Ellerby at 9? Not so sure.
View Single Post
04-24-2007, 07:25 AM
Only a 2 year window
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
First, your substantive argument. Of course the site's system is imperfect. Who said it was? That doesn't make the infrastructure of it not useful. Its number one advantage is comparing talent levels of players
relative to each other.
Isn't what we do here when we talk about Name X and Name Y mostly about comparing their talent, potential, etc.?
You're foolishly throwing out the baby with the bathwater. You don't seem to grasp the difference between criticism of some specific rankings with the very
of organizing the way prospects are grouped. Whether there is a Universally Perfect Correct Answer to "what is this guy's value" is irrelevant.
I would bet every dollar I have that 1) every scouting group has its own classification methodology for comparing value; 2) that no scout who is sane thinks he's got the perfect, inerrant system; and 3) nevertheless on draft day teams still somehow mystifyingly rely on their "inevitably flawed," "junk" systems to help make their picks, their trades, their judgment about whether by trading up or down they can increase organizational value, etc.
Put another way, it is not controversial to say that in the NHL, some players are once-in-a-generation talents, some are perennial All-Stars, some are merely solid, non All-Star productive top six forwards and so forth. Of course these
of players exist. Of course you can tell the difference between these
. You are confusing "is Joe Blow an 8" with "do 8s even exist?" The former question is debatable, the latter is not.
The opinion debate is about things like:
- Who fits in what categories on the current roster?
- What's the best philosophy on how the roster needs to be built before we have a Cup contender? (Not every Cup winner took the same building approach).
- Where are the current needs?
- In the draft, do we have sufficient positioning to get what we need or do trades need to happen?
- What categories of players should we target in free agency and what types should we not target?
And so forth. Once you have a nice, workable shorthand, it can facilitate a lot of conceptual discussion. Your sneering failure to grasp the value in it is irrelevant.
Next, the personal stuff. You call me "obsessed," you arrogantly judge my personality, you publicly QFA-cheer the poster here who's now trolled me out of the blue three times seemingly without repercussion, etc.
Fortunately, see, there's this hockey message board where hockey topics are explored from all different angles. I mean, it IS ok to discuss Blues hockey here in great detail, right? I am in the right spot for the detailed Blues hockey talk, yes?
So I like to come here, read/research threads, ask questions of others, and express myself on these topics. The medium is the written word. Am I supposed to apologize for knowing how to write and express myself? Only an insecure person would try to make that lame anti-intellectual jibe.
In addition to being a die-hard Blues fan, I appreciate the intricacies of game theory. Rebuilding a franchise is a fascinating real-world game theory application. I'm not a GM, obviously, but all the moving parts with incomplete information involved make it an intriguing challenge to discuss. Armchair GM is a fun if harmlessly fanciful simulation game – for me and obviously for others like IB, kimzey, etc. It's fun. Don't some of those Playstation-type sports games allow a "build a franchise mode?" Isn't fantasy football alone a multibillion dollar business?
I am not a GM nor remotely imagine I'll ever be one, but what's the harm? Why do people like you always get so offended and attack people with all that holier-than-thou BS ("obsession," "take yourself so seriously")? Why does IB take himself so seriously with the incredible salary site? Is he "obsessed?" Why do SIU Law and PB take themselves so seriously by having blogs where they do research, conduct interviews with scouts and coaches and so forth? Because it's fun.
The better question is, why are you so insecure?
P.S. Preciously, I think you think you're sarcastically mocking me with the "GASP" line about trading Backman for a player. I've mused about several scenarios with Backman in the last few weeks including that one. Sorry if this fact inconveniences your apparent insecure need to attempt to position yourself as the "big thinker" relative to me. Buck up, little camper. We'll beat this slope... together.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by PocketNines