HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2010-11 Wild Season Report Card

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-21-2011, 04:26 PM
  #26
UMD05
Hobey Baker Champs
 
UMD05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: St. Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
Hah, or that one. Must have skimmed over it on the search.

[Edit] Never mind. I searched the Wild board, not site wide.


Last edited by UMD05: 04-21-2011 at 04:32 PM.
UMD05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-21-2011, 04:38 PM
  #27
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,032
vCash: 500
I think there are better ways to handle it than undermining the coach and having your agent start talking about it in public. I'm a Havlat fan, and not much of one about Richards, but let's not forget Havlat disappeared down the stretch just like everyone else.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-22-2011, 10:33 PM
  #28
brandbll
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 61
vCash: 500
Let's see here, you handed out:

A's - 6
B's - 8
C's - 3
D's - 3
F's - 2

Considering how awful the Wild were, i think you went a little on the homer side with your grades. Those numbers should probably be flipped upside down. It was an interesting read though...

brandbll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-22-2011, 10:55 PM
  #29
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 16,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandbll View Post
Let's see here, you handed out:

A's - 6
B's - 8
C's - 3
D's - 3
F's - 2

Considering how awful the Wild were, i think you went a little on the homer side with your grades. Those numbers should probably be flipped upside down. It was an interesting read though...
It really depends on what you had for expectations. I predicted 10th in the West, they finished 12th... I didn't find his grades that far off considering the roster we had.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 07:50 AM
  #30
a79krgm
Registered User
 
a79krgm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: White Bear Lake
Country: United States
Posts: 677
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to a79krgm
I think we all know Marty by now. When the team is on a roll he's on top of his game. But, when the team is struggling he's simply a passenger on the train wreck.

We can never expect him to lead a charge.

a79krgm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:30 AM
  #31
Bookman
Registered User
 
Bookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: frozen north
Posts: 7,099
vCash: 1000
A usually stands for far exceeded requirements/expectations. Excellent. 90-100%.
B is exceeded requirements/expectations. Good. 80-89%.
C is met minimal requirements/expectations. Average. 70-79%
D is failed to meet minimum requirements/expectations. Poor. 60-69%
F is total failure. Fail. <60%.

For the Wild, I'd see a handful of Bs, lots of Cs, and several Ds.

I guess it also depends on whether the team is graded in isolation, like a single class, or vis-a-vis their peers across the league. The former might accord a few A grades, like the best students in the class. Graded vs. all the other players in the league, one would be hard pressed to give a single A (first half Burns would have been close).

Bookman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2011, 09:45 AM
  #32
Casper
30 goal grinder
 
Casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Posts: 1,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by a79krgm View Post
I think we all know Marty by now. When the team is on a roll he's on top of his game. But, when the team is struggling he's simply a passenger on the train wreck.

We can never expect him to lead a charge.
Unfortunately that seems to be the same for Backstrom and Brent Burns as well.


Last edited by Casper: 04-24-2011 at 12:58 AM.
Casper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 07:59 AM
  #33
LemaireisGOD
Registered User
 
LemaireisGOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nowhere, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
A usually stands for far exceeded requirements/expectations. Excellent. 90-100%.
B is exceeded requirements/expectations. Good. 80-89%.
C is met minimal requirements/expectations. Average. 70-79%
D is failed to meet minimum requirements/expectations. Poor. 60-69%
F is total failure. Fail. <60%.

For the Wild, I'd see a handful of Bs, lots of Cs, and several Ds.

I guess it also depends on whether the team is graded in isolation, like a single class, or vis-a-vis their peers across the league. The former might accord a few A grades, like the best students in the class. Graded vs. all the other players in the league, one would be hard pressed to give a single A (first half Burns would have been close).
What do you want me to do; give them a standardized test? Should I look at our players and then say, how are those guys playing in similar positions perform in Detroit or Philadelphia. Sorry, I think that's ludicrous to look at it that way. I took a basic pre-season expectation (as others mentioned about where they felt the team would finish, by the way I predicted 11th) and then graded them to how well they lived up (or not) to that expectation.

Havlat did disappear down the stretch, yet should his final grade be reflective entirely what he did in the last 20 games or throughout the course of the whole season?

The Wild roster is an amalgam of bad contracts more or less prompted by poor drafting that forced the team to invest in more expensive free agents then simply filling spots with players it developed itself.

Bang for the buck the Wild are horrible. I totally recognize that; but as others have stated. Its not always about the stats; its just part of the picture and just part of the overall expectation for a player.

By the way, your grading scale is pretty weak. Most schools go 94-100% A, 93-91% A-, 90-89% B+, 88-84% B, 83-81% B-, 80-79% C+, 78-74% C, 73-71% C-, 70-69% D+, 68-64% D, 63-60% D-, and 59.9% and below F.

Maybe the next time I do this I'll give the team the ACT and then we can grade them that way so their normed against their peers league wide.

LemaireisGOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 10:17 AM
  #34
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemaireisGOD View Post
Maybe the next time I do this I'll give the team the ACT and then we can grade them that way so their normed against their peers league wide.
I prefer the SAT. Make it happen.

kthxbai.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 12:31 PM
  #35
LemaireisGOD
Registered User
 
LemaireisGOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nowhere, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 728
vCash: 500
Strange...it made a duplicate post...

LemaireisGOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 02:10 PM
  #36
Bookman
Registered User
 
Bookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: frozen north
Posts: 7,099
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemaireisGOD View Post
What do you want me to do; give them a standardized test? Should I look at our players and then say, how are those guys playing in similar positions perform in Detroit or Philadelphia. Sorry, I think that's ludicrous to look at it that way. I took a basic pre-season expectation (as others mentioned about where they felt the team would finish, by the way I predicted 11th) and then graded them to how well they lived up (or not) to that expectation.

Havlat did disappear down the stretch, yet should his final grade be reflective entirely what he did in the last 20 games or throughout the course of the whole season?

The Wild roster is an amalgam of bad contracts more or less prompted by poor drafting that forced the team to invest in more expensive free agents then simply filling spots with players it developed itself.

Bang for the buck the Wild are horrible. I totally recognize that; but as others have stated. Its not always about the stats; its just part of the picture and just part of the overall expectation for a player.

By the way, your grading scale is pretty weak. Most schools go 94-100% A, 93-91% A-, 90-89% B+, 88-84% B, 83-81% B-, 80-79% C+, 78-74% C, 73-71% C-, 70-69% D+, 68-64% D, 63-60% D-, and 59.9% and below F.

Maybe the next time I do this I'll give the team the ACT and then we can grade them that way so their normed against their peers league wide.
Don't get me wrong - I don't have a beef with your grades; you obviously put a lot of thought into them, and taken looking at the Wild alone are pretty much spot on. But the more I thought about the Wild, the more I felt that nobody really deserved an A, which should be reserved for outstanding work. There were plenty of better than average to average performances from the Wild, but nothing superlative.

BTW, the 90-80-70 system betrays my age. That's the way it used to be all the way up through college.

So, how would the Wild have fared against the league wide norm

Bookman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 02:34 PM
  #37
LemaireisGOD
Registered User
 
LemaireisGOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nowhere, WI
Country: United States
Posts: 728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookman View Post
Don't get me wrong - I don't have a beef with your grades; you obviously put a lot of thought into them, and taken looking at the Wild alone are pretty much spot on. But the more I thought about the Wild, the more I felt that nobody really deserved an A, which should be reserved for outstanding work. There were plenty of better than average to average performances from the Wild, but nothing superlative.

BTW, the 90-80-70 system betrays my age. That's the way it used to be all the way up through college.

So, how would the Wild have fared against the league wide norm
Leaguewide, the team deserves a grade somewhere in the D to F range.

I think if you norm it to the rest of the league; you're probably right that no one from this team deserves an "A". However when you make it a bit more local and norm it under the premise expectations I think there are a few A's to be had. Not many, but a few.

I guess I could've gone with the old elementary style grading.

Commendable, Satisfactory and Needs Improvement

LemaireisGOD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 03:03 PM
  #38
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,032
vCash: 500
If your top guys are getting C's and D's and your role players are getting A's and B's, you can still have a crap hockey team.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2011, 05:56 PM
  #39
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 24,171
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
If your top guys are getting C's and D's and your role players are getting A's and B's, you can still have a crap hockey team.
word.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:01 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.