Thread: Hf Rankings....
View Single Post
Old
09-01-2004, 12:54 AM
  #48
Kubera55
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 323
vCash: 500
Woo hoo, updated prospect material!

I'm officially excited.

Though, as NYR says above, I'm not sure I'm totally on board with some of the ratings.

For example:

Hugh Jessiman is awarded a 7.5/B rating. This to me, seems very misleading. Jessiman is a classic 'high-risk-high-reward' player. According to this rating, he has a very good probability of becoming a top six forward, and a nearly certain probability of becoming at least a top nine forward. But that's not (allegedly) the case at all. He has the physical skills and talent to be an elite PF, an 8 or even a 9 on the rating scales... the problem is his risk of total failure is very high. A rating of 8C or 8.5C would seem much more inline with what the two variable rating system was attempting to accomplish, i.e., state that a player has a very high ceiling, but also high level of risk of failure.

Similarly, players like Henrik Lundqvist, Jarko Immonen, Petr Prucha, Nigel Dawes, Bruce Graham, Tomas Pock, are all players with extremely high skill levels, but physical, mental, experince, or personality limitations that make them 'risky'. I could make a similar argument for each (like Jessiman above). These guys have the ability to be major NHL players... but they also have flaws that they may never overcome and they might never even become NHL'ers. But few people would argue that Pock is going to be a depth defenseman, or that Nigel Dawes is ever going to be an everyday fourth line forward. Their skill sets are just all wrong.

The other problem are the player ratings that seem to squew the other way. Fedor Tjutin, much as we love him, is not an 8.5 player. 7.5 sounds a lot more likely, maybe an 8 if we're being charitable. But the reason Tjutin is so valuable is his probability rating, which should be a solid A. Nothing short of injury is going to derail him from having a lengthy and productive NHL career. It's only a question of how prominent a role will he play. In a similar vein, guys like Garth Murray, Bryce Lampman, Cory Potter, Greg Moore, Dwight Helminen, and so on, are all guys without the highest talent levels. But they have great work ethics, no significant injury history, and I would imagine, really good chances of living up to their rather limited expectations.

I have to say, I LOVE the idea of the new ranking system. I'm just not sure it's being applied to the full extent of its descriptive versatility here.

Still, great to have an update!

Kubera55 is offline