The old geezer
Registered User
- Feb 10, 2007
- 715
- 0
Question: For goalies which rating(s) are most influenced by sav%?
I'm confused about something and perhaps Ville can clear this up for me. If Kolzig has been a starter all his career and a backup from the trade deadline in 08, on does that make him a backup in the eyes of ratings? Or does he still get viewed as a starter because of the 3 year average? I expected his ratings to take a dip but what he was rated as is ridiculous. If I had any clue as to how to even challenge a goalies ratings I would have done so but I have no clue. Anyways I'll play the cards that have been dealt.
Good work guys and thanks for taking the time to do it and make this league enjoyable!
Hey fellas, I sent in my challenges for Ottawa, yesterday afternoon (Perth time.) Can you confirm Ville?
Cheers,
Cohen
DF rating, as Matt said was mostly compiled using PK time on ice, especially for defenseman. For forwards, Selke votes were used a lot as well. Some of the things that were used, but only less and in situations where the rating looked off in comparison to last year's DF rating (for veterans), and in comparison with another league's DF rating, the MXFHL (which uses PK time on ice, blocked shots and +/- as their building block). This was mostly +/-.
We went on a primarily stat based DF in order to try and eliminate some of the subjectivity that is usually involved in creating DF. At least this way, it was a consistent system. And if there is something that is missed, it can be taken care of using ratings challenges. And while you can say the process of selecting stats or criteria that should go towards DF is subjective in itself, in the end, as Matt said, there is no perfect way of doing it and it's always been the one rating that has given us trouble in creating it.
As for Sullivan, he last played an NHL game on Feb. 22, 2007. So it's not like he's a case of Patrice Bergeron (whose rating did also go down). We felt like his rating should not continue to keep him as an elite offensive player in the HFNHL, which he was, having some of the best PA, SC, and PC ratings among forwards. But you can feel free to challenge two of his SC, PA, or PC ratings if you want and can make a good case.
Now that Steve Sullivan is back and playing well ...don`t you think he should re rated for his SC and DU. If not, I hope you are going to do the same for guys like Goborik and many others who have played minimum number of games this season.
I won't answer the original question, but wouldn't Gaborik still not be relevant considering he did play this year and has definate plans to return to the NHL when he recovers from surgery? Sullivan did not play a single game in the 2007-08 season and had no planned return date or insurance that he would ever play again. A guy like Chad Kilger on my team (or Yanic! at the Disco Perrault) is a more relevant comparison I would think.
I won't answer the original question, but wouldn't Gaborik still not be relevant considering he did play this year and has definate plans to return to the NHL when he recovers from surgery? Sullivan did not play a single game in the 2007-08 season and had no planned return date or insurance that he would ever play again. A guy like Chad Kilger on my team (or Yanic! at the Disco Perrault) is a more relevant comparison I would think.
Is Chad Kilger or Yanic Perrault out due to injury and had surgery? Do you know for certain that Gaborik will return and are you sure that Gaborik will recover fully and perform like he did before his surgery. As far I am concern, S. Sullivan was rated 80 before his surgery and lower rating was given because there was assumption made that he will not return to the NHL.
I know in the past I had Saku Koivu and we didn't take his rating away because he had cancer and there was no definate date of his return. We took the player off the roster and I was able to use him once he returned to the ice. We did same with Lindros as well so why are we treating Sullivan differently?
All I am asking for is consistancy...if we are treating one player this way than it should be for all the player regardless of star status.
Now that Steve Sullivan is back and playing well ...don`t you think he should re rated for his SC and DU. If not, I hope you are going to do the same for guys like Goborik and many others who have played minimum number of games this season.
Now that Steve Sullivan is back and playing well ...don`t you think he should re rated for his SC and DU. If not, I hope you are going to do the same for guys like Goborik and many others who have played minimum number of games this season.
Hasnain - did you challenge his ratings before the season started?
GM Kruegs
No I did not challenge his rating nor did I challenge anyone else. I was so upset about the whole thing regarding Sullivan that I decided not to challenge at all. I am not asking for the admin team to change the rating but there should be a rule in place that when this kind of thing happens in the future with a star player or any other player than they will take the same action.
I don't think you can justify changing SC rating when you have no basis for it. I can understand the DU rating and because of the DU Sullivan has only played 2 games whole season on my team.
We had cases in the past where players were out due to injury or illness and we never penalized them.
No I did not challenge his rating nor did I challenge anyone else. I was so upset about the whole thing regarding Sullivan that I decided not to challenge at all. I am not asking for the admin team to change the rating but there should be a rule in place that when this kind of thing happens in the future with a star player or any other player than they will take the same action.
I don't think you can justify changing SC rating when you have no basis for it. I can understand the DU rating and because of the DU Sullivan has only played 2 games whole season on my team.
We had cases in the past where players were out due to injury or illness and we never penalized them.
I can understand why you might be a little miffed at how the ratings for him were determined, but you had an opportunity along with all other GMs with similarily affected players to challenge the new crop of ratings. I won't speak on behalf of all in the league here - but I personally don't think we should be opening up player ratings mid-season, particularely when a GM had an opportunity to challenge that player's rating before the season started and chose not to. No matter what your intentions are Hasnain i.e. to improve his play for your team, or to improve his trade value - the opportunity to change his ratings has passed IMO.
2-cents Kruegs
I am not asking for the Admin team to change the rating but giving arbitrary rating just because someone felt that he is not an elite player anymore is no justification.
If that's a nice little attempt at a backhanded stab at me, then quite frankly I don't appreciate it.
It wasn't that we felt Sullivan wasn't an elite player anymore. It was that he hadn't played in 22 months and had no return in sight. It's not like we sat there and we thought of a way to screw Hasnain and lower Steve Sullivan's rating. It was because we all identified players who we couldn't rate accurately using our new formulas, and who hadn't seen any rating changes in recent seasons because they hadn't played. Sullivan was identified as one of those players and we went from there. This wasn't subjective, it was done objectively.
So sure, we can input a new rule that says we'll do the same thing to other players, if you show us a player who hadn't played for 22 months. Maybe Sean can add the following new rule to the rulebook for us, "Any player who does not play a single game in the NHL for 22 months and longer, will be subject to a rating decrease of 10% and the lowest possible DU rating."
Thanks for making my vote on the issue that much easier, as you've swayed me as a possible supporter of you to someone who's completely against it with the way you're handling yourself here and with the way you seem to continue to attack me.
So consider my vote and opinion the same as Rob and Nick's.