Player ratings for Oct. 1 game vs 'Hawks?

Ajax1995

Registered User
Dec 9, 2002
8,808
866
I thought the general consensus at some point last year was we were going to rate everyone after each game this year. So do we want to do that?

I was thinking 1-10 ratings with 10 being the best with the only ground rule being you had to have watched the whole game. No ratings based just on stats, highlights, or just one period.

So?
 

Liberati0n*

Guest
I honestly don't know if it's possible to pay attention to every player enough to grade them all (legitimately at least). Not that I'm against trying.
 

brs03

Coo coo ca cha!
Jun 2, 2008
12,066
0
Maryland
Obviously worth doing if it's fun, but will probably say more about everyone's individual watching habits and/or biases than it will the team.
 

Zoidberg Jesus

Trotzkyist
Oct 25, 2011
3,814
0
I'll give it a shot. I'm not great at analyzing play since I tend to puck watch and my tv is tiny, but oh well. Beats working on the essay due tomorrow.

Johanson (3) - Backstrom (6) - Ovechkin (7)

So bad defensively... Backstrom and Ovechkin redeemed themselves on the power play, but at even strength these guys didn't do much after the first period.

Laich (5) - Grabovski (10) - Brouwer (5)

Laich and Brouwer were great on the PK, but I didn't notice them much at even strength, and Brouwer didn't really contribute on the PP. Grabovski wasn't technically perfect, but 3+1 earns him a 10.

Chimera (6) - Fehr (3) - Ward (6)

As a line, they did some great forechecking and cycling, and I think the points will come if they keep up that pressure. Fehr had a rough game in his own zone by any standard (on for 5 GA) but you've got to give him the benefit of the doubt with it being his first real game at center.

Erat - Latta - Wilson

Honestly, not really enough of a sample to grade them on.

Alzner (6) - Green (6)

Alzner was his usual self. Green looked like his old self on the PP, but seemed a little out of it at evens. His inaction during the Kane goal was just... odd. He seemed pretty lackadaisical, even at the end of the game with Holtby pulled. Made up for it with the extra man, but still.

Erskine (2) - Carlson (7)

Erskine pretty much confirmed all our fears in this game. Slow, out of position, and really not that physical either. Carlson had an Alzner-esque game. I thought he played well in spite of his partner.

Hillen (3) - Carrick (3)

Small pairing got knocked around. Surprise. Seemed to me that the Hawks were doing everything they could to get the Toews line out whenever these two were on the ice.

Holtby (3)

Tough to grade him, because he had about as many dazzling saves as he had bad goals. Hopefully we'll get more of 2nd period Holtby going forward.
 

FloridaCap

Beaglechuk Mania
Jun 30, 2012
2,651
0
I'll give it a shot

Johansson(5)-Backstrom(7)-Ovechkin(8)
Laich(6)-Grabovski(10)-Brouwer(6)
Chimera(7)-Fehr(5)-Ward(8)
4th line didn't play enough

Alzner(5)-Green(7)
Erskine(3)-Carlson(7)
Hillen(3)-Carrick(1)

Holtby(4)
 

MW6

Registered User
Oct 21, 2011
1,403
51
Halland
So by this standard, what should be an "OK" game? Where the player held his own? Is anything below 5 press box-worthy?
 

HunterSThompson

[}=[][][][][]
Jun 19, 2007
4,480
1,097
Washington, DC
Just my 2 cents.

I would do the 5 highest rated and the 5 lowest rated each game, less daunting and more likely people will follow through. Different people will have different ratings for different people. I would also not do a 1-10 rating system as people tend to select certain numbers more frequently than other numbers (3,5,7).

The fun part would be if someone would compile them for an average after each game and then keep a running average throughout the year (not it).
 

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,057
13,508
Philadelphia
Johansson(4)-Backstrom(6.5)-Ovechkin(7.5)*
Laich(3.5)-Grabovski(8.5)**-Brouwer(6)
Chimera(7)-Fehr(3)-Ward(8)
Erat (INC) - Latta (INC) - Wilson (INC)

Alzner(7)-Green(6)
Erskine(2)-Carlson(7)
Hillen(4)-Carrick(3)

1st period Holtby (3)
2nd period Holtby (9)
3rd period Holtby (2)

*Terrific in the first and on the powerplay. Was a ghost at ES in the second, though.
**He still looked a little confused in the defensive zone, but that's something I'm confident time will fix.
 

RandyHolt

Keep truckin'
Nov 3, 2006
34,773
7,093
I would rather have a Good Bad and the Ugly.

Or

3 for the good, 3 for the bad. Laichs and DisLaichs.

Most nights, everyone plays... average. You dont know, so you put a 5. Why bother listing them name by name. Typing. Ugh.

Or let's focus on the negatives only!!!!! ;)
 

Ajax1995

Registered User
Dec 9, 2002
8,808
866
So by this standard, what should be an "OK" game? Where the player held his own? Is anything below 5 press box-worthy?

Well when I see this done for soccer something along the lines of decent game, no real mistakes, but didn't do anything special usually results in a 6.
 

Ajax1995

Registered User
Dec 9, 2002
8,808
866
Johansson(5)-Backstrom(7)-Ovechkin(8)
Laich(6)-Grabovski(10)-Brouwer(6)
Chimera(6)-Fehr(4)-Ward(7)
Erat(5)-Latta(5)-Wilson(4)

Alzner(6)-Green(7)
Erskine(3)-Carlson(6)
Hillen(3)-Carrick(2)

Holtby(3)
 

artilector

Registered User
Jan 11, 2006
8,351
1,187
Best players:
Grabo - 9
Chimera/Fehr/Ward - 7
Ovi - 6.5
Green - 6.5

Worst players:
Carrick - 2
Holtby - 4
Erskine - 4?
 

ovikaps

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
14
0
Mulhouse
Johansson (4)-Backstrom(8)-Ovechkin(9)
Laich(6)-Grabovski(10)-Brouwer(7)
Chimera(6)-Fehr(6)-Ward(7)
4th line didn't play enough

Alzner(6)-Green(9)
Erskine(4)-Carlson(6)
Hillen(4)-Carrick(5)

Holtby(3)

The PP is outstanding. 19, 8, 84, 52, 20 all deserved at least 1 pt for that tonight.
Carrick played his first NHL game, in his own town, with his parents, against the best team in the NHL. So 5.
Holtby gave two bad goals (Kane and the losing one)
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad