Rate each player from 1-10 based on pre season expectations

[Aerrol]

Well if he didnt play enough then dont rate him.. The games he did play he has been pretty good. His stat line is impressive and he was a clear upgrade over Gustavsson.
Based on expectations if I rated him I would have given him a 7 or a 8. The sample size is just not there ala Pitlick.

Pitlick got 31 games, I think the sample size is there. That's more than Pulju's 28 games .

I also explained how I didn't like how he played the position in his few games, even if he was stopping pucks. You're welcome to disagree though, I don't think he's a bad goalie prospect. I personally would just have preferred to have a more veteran backup going into the playoffs.

 

[suddeninterest]

I'm not really that disappointed in Nuge/Ebs tbh. Both guys scored probably 10 less points than I hoped they would, but it's not like they only had 30 each. I think Nuge with the minutes he's now getting with McD and Drai on the team is probably a 50-55 point 2C, at 6m he's slightly overpaid. Eberle I think is a 60-65 point player who just had a down year. He's more a 30-30 guy who had some confidence issues with his shot this year imo. The good news is that both guys have looked better in the last month, which is exactly the right time for us to have them finding their games a bit. Really hoping that clutch Eberle shows up in the playoffs, we all know it's in there somewhere.

 

[nexttothemoon]

McDavid 10
Slepyshev 10
Larsson 9
Sekera 8
Benning 8
Maroon 8
Talbot 8
Desharnais 7
Eberle 7
Kassian 6
Russell 6
Brossoit 6
Lucic 5
Letestu 4
Draisaitl 4
Klefbom 4
Nurse 3
Caggiula 3
Hendricks 3
Pouliot 2
Gustavsson 2
Gryba 1
RNH 1

 

[Soundwave]

McDavid - 9, If you had told me even 20 games ago that 100 points was going to happen I'd have been very skeptical. Only thing I would like to see him develop a bit more is his shot. When he becomes a 40+ goal scorer instead of a 30+ goal scorer ... look out.

Maroon - 8

Draisaitl - 8.5, Avoided the dreaded "post-Hall" drought I thought was going to happen.

RNH - 3.5, I expect more but he has been better of late.

Eberle - 4, Trending better, but again maybe his worst overall season

Lucic - 6, Picked it up towards the end of the year, was very happy with his game by April.

Letestu - 8.5, Great season for him, didn't think he could cut it on the PP. Did not expect this.

Nurse - 6

Russell - 7, Better than I thought, early in the season was really good.

Larsson - 7, Still want more offence from him, a few brain farts now and again, overall solid player, unexpected toughness.

Kassian - 6, Poor guy had a lot of goals taken away.

Caggiula - 5, Eh still kind of a weak link I think, could use some AHL seasoning.

Puljujarvi - 4.5, Needs work on his balance and lower body strength. Some promising raw ability though.

Sekera - 8, Good season for him, good point totals.

Klefbom - 8.5, did not expect that many goals/points from him.

Hendricks - 4

Gryba - 5.5, was in on some oddly important goals for us.

Pouliot - 2.5, Start fresh in the playoffs.

Gustavsson - 2, Terribad.

Broissoit - 4, Beat Calgary once but still looks shaky to me.

Desharnias - 5.5, Partial Grade. Good start, but has cooled quite a bit lately.

Pitlick - 7.5, Poor guy was having a great year until the too-predictable injury.

Khaira - 5

Talbot - 9, Considering the amount of games he played, I can't complain.

Slepy - 5, OK I guess, I'm not quite as enamored with him as others. Prefer Pitlick.

Benning - 6, Bad start, great middle, but bad again to close the season. Hopefully he can get it together.

Davidson - 3 (Partial Grade), Expected more from him this year, though not all his fault due to injuries.

 

[HockeyGuy1964]

McDavid 10
Slepyshev 10
Larsson 9
Sekera 8
Benning 8
Maroon 8
Talbot 8
Desharnais 7
Eberle 7
Kassian 6
Russell 6
Brossoit 6
Lucic 5
Letestu 4
Draisaitl 4
Klefbom 4
Nurse 3
Caggiula 3
Hendricks 3
Pouliot 2
Gustavsson 2
Gryba 1
RNH 1

You're obviously trolling with this BS.

 

[McDraekke]

Not to pick just on you, you weren't the only person to give him a hard time... but it's actually pretty funny that people can't grasp the idea that if someone already had high enough expectations, McDavid's performance, based on the criteria given, is not a 10.

The OP clearly stated that a 5 = expectations met - so if I predicted that McDavid would have a 100 point season, and more or less do exactly what he did, that rates a 5. It's not that hard to grasp. An 8 meant the guy already had high expectations for McDavid - maybe a 90 point season - and that despite his high expectations, McDavid still did better, but maybe not the 110 or 120 point season that would have warranted a 10, relative to those expectations.

OP said that he "never imagined Art Ross." If the player you are rating just got the best non-subjective award the NHL can offer an individual, and that was beyond even your imagination... what more could that player do to get a 10/10? This is the reason that we are judging how the OP made his ranking for McDavid. This type of ranking easily allows for people to question what the OP would need McDavid to do to get a 10/10 if leading the league in scoring by 11 points isn't good enough. Some peoples' biggest complaint is that he doesn't shoot enough - He is 7th in shots by a C, 17th Overall.

Straight point totals are a completely unfair basis, as year-to-year the number of points that players are getting varies, especially if you're thinking anywhere higher than 100 points.

If you said that 10/10 means that a player dominates like Gretzky did, that's a silly explanation because that hasn't happened in decades. And even if we allow for that to be a 10, what is, then, a 9?

It just seems a bit of a reach to give McDavid an 8/10 for a season in which he was the third youngest player to ever lead the league in scoring.

 

[ijk]

What kind of grade would Pakarinen and Lander get? Also, is it likely Paks will stay in the line-up for the playoffs, seeing as he has played in the big club for these last few games?

I guess you could do the same for Khaira and some other players that played less, but I guess most didn't have any expectations for those most likely deemed to only play in the minors...

I won't give grades for all players since I haven't been able to watch enough games. However, I would comment that since I had more time to see games during the early/middle parts of the season, I can say that Lucic was losing the puck all the time and RNH was frustrating as he was outside the game and/or not involved 100% at least physically. Eberle to my eye for example never seemed so outside of the game as these two (Lucic losing puck, RNH being a disinvolved twig)

Also, Russell seems to block a huge amount of pucks.

Come to think of it, the games I've seen have mostly been games in which Oilers have been unable to breakout from their zone. Anyway, I'll comment on those who I followed and noticed in the games I watched:

MCD: 10 (though he seems to have better chemistry with his linemates now than during the early parts of the season)
Drai: 7 (was slow and sometimes lost in the games I saw.)
Eberle: 4
RNH: 2 (really disappointing esp. after his WC performance, but he seems to have improved)
Lucic: 4 (Same as RNH but replace WC with Boston to his Boston days)
Pulju: 3 (was nervous when I saw him play)
Pitlick: 10 (was the most energetic player and hit the most in the games I saw)
Kassian: 8

Sekera: 6
Larsson: 7
Klef: 7 (Made many mistakes in my viewings, has improved)
Nurse: 5 (Same as Klef + being positionally lost at times)


Talbot: 7
Gustavsson: Less than zero even if I didn't have high expectations

Anyway, please don't flame. These grades are based on my viewings. Actually I really don't know why I contributed, but maybe I wanted to give something in exchange for some answers to my questions.

 

[harpoon]

You're obviously trolling with this BS.

You can't really say that because op botched the thread by allowing for personal expectations.
Any given poster could have had wacked personal expectations for any individual player for a whole host of reasons.
Take Benning for example; couldn't have been a lot of posters who knew much about this kid's game.
Does he get a 10 from everybody then? Kinda makes the scale pointless imo.