2013-14 Mid-Season Prospect Poll: #5

[Ruckus007]

Agreed.

I'll go further and suggest not having a run-off between Larsson and Armia to seed 4 & 5 was a mistake that will invalidate the rest of the rankings.

*edit- add Makarov

That's a joke, right?

 

[Ruckus007]

If McCabe and Compher are tied in my ranking system, what do I do?

Vote for James K Polk?

 

[Jame]

Vote for James K Polk?

Nice

 

[Jame]

McCabe over Compher (on age)

Add kea

 

[Zman5778]

McCabe over Compher (on age)

Add kea

Was going to suggest that you vote Compher over McCabe based on organizational need.....

 

[dire wolf]

Ullmark again.
Kea again.

I've identified a problem with this polling technique: If you are like me and have an unpopular opinion - like Ullmark should be ranked 3rd, then your vote doesn't count at all for all of the rounds until he is picked (which could be a long time).

To attempt to correct this problem of disenfranchising "free thinkers," I was toying with the idea of starting a separate thread (Alternative Prospect Rankings), which would work as follows:

Everyone submits their top 10 rankings. Players get 10 points for being ranked first, 9 points for 2nd place, etc. In addition, if you think two or more players are essentially indistinguishable, then you could rank them as tied. So, for example, if you thought Risto and Zads were essentially tied for first, then they would each get 9.5 points. If you thought Armia, McCabe, Compher, Larsson and Ullmark were essentially tied at the next tier (i.e., places 3-7), then they would each get 6 points.

Anyone think this is a good idea?

 

[MagnumForce2]

Ullmark again.
Kea again.

I've identified a problem with this polling technique: If you are like me and have an unpopular opinion - like Ullmark should be ranked 3rd, then your vote doesn't count at all for all of the rounds until he is picked (which could be a long time).

To attempt to correct this problem of disenfranchising "free thinkers," I was toying with the idea of starting a separate thread (Alternative Prospect Rankings), which would work as follows:

Everyone submits their top 10 rankings. Players get 10 points for being ranked first, 9 points for 2nd place, etc. In addition, if you think two or more players are essentially indistinguishable, then you could rank them as tied. So, for example, if you thought Risto and Zads were essentially tied for first, then they would each get 9.5 points. If you thought Armia, McCabe, Compher, Larsson and Ullmark were essentially tied at the next tier (i.e., places 3-7), then they would each get 6 points.

Anyone think this is a good idea?

I think it would be cool to compare this format to the outcome of this current poll.

 

[Paxon]

Ullmark again.
Kea again.

I've identified a problem with this polling technique: If you are like me and have an unpopular opinion - like Ullmark should be ranked 3rd, then your vote doesn't count at all for all of the rounds until he is picked (which could be a long time).

To attempt to correct this problem of disenfranchising "free thinkers," I was toying with the idea of starting a separate thread (Alternative Prospect Rankings), which would work as follows:

Everyone submits their top 10 rankings. Players get 10 points for being ranked first, 9 points for 2nd place, etc. In addition, if you think two or more players are essentially indistinguishable, then you could rank them as tied. So, for example, if you thought Risto and Zads were essentially tied for first, then they would each get 9.5 points. If you thought Armia, McCabe, Compher, Larsson and Ullmark were essentially tied at the next tier (i.e., places 3-7), then they would each get 6 points.

Anyone think this is a good idea?

I say yes, we should do this when the rankings are over but do top 20 imo.

 

[cybresabre]

I'm in as long as we can then rank posters' rankings.

 

[Chainshot]

McCabe again, add Kea again.

 

[dire wolf]

I say yes, we should do this when the rankings are over but do top 20 imo.

OK - I'll fire it up after we finish this poll and we can compare.

Hockey nerd power!

 

[Chainshot]

OK - I'll fire it up after we finish this poll and we can compare.

Hockey nerd power!

Sounds good! Maybe do it be top 20 with the points inverted? #20 gets 1 while #1 gets 20?

 

[dire wolf]

Sounds good! Maybe do it be top 20 with the points inverted? #20 gets 1 while #1 gets 20?

That's the plan.

 

[MagnumForce2]

I would almost rather message our top 20 to Chain or Dire and then have them post the results. It would be a little more work that way but true in form.

 

[Team Cozens]

Compher. Again

 

[dotcommunism]

I've identified a problem with this polling technique: If you are like me and have an unpopular opinion - like Ullmark should be ranked 3rd, then your vote doesn't count at all for all of the rounds until he is picked (which could be a long time).

If only HFboards software could support instant runoff voting

 

[couture23]

Army.

Add Kea.

 

[SabresSociety]

Armia, add Petersen

 

[dire wolf]

I would almost rather message our top 20 to Chain or Dire and then have them post the results. It would be a little more work that way but true in form.

I thought about that. Maybe we'll try it. I don't mind compiling it from PMs, but I'll bet you $5 some posters feel compelled to publicly announce their rankings anyway.

 

[MagnumForce2]

I thought about that. Maybe we'll try it. I don't mind compiling it from PMs, but I'll bet you $5 some posters feel compelled to publicly announce their rankings anyway.

How about 500 in vCash?

 

[ottawah]

And Varone I didn't know this til just now was a PPG player in the OHL (78 goals and 230 points in 228 games) including 33 goals and 81 points in 55 games for the Otters in 2010-11.

Baptiste has 61 goals and 141 points in 181 games in the OHL and Compher isn't better than PPG in any league he's been in comparable to the OHL. Not trying to **** on Baptiste and Compher because I hope all our prospects do great but I don't see how the guy who made it to the NHL isn't even on the list yet while the guys who are putting up comparable numbers at similar development levels are already getting votes. I don't see what points to Compher and Babtiste being ranked above Varone based on potential.

Comparing Ruhwedel to mccabe - Rudy scored 15 goals and 63 points in 110 games in the NCAA, and was a +14. McCabe has 13 goals and 52 points through 90 games in the NCAA and is a +17. McCabe is 2 inches taller and 20lbs heavier, but its not like Rudy is small and McCabe is Chara - they're both average size. They're both pretty similar in comparable NCAA stats, but Rudy has made it to NHL readiness while McCabe still has a couple years. I don't see what indicates that McCabe has so much more potential than Rudy.

It is relatively simple. Varone is 5 years older than Compher/Baptiste.

Baptiste for example is already bigger and faster and has 5 more years of development to go. Baptistes point per game total in his third year will be about a match for Varones OHL numbers in his 5th year.

For potential between these two its not really close.

 

[Savitar]

Easily Armia add Bailey

 

[jBuds]

McCabe. Add Kea.

I worry people don't realize how good McCabe will be. This kid is well rounded and brilliant. I'm psyched about the three of them with he, Risto and Zadorov.

 

[Zip15]

I would almost rather message our top 20 to Chain or Dire and then have them post the results. It would be a little more work that way but true in form.

I agree that this would be the best method, as it would likely avoid some retaliatory and/or butthurt rankings from posters upset with others' rankings. But it's totally up to Chain or Dire because it would involve a fair bit of grunt work.

 

[yahhockey]

quickly went armia/kea but am now having buyer's remorse and thinking it's time for ullmark to get my vote