OHL team rankings in Points Per Game from '00 and '01 players

digiblader

Registered User
Nov 6, 2015
972
75
Hamilton 17th.. while Missy, Windsor and London are understandable due to loading up in previous years and not having decent picks, the Bulldogs have no excuse for this. It shows how terrible the drafting has been under Staios, and I'm surprised Andaluer hasn't already started looking for a new GM as the Bulldogs stagnate towards the bottom of the Eastern standings..
 

Fischhaber

Registered User
Sep 3, 2014
3,031
1,622
Hounds 3rd in rookie games played and 8th in ppg, but still a top team in the league. Looks good for the future.
 

hockeylegend11

Registered User
Sep 11, 2010
15,776
3,780
and i keep being told that windsors 2000/2001's are great by the same few posters lol

Never said they were great, that being said,5 of Windsor's 11 victories winning goals were scored by a 17 year old,most game winning goals by 16-17 year olds in the O.
 

RayzorIsDull

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
14,407
3,209
bp on hfboards
and i keep being told that windsors 2000/2001's are great by the same few posters lol

I think those people have touted GW goals by certain players. Let's look go blind resume.

19 games 10g 16a 0 GWG
16 games 10g 18 0 GWG
18 games 5g 4a 3 GWG
17 games 2g 0a 2 GWG

Rank those players in regards to value to their team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snippit

Bra Wavers

Registered User
Feb 19, 2016
1,719
1,254
You can really only use GWG as a worthwhile measure when comparing players who have scored roughly the same number of goals.

But it would be worthwhile looking at goals per game in games versus the top 8 (?) teams only. I want players who show they can score goals in the bigger games against the tougher teams......not the guys who score most of their goals versus the softer teams.
 

OHL4Life

Registered User
Sep 6, 2017
3,513
2,800
Says the guy who raved about London's 16-17 youth earlier in the year ha ha

your mis-representing my point but that’s fine. I just pointed out that they had 17 year olds coming in, not cuts like mizzi/larionov. if we’re ‘rebuilding’ (we’re not) then there’s no point to have those guys.

but sure, correct, and i was wrong. so when you promote all these 16/17 year olds as good, when they are producing the second worst in the ohl, will you do the same? downtful. I mean I remember you promoting Coffey/shannahan as answers and proof of great drafting. I don’t ever remember you saying ‘the spits made bad picks’.

if i can admit my errors, im sure you can do the same with how our 16/17 year olds are performing, no?
 

OHL4Life

Registered User
Sep 6, 2017
3,513
2,800
You can really only use GWG as a worthwhile measure when comparing players who have scored roughly the same number of goals.

But it would be worthwhile looking at goals per game in games versus the top 8 (?) teams only. I want players who show they can score goals in the bigger games against the tougher teams......not the guys who score most of their goals versus the softer teams.

he found a stat that made the spits players good good and ran with it is all.
 

cub

Registered User
Apr 11, 2012
4,752
3,664
he found a stat that made the spits players good good and ran with it is all.

No reason to get confrontational and get upset with your response. A lot of rookies in different organizations, are brought up differently in they're development. London historically younger players don't get much ice time as veterans on team, they slowly develop them. So this stat can be squ'd because some teams have no choice to play they're rookies and they are putting up better numbers. Truer picture will be when they are 18 or 19, same birth age what kind of numbers they will put up.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->