View Single Post
04-24-2007, 08:46 AM
Registered User
kimzey59's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,788
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
You are also misdefining it compared with the way I am using it. I don't mean the specific numbers - at all. I mean simply the definitions of the terms. A 6 equals this, a 7 equals that. NOT who is a 6 or 7.

I also have no interest in any anti-Blues bias HF has. I am not agreeing or disagreeing, I just don't care about the issue.

I'm not talking about bias at all with that statement. What I'm talking about is the very thing we're discussing in regards to Backman.

The problem HF usually runs into; and takes a LOT of heat for, is that 1 team/persons 7.0A is another team/persons 7.5B. Hockeysfuture is chock full of situations like that. Every prospect ranked on this site would likely have a different rating if moved to a different team. Teams/people just have too wide a variance on what a prospect player reallly is to accurately grade them.
Case in point; Backman. Pretty much anybody you ask is going to give you a different opinion on the guy. On person may think he's a #1; another may think he's a #6. IMO; there's just too much variance on what , exactly, that extra .5 indicates. I take it to mean the mid-way point between being a #2 and a #3 D man. Ask somebody else and they'll tell you something else. IMO; there's just too much variance in opinion to use the HF grading scale as anything more than a VERY loose guidline. I certainly would hold it up as a "building chart" like you did in your "rebuilding in terms of HF rankings" thread.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote