View Single Post
03-17-2013, 12:04 AM
major major
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,045
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I typically don't assess number/letter scores for players ... I like to rate guys based on what I see. One example I'll use is Emerson Etem. It wouldn't be fair for me to compare his skating to a guy like Quinton Howden - who went a few picks ahead of him - because their strides are so incredibly different. So, if I give Howden one rating, I don't feel comfortable giving a different rating to Etem, because I think they have similar top end speed. I take in a guy's whole game usually, and then make my own judgments on how they play overall.

If I were evaluating Hunter Shinkaruk, my notes read something like: Quick stride, above average skater with good acceleration. Excellent shot, quick, deceptive release, has great offensive vision and catches his teammates off guard with his passing abilities. Better physically than I expected, good (not great) in his own end. Battles in the corners and in all three zones. Good leader, sets a solid example for his team. Needs to get stronger to be most effective.

I have some notes on most of the guys you'll hear of at the draft, but the WHL guys are my forte, so I tend to know the most about them. It would be pretty hard for me to come up with something like that for all of the top-10 guys ... but I have seen them all play quite a bit.
Well I meant using the hockeysfuture rating system. Its just a code for much of what you are already saying. So when you just said Monahan could be a good second line c, but will definitely be at least a 4th liner, that's a 7.5C. This doesn't replace narratives, but its a shorthand for upside/downside.

I also love the narrative evaluations, so whatever you want to share!

major major is offline