X-SHARKIES Final Top 60 for 2004.

Status
Not open for further replies.

joechip

Registered User
May 29, 2003
3,229
0
Gainesville, Fl
www.sabrerattling.com
mowthecat said:
So you're 16 and neither you nor your retired buddy are currently or ever have been pro scouts? You can make opinions on players by watching a few NCAA and Moose Jaw Canuck tapes? I think that makes your draft list suitable for oragami myself.

I'm constantly amazed by posters here sounding off on prospects when its painfully obvious they've never seen them play a single game, and lists like this should be chalked up to being entertainment versus any sort of hard knowledge. I'll put up any amount of money someone cares to name that Mr Shark hasnt seen 6 of these prospects live and on the ice, never mind that he hasnt the credentials to be talking the way he does.

Myself I'd like to see some credentials or at least an upfront admission that this is all in fun, is purely circumspect, and has absolutely no relevance to anything that will happen on draft day outside of numbers 1 and 2. I dont think theres one pick here past those thats anything close to factual, and my 4 year old could have managed that in 30 seconds.

Dude!

You are reading this on a message board. Everything written should be taken with liberal doses of sea water. Nothing has relevance. This is entertainment. Get a grip! Credentials? If the guy posts utter shite then eventually people will stop reading it. If his work is worthwhile then people will continue. It's called the free market in ideas, if you don't like it don't read. I don't need you or Vlad or anyone else playing 'content cop' for me. I'll judge this myself. This is what really ticks me off in these threads. A bunch of self-important blowhards accusing someone else of being a self-important blowhard when in reality all that was intended was some thoughtful discussion. This is to me means that the people doing the accusing don't actually have an opinion, and can't stand the fact that other people do. Therefore, they do the message board equivalent of 'taking my toys and going home," to focus all the attention on them.

Get over yourself, all of you.

The conjectures about who X-Sharkie has and has not personally seen play live is no more conjecture than when X-Sharkie thinks they are going to be drafted. You're engaging in the EXACT SAME behavior you are attacking him for.

Ta,
 

Lowetide

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
13,281
11
joechip said:
Dude!

You are reading this on a message board. Everything written should be taken with liberal doses of sea water. Nothing has relevance. This is entertainment. Get a grip! Credentials? If the guy posts utter shite then eventually people will stop reading it. If his work is worthwhile then people will continue. It's called the free market in ideas, if you don't like it don't read. I don't need you or Vlad or anyone else playing 'content cop' for me. I'll judge this myself. This is what really ticks me off in these threads. A bunch of self-important blowhards accusing someone else of being a self-important blowhard when in reality all that was intended was some thoughtful discussion. This is to me means that the people doing the accusing don't actually have an opinion, and can't stand the fact that other people do. Therefore, they do the message board equivalent of 'taking my toys and going home," to focus all the attention on them.

Get over yourself, all of you.

The conjectures about who X-Sharkie has and has not personally seen play live is no more conjecture than when X-Sharkie thinks they are going to be drafted. You're engaging in the EXACT SAME behavior you are attacking him for.

Ta,


Clarity, sweet, sweet clarity. Front of the line.
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
joechip said:
Dude!

You are reading this on a message board. Everything written should be taken with liberal doses of sea water. Nothing has relevance. This is entertainment. Get a grip! Credentials? If the guy posts utter shite then eventually people will stop reading it. If his work is worthwhile then people will continue. It's called the free market in ideas, if you don't like it don't read. I don't need you or Vlad or anyone else playing 'content cop' for me. I'll judge this myself. This is what really ticks me off in these threads. A bunch of self-important blowhards accusing someone else of being a self-important blowhard when in reality all that was intended was some thoughtful discussion. This is to me means that the people doing the accusing don't actually have an opinion, and can't stand the fact that other people do. Therefore, they do the message board equivalent of 'taking my toys and going home," to focus all the attention on them.

Get over yourself, all of you.

The conjectures about who X-Sharkie has and has not personally seen play live is no more conjecture than when X-Sharkie thinks they are going to be drafted. You're engaging in the EXACT SAME behavior you are attacking him for.

Ta,

Halleluiah brother.
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
Of note, I've seen three first round ratings or mock drafts from three publications that I respect, and each one has Schneider going in the first round. The only one that doesn't thus far, is CSB (based on his respective goalie ranking). I obviously haven't seen TSN or Redline's final ratings yet.

The fact CSB is choosing to be much more careful about rating Schneider based on his limited exposure to high level competition is fair enough. The difference of opinion is understandable however, given Schneider's play at the U18's, as it sounds like he showed as much as Schwartz at the tourney.

There is no inexusable lack of judgement from any of these sources. Just a difference of opinion.
 

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,340
39,859
www.youtube.com
joechip said:
Dude!

You are reading this on a message board. Everything written should be taken with liberal doses of sea water. Nothing has relevance. This is entertainment. Get a grip! Credentials? If the guy posts utter shite then eventually people will stop reading it. If his work is worthwhile then people will continue. It's called the free market in ideas, if you don't like it don't read. I don't need you or Vlad or anyone else playing 'content cop' for me. I'll judge this myself. This is what really ticks me off in these threads. A bunch of self-important blowhards accusing someone else of being a self-important blowhard when in reality all that was intended was some thoughtful discussion. This is to me means that the people doing the accusing don't actually have an opinion, and can't stand the fact that other people do. Therefore, they do the message board equivalent of 'taking my toys and going home," to focus all the attention on them.

Get over yourself, all of you.

The conjectures about who X-Sharkie has and has not personally seen play live is no more conjecture than when X-Sharkie thinks they are going to be drafted. You're engaging in the EXACT SAME behavior you are attacking him for.

Ta,


Great post, well said. :handclap: :cheers:



I'll now be a mod for this board, as I spent my time on the Habs board and here mostly. Personaly attacks will not be allowed although it's tough for the mods to always be here. Use the report button so the mods can look into the post and issue bans when necessary.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
montreal said:
Great post, well said. :handclap: :cheers:



I'll now be a mod for this board, as I spent my time on the Habs board and here mostly. Personaly attacks will not be allowed although it's tough for the mods to always be here. Use the report button so the mods can look into the post and issue bans when necessary.


Great news, This post has been turned from a 2004 Entry draft discussion to a complete immature jabb session.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
joechip said:
I agree. Not all of us are plugged in to the situation or, more importantly, SPEND MONEY things like RLR and CSS. I get my prospect information from these message boards so and appreciate the effort and resources spent by EVERYONE who spends their time bringing their slant on the subject to me.

Translation: I don't have a dime, so I appreciate people ripping off opinions left and right.

joechip said:
Gadfly's like Vlad and Jason Mac are just rude. It takes a lot more stones than I have to put these things up here, and I don't see them doing it either.

Translation: I think it takes courage to make stuff up. People who show restraint and integrity are people who lack balls.

joechip said:
Their posts come from, I think, passion about the game, and that's commendable, but that still doesn't excuse them from bahaviour they'd never engage in if we were sitting in a room together talking about it. That's one of the big problems with internet message boards.

Translation: I understand what the problem is with the internet but I don't actually understand how it applies to the current situation. I think if Sharkie came face to face with folks and told his fantasy stories, people would actually be more respectful.

joechip said:
The best way to deal with posts like their's is to ignore them, which is the same advice I have for them the next time X-Sharkie posts his Draft Report.

Translation: We should absolutely avoid discussing issues that are real. The fact that Sharkie, for months, has spread questionable information with holes the size of Swiss cheese does not matter. Let's just close our eyes to the obvious.

joechip said:
Thanks X-Sharkie, the information and time spent putting this together is greatly appreciated. I have no idea if your opinions are valid/invalid or products of a delusional episode, but you obviously care enough to disseminate information and be willing to stand by it in a public forum.

Translation: Thanks for your stuff, even though I don't actually know whether I can trust it or not. Who cares? I do not care that it might actually misinform me, and thus is worse than not posting at all. And you are very courageous for doing so!

joechip said:
That's more than can be said of your detractors.

Translation: Your detractors would be better men if they made up stuff too. Then the boards would be a huge happy place where we do not question anything, and post big fat lies.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
Vlad, You keep on saying all this stuff about my posts, but you havent once, not even once, said somthing back that proved me wrong, or that my thoughts on a player are so wrong?

No ones perfect, so I thought Olver played defense, I listed Hedman or Fransson from Sweden.

I'm sorry Vlad, your the perfect person who makes no errors and secretly in your head you know how every little thing about these young players, :bow: TO THE GREAT VLAD :bow:

If I wrongly assessed a players talents, then fine, call me out on it, but when I get called a 16 year old who never seen junior hockey before, or a fraud, what ever, it does piss me off. But I try not to respond because I know it well just light a fire and this thread well get out of hand and not do the purpose I made this for, (witch it already has) But somwere I got to say stop.
If you have a problem with one of my reports on a player, call me out, like somone did on Lammers, But if your going to attack me personally, theres a thing called Private messaging for it. Thank you.
 
Last edited:

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
X-SHARKIE said:
Vlad, You keep on saying all this stuff about my posts, but you havent once, not even once, said somthing back that proved me wrong, or that my thoughts on a player are so wrong?

No ones perfect, so I thought Olver played defense, I listed Hedman or Fransson from Sweden.

But no one told you to be perfect. However, the simple fact that you feel you are entitled to comment on this Olver is just wrong. You can't. This is a disservice to everybody. Why is this guy on your list when you clarly don't know him? What else on this list have you made up? How can you be trusted when you constantly get things wrong?

I am sorry, but whether you put this together with articles or worse, saw the guy play but did not figure he was a defenseman... I think this is just wrong.

I am sorry about this. You probably think I have something against you but that's not it. I love your enthusiasm. However what you are doing is wrong. I am sure there are prospects you have seen enough. I'd love to read what you think of them. But instead you make those huge lists that lamost always contain factual errors.

Mistakes on the tournaments played, mistakes on where you have seen them play, when, how and even positions. How can you report that a goalie has played great for two years on a team when he's been there only one year? How is that helping anybody? This is pure fabrications.

People constantly have to correct you, you constantly come up with excuses that make no sense.

I do not think everybody has to be perfect but clearly, you start threads and write reports. You've got to work a lot harder. I think you have a LOT of enthusiasm and you could put it to wonderful use. You want to write a top 60? Why don't you hook up with posters from all over the world and ask for their views on guys, then write a report collectively?

You are not helping anybody with those lists, not even your most diehard supporters. The buffoon who started the Dustin Rose had lots of supporters too. Doesn't mean a thing to me.
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
Vlad The Impaler said:
Translation: I don't have a dime, so I appreciate people ripping off opinions left and right.

Translation: I think it takes courage to make stuff up. People who show restraint and integrity are people who lack balls.

Translation: I understand what the problem is with the internet but I don't actually understand how it applies to the current situation. I think if Sharkie came face to face with folks and told his fantasy stories, people would actually be more respectful.

Translation: We should absolutely avoid discussing issues that are real. The fact that Sharkie, for months, has spread questionable information with holes the size of Swiss cheese does not matter. Let's just close our eyes to the obvious.

Translation: Thanks for your stuff, even though I don't actually know whether I can trust it or not. Who cares? I do not care that it might actually misinform me, and thus is worse than not posting at all. And you are very courageous for doing so!

Translation: Your detractors would be better men if they made up stuff too. Then the boards would be a huge happy place where we do not question anything, and post big fat lies.

Translation: I have way too much time on my hands and enjoy wasting everyone else time who are simply trying to openly discuss hockey prospects.

PS: I wonder how most people rank Lyamin, Franson and Meszaros...who would you take and why? (anything to get people chatting about prospects again)
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
Dr.Sens(e) said:
Translation: I have way too much time on my hands and enjoy wasting everyone else time who are simply trying to openly discuss hockey prospects.

By discussing, you mean inventing, right?

Not that I expect you to care or know the difference based on past conversations.
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Vlad The Impaler said:
But no one told you to be perfect. However, the simple fact that you feel you are entitled to comment on this Olver is just wrong. You can't. This is a disservice to everybody. Why is this guy on your list when you clarly don't know him? What else on this list have you made up? How can you be trusted when you constantly get things wrong?

Funny you should say that...

I am sorry, but whether you put this together with articles or worse, saw the guy play but did not figure he was a defenseman... I think this is just wrong.

Er. He wasn't a defenseman. I think this is just wrong and you are spreading misinformation yourself.

I am sorry about this. You probably think I have something against you but that's not it. I love your enthusiasm. However what you are doing is wrong. I am sure there are prospects you have seen enough. I'd love to read what you think of them. But instead you make those huge lists that lamost always contain factual errors.

and you make these huge posts that seem to contain factual errors.

Mistakes on the tournaments played, mistakes on where you have seen them play, when, how and even positions. How can you report that a goalie has played great for two years on a team when he's been there only one year? How is that helping anybody? This is pure fabrications.

Actually if you look at it carefully Sharkie didnt claim that goalie played great for solely one team.. just that he's carried his team. You made the assumption, not Sharkie. Your criticism is a fabrication itself, a convenient way to attack him.

People constantly have to correct you, you constantly come up with excuses that make no sense.

Great. That's what hfboards is about. Discussion. Corrections.

I do not think everybody has to be perfect but clearly, you start threads and write reports. You've got to work a lot harder. I think you have a LOT of enthusiasm and you could put it to wonderful use. You want to write a top 60? Why don't you hook up with posters from all over the world and ask for their views on guys, then write a report collectively? .

Oh jeez. Listen to yourself. You're telling a guy to work harder on his posts. Its a frigging message board! You still seem to confuse hockeysfuture.com and hfboards.com. They are not the same thing at all as HollyG pointed out. Sharkie isnt a professional. It would be great if he or anyone else could do what you suggest but then it would start costing money beyond their pocket change and they would be perfectly entitled to start charging for it. You want a professional standard like ISS, RLR and all the others and you want it free on hfboards? Please.

Nothing personal Vlad, you have a point that the public interest should be looked out for. But I think you're just too harsh and heavy handed here. By going so far, this will actually repress information, not inform people.
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
Vlad The Impaler said:
By discussing, you mean inventing, right?

Not that I expect you to care or know the difference based on past conversations.

Hey man, if you have a problem with someone, send them a private message. There is no need need to turn this whole post into something about you. Although I guess this isn't a surprise based on past conversations.

PS: how many people like Wheeler better than Graham? Does Wheeler's skating put his potential slightly higher than Graham's? (last desperate attempt to get this back to prospect talk...)
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Dr.Sens(e) said:
PS: I wonder how most people rank Lyamin, Franson and Meszaros...who would you take and why? (anything to get people chatting about prospects again)

Good idea.

Fransson seems the safest pick to me despite being older. Lyamin sounds very solid but does he have anything he does VERY well? Im wondering if he will turn into Mr.Average. Meszaros seems the opposite with skills not yet put together.. more of a wildcard. I'd go for 1.Fransson 2.Meszaros 3.Lyamin.
 

Larry Fisher

Registered User
Sep 19, 2002
4,034
1,194
Kelowna, B.C.
...

This whole thread is getting a little childish...fitting since it was started by a child, sorry X-Sharkie its not really your fault but some of these people are holding valid points against your blatant errors.

You still haven't answered my questions from the post about John Lammers...are you avoiding positive criticism and questioning or ???
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
Stevex said:
Er. He wasn't a defenseman. I think this is just wrong and you are spreading misinformation yourself.

The fact you do not realize the difference between an inconsequential mistake in a conversation and starting a thread with a big scouting report pretending you saw a player play, describing him as something he is not, at the wrong position is alarming. The report is bogus

Seriously.

The difference is huge.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
On the Shantz call....that was a mistake.... He wasn't even in the OHL last year, why I said the past two years IDK...Mabey I was thinking of Justin Peters but he's had a pretty good team in front of him. IDK.

Darin Olver, I saw him play once, and then I listened to others hyping him up, so thats how he was in my top 60.

Other Mistakes: I can't remember if I said Fransson Or Hedman was from Finland, but I know, we all know there both from Sweden, thats probally why I said another good defensman from Finland, even though I meant Sweden.
John Lammers: I still look at my notes and stand by them. Mabey I missed some bits, but I dont think I missed the boat completely at all.

Vlad you bring up some good points, I did go back and correct my self, and tell everyone that Yes, I didn't see all of these guys, but to my defense, I never claimed to, and I began to give credit were it was due.
I'll also take your advice , and use the spell check. I spent alot of time thinking about my top 60....I probally should've just posted the top 60 straite on here, but within the past three days I made about a sentence to a paragraph long statement that gives people my basic thoughts on them. I should've went over those more thouroghly sp? And looked for errors ect.
Back to the 2004 draft :)
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
Hey, I don't have anything against you. I recognize your handle to know we've probably disagreed about something in past, but that's about it. How could I hold something against an alias? It's a freakin' message board for god's sake.

My main point is everyone see's the list for what it is. We don't need you crowding 3 pages of rhetoric over and over about breaking some code of conduct on how to make a scouting report on a message board. The funny thing is, I've read a few direct unedited scouting reports and they hardly wrote any better. :)
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
Alright folks.....

I fixed my top 60. I fixed my David Shantz profile, I put more of my thoughts in his profile instead of just a back round,
Paul Statsny is gone, because he opted out. I also made the correct changes to Darin Olvers.

Remember, This is my top 60, The little profiles on them, is not a scouting report, for those go to my X-SHARKIES scouting reports thread or kindly ask.

Kirill Lyamin is the mabey the most underated defensman in the draft. He has always impressed me. He is one of my most wanted players in the draft for the SHarks to select at 28th overall. He's 6-3, a nasty nasty player, who can skate well, and is a starting to get a offensive touch.
I love the player that Kirill has became.
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
Vlad The Impaler said:
The fact you do not realize the difference between an inconsequential mistake in a conversation and starting a thread with a big scouting report pretending you saw a player play, describing him as something he is not, at the wrong position is alarming. The report is bogus

Seriously.

The difference is huge.

This is a classic post from you Vlad. You know fully well I know what the difference is. My point was you made several mistakes and assumptions in your own post which ironically was demanding others post immaculately. I know you understood my point - you're not that stupid. But instead you have to insult my intelligence by putting words into my mouth, responding to that, and then totally ignoring all the other points I raised in my post.

I think people just need to calm down. It doesnt hurt to DISCUSS things in a calm and mature manner, instead of attacking each other as is happening now.
 

jincargo

Registered User
Jan 28, 2004
521
0
This isnt just about the list....its about how the list is presented and how the info is obtained.

Its plain and simple...some posters want sharkie to "keep up the good work" so they can get the same damn info quite a few people have to pay for from Redline and Mckeens. These are not personal shots or name calling posts....its an attempt to stop something that is morally wrong.


Take it to PM!! Take it to PM!!

You really think that's going going to stop sharkie from posting stolen material?
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
If it is stolen then HF's moderators will remove it. Thats what they are there for. They havent done so yet.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
strungout said:
This isnt just about the list....its about how the list is presented and how the info is obtained.

Its plain and simple...some posters want sharkie to "keep up the good work" so they can get the same damn info quite a few people have to pay for from Redline and Mckeens. These are not personal shots or name calling posts....its an attempt to stop something that is morally wrong.


Take it to PM!! Take it to PM!!

You really think that's going going to stop sharkie from posting stolen material?

Comments like this get on my nerves, This is my own top 60. Where would I find a top 60 to copy? I'm not a thief, wheather it be stealing a t.v. or somone elses work/words. I think it's wrong. So don't call me a thief.
I'm also not a egomatic man. I can step back and say McKeens and Redline are likely ten fold more accurate then me, I even recomend those sites to friends, I do in fact do read those sites but I don't steal. JNR, Stoneythekoala, and some others (sorry if I forgot you) Could tell you that I do in fact see these players and have talked to them about the players before. I can't prove it to you, I can't take a flight and show you evidence, but dont call me a thief.
 

orrthegreatest

Registered User
Nov 14, 2003
312
0
Norwalk California
X-SHARKIE, Has been posting his views on players all the way since last year, if he was stealing I did not see what he was stealing any where else at that time.....Lighten up and relax, I look at all the draft guides and his views are not like theirs, his is original from what I can see....G :handclap: o Sharkie,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->