jose, Atlanta. There's no getting around such a thing, other than all the writers watching all the prospects which is completely unrealistic.
Not entirely correct. It is easier to rank a player when you have seen them several times, but I have seen almost every high end prospect play at some point, either live or via TV. There are some that are harder to get viewings on.

For example, I have a buddy in Sweden that keeps telling me about Anton Stralman....never seen him play but he is very high on him.

But we try to see as many and as often as we can. Since the evolution on satellite, I can see OHL games, WHL games, NCAA games, WJC, ADT CHL/Russia Challenge, Under 18, Memorial Cup, Top Prospects game.....

The performances I miss are the U-17, and the Four Nations type of tournaments.(Which are usually in Europe and not televised.)

Thus far for the 2007 draft, I have seen Esposito, Llewellyn, Hamill, Van Riemsdyk, Sexsmith, O'Brien, Shattenkirk, Hayes......well I am sure you get the idea....

Evgeny Belaschenko and others are the people we go to for in depth on players we may only get to see a couple times or not at all.

But I know I have seen everyone in the HF Top 50....and most of the top 300 prospects with my own eyes.

Doesn't matter what team they are from.
 

Buffaloed

webmaster
Feb 27, 2002
43,324
23,584
Niagara Falls
Hasbro said:
I'd add first round picks.

The lament on the Avs board is that we don't get enough credit for getting talent out of the late rounds, but we take it with a grain of salt anyway.

Prospect ratings alone don't give a complete picture. There's no assessment of the developmental skills of organizations. Talent is a raw commodity. Being able to locate it, doesn't necessarily correlate with being able to extract it efficiently and turn it into a finished product.
 

Hasbro

Family Friend
Sponsor
Apr 1, 2004
52,415
16,383
South Rectangle
Buffaloed said:
Prospect ratings alone don't give a complete picture. There's no assessment of the developmental skills of organizations. Talent is a raw commodity. Being able to locate it, doesn't necessarily correlate with being able to extract it efficiently and turn it into a finished product.
Which also applies to the case I was making, getting a guy like Liles or Kronwal and not rushing him and turning him into a good prospect.

Examples of the contrary I can think of is RJ Umberger the Canucks saw the talent but couldn't sign him or Kilger getting rushed or whatever Pittsburgh did to screw up Dome's development.
 

bling

Registered User
Jun 23, 2004
2,934
0
George Bachul said:
I may have been in a grassy knoll or two in my youth but it was with my best girl and loogies and gunmen weren't involved.... ;)

Perhaps only figurative luegies and gunmen were involved.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->