HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Prospects
Notices

Prospects Discuss hockey prospects from all over the world and the NHL Draft.

So much for player and organizational rankings...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-01-2004, 02:47 AM
  #1
leafaholix*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ron Hainsey is King!
Country: Botswana
Posts: 22,934
vCash: 500
So much for player and organizational rankings...

In 2000...

The Avs defense was rated like so...

1. Alex Riazantsev - 8
2. Agris Saviels - 6
3. Rick Berry - 6
4. Kurt Sauer - 6
5. Dan Smith - 6
6. Ben Storey - 5
7. Brian White - 4
8. William Magnuson - 4
9. Sanny Lindstrom - 4
10. John-Michael Liles - 3

The Hawks had 30 players ranked ahead of a 24 year old Tyler Arnason, including...

2. Reto von Arx, LW
7. Ty Jones, RW
8. Jonas Nordqvist, C
9. Nolan Baumgartner, D
10. Jeff Paul, D
11. Dimitri Levinski, LW
13. Dmitri Tolkunov, D
14. Nathan Perrot, RW
15. Michel Larocque, G
16. Jeff Maund, G
17. Erasmo Saltarelli, G
18. Chris Herperger, RW
19. Geoff Peters, C
20. Mike Souza, LW
21. Stepan Mokhov, D
22. Jonas Elofsson, D
23. Jari Viukola, C
24. Casey Hankinson, LW
25. Jason Hamilton, D
26. Marty Wilford, D
27. Arne Ramholt, D
28. Scott Balan, D
29. Olli Malmivaara, D
30. Alexander Barkunov

The Sabres were ranked as the 4th best system with the likes of...

Barret Heisten - 8 (what?)
Artem Kriukov - 8 (what?)
Brian Campbell - 8 (what?)
Norm Milley - 7 (what?)
Mike Zigomanis - 7 (what?)
Jaroslav Kristek - 7 (who?)
Gerard Dicaire - 7 (what?)

The Montreal Canadians had many future stars coming up, led by...

Andrei Markov - 9 (potential superstar... ?)
Eric Chouinard - 8 (top forward)
Mathieu Garon - 8
Alexander Buturlin - 8 (top forward... ?)

The Ottawa Senators had a few surprises...

Petr Schastlivy - 7 (#2 ranked prospect)
Simon Lajeunesse - 6
Mathieu Chouinard - 6
Martin Prusek - 4

The Leafs...

Jeff Farkas - 8 (what?)
Brad Boyes - 8 (hmm...)
Adam Mair - 8 (rrrright)
Konstantin Kalmikov - 7 (didn't make the cut on CBC's new reality show)
Don MacLean - 7 (career minor leaguer)
Mihail Travnicek - 7 (0 NHL games)
Mikael Hakansson - 7 (0 NHL games)
Jonathan Zion - 7 (ECHL regular)

The New York Rangers...

Organizational Ranking: 8

Produced a total of 3 NHL players (Lundmark, Brendl, Kloucek?).

Atlanta's top prospects...

Dany Heatley - 8
Zdenek Blatny - 8
Tomi Kallio - 8
Luke Sellars - 7
Ilja Nikulin - 7
Rob Zepp - 7

...
Garnett Exelby - 4

Our Stanley Cup champs had six players rated 8's...

Sheldon Keefe
Dmitri Afanasenkov
Ruslan Zainullin
Brad Richards
Kristian Kudroc
Nikita Alexeev

The #1 ranked organization in 2001...

The Pittsburgh Penguins:

- Kris Beech
- Konstantin Koltsov
- Brooks Orpik
- Colby Armstrong
- Michal Sivek
- Ryan Malone (not mentioned on OR's list of notables, ranked #19)

The #28 ranked organizaton in 2001...

The New York Islanders:

- Raffi Torres
- Juraj Kolnik
- Justin Mapleloft
- Mattias Weinhandl
- Trent Hunter
- Rick DiPietro (not mentioned on OR's list of notables)

The #29 ranked organization in 2001...

The Detroit Red Wings:

- Henrik Zetterberg
- Pavel Datsyuk (not mentioned on OR's list of notables)
- Niklas Kronwall
- Jason Williams
- Tomas Kopecky
- Sean Avery (not mentioned on OR's list of notables)
- Igor Grigorenko (not mentioned on OR's list of notables)

Other not-so-great rankings...

4. Tampa Bay (Alexeev, Svitov, Keefe, Kudroc, Mathieu Biron)
7 Phoenix (Kolanos, Sjostrom, Safronov, Zainullin, Taffe)
9. Buffalo (Noronen, Miller, Campbell, Kriukov, Novotny)
13. New York (Lundmark, Blackburn, Novak, Mottau, Heisten)

Point is... don't take player and organizational rankings seriously.

leafaholix* is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 03:32 AM
  #2
cstu
Registered User
 
cstu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 562
vCash: 500
Hindsight is 20/20......but interesting read nonetheless.

cstu is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 04:02 AM
  #3
Kasparov*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 959
vCash: 500
good idea for a post.....

Kasparov* is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 04:09 AM
  #4
Gwyddbwyll
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 10,525
vCash: 500
............and guys like Khabibulin go in the 9th round, bypassing 30 NHL scouting networks. Does that mean they dont take their rankings seriously?

Enjoyable reading certainly but it doesnt prove what you clearly want it to.

Gwyddbwyll is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 04:31 AM
  #5
Atlas
Registered User
 
Atlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 3,211
vCash: 500
Alex Riazantsev was Caps property last I knew. He's been playing very well in Russia and has a chance to make the NHL. Especially with the terrible defensive core in D.C. right now.


But your point is a good one. We overrate prospects. It's like guys overrating how beautiful their girlfriends/wives will be in 5 years. We can't help it and we're often wrong.

Atlas is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 04:53 AM
  #6
Amen evil king
Amen, Evil King
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,384
vCash: 500
Heh, after seeing that rating for Markov I looked him up on HockeyDB to see how his RSL stats were, and found this interesting roster:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...019322000.html

All in all there are 13 Alex's on that one roster; 6 Alexander's and 7 Alexei's.

Pretty much confirms the theory that communism stifles creativity doesn't it?

Amen evil king is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:12 AM
  #7
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lehtonen32
Heh, after seeing that rating for Markov I looked him up on HockeyDB to see how his RSL stats were, and found this interesting roster:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/l...019322000.html

All in all there are 13 Alex's on that one roster; 6 Alexander's and 7 Alexei's.

Pretty much confirms the theory that communism stifles creativity doesn't it?

Yes there is a major obsession with the name Alexander in Russia, probably at least a quarter of males there are named Alexander.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 11:38 AM
  #8
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
It proves that the vast majority of prospects have little impact in the NHL.

DuklaNation is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 01:46 PM
  #9
loadie
Official Beer Taster
 
loadie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,968
vCash: 500
A good read, and shows how hard it is to rank prospects.

loadie is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 01:52 PM
  #10
Volcanologist
Habitual User
 
Volcanologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kessel Apocalypse
Country: Germany
Posts: 20,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Konstantin Kalmikov - 7 (didn't make the cut on CBC's new reality show)

Volcanologist is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:00 PM
  #11
Marshall
Too right, man.
 
Marshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Old Town Alexandria
Posts: 11,831
vCash: 500
Good, grounding post.

Marshall is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:07 PM
  #12
Big McLargehuge
Moderator
Buff Drinklots
 
Big McLargehuge's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Germany
Posts: 53,479
vCash: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafaholix
The Pittsburgh Penguins:

- Kris Beech
- Konstantin Koltsov
- Brooks Orpik
- Colby Armstrong
- Michal Sivek
- Ryan Malone (not mentioned on OR's list of notables, ranked #19)
You mention Koltsov, Orpik, and Armstrong is if they were bad or something...

Beech hasn't developed like wanted and Sivek got a major case of homesickness, that mixed with injuries caused his NHL career to get sidelined. If he had his head on straight I have no doubt that he'd be a NHL regular, he has the talent, but I doubt he'll ever play in North America again.

__________________
“The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile, but that it is indifferent. If we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death, our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.” - Stanley Kubrick
http://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/054.gif
Big McLargehuge is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:11 PM
  #13
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,726
vCash: 500
Ratings were a joke on HF a few years ago. It's been much better lately. Some of the former team editors were just plain moronic.

There's been a major overhaul in that department. The people in charge right now I much prefer. The chain of command makes more sense. And on top of that, the new rating system (while not perfect) is an improvement and should make for more realistic, clearer ratings.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:21 PM
  #14
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Balearic Islands
Posts: 23,296
vCash: 500
I don't think having Garon as an 8 is that far off base, he just hasn't had the chance to play a lot yet. If the NHL ever starts up, Kings fans will likely be very happy with him, imo. Markov as a 9 is a bit high, but he was also named the top defensmen in the RSL twice, so I can see why the writer would have him that high, as I'm sure I would have too back then.

But to be fair to all writers, hindsight is 20/20 and it's downright impossible to predict what kind of impact or development a player will have in 2-5 years. I try and just look at what the prospects strength and weaknesses are, as I find that's what's most important to the casual fan, as I first came to HF to get info on the more obscure prospects that I had never really heard of or seen play. I wasn't really concerned with what number some guy or girl put next their name, but what kind of game they played, what kind of team/league did they play for, how was their progression/development going. I'm not saying ranking players is a waste of time, cause I'll likely get rocks hurled at me and I don't think it is, but when your talking about potential it's based off opinions and all opinions can vary widely since it's not an extact science.

Lots of writers work very hard, but how can someone really know what's to come of a player four years from now? It's fun for the readers to see where their prospects stand against one another, and it's fun for the writers, or at least I really enjoy do it, but to go back and try and put down writers from the past based on their opinions is childish to me. No kidding many will be way off. It's very hard to keep track of 40+ prospects and get to see them play on a consistent basis unless your getting paid to do so and paid well since the travel would be costly.

If I had put Michael Ryder at an 8 two years ago, I would have been laughed at and called another Hab homer overrating their prospects again. But the reality is that I had no idea he would end up scoring 25 goals in his rookie year in the NHL. After his 2nd demotion to the ECHL, I figured he was done, although at that time our prospect depth was thin, I figured his skating would hold him back until I saw him make the ECHL all star team and go on a tear in the AHL after his recall. Even then I never would have said he'd be the top rookie scorer in the NHL. I had big question marks on Mike Ribeiro as well, as I figured his lack of strength, foot speed and skating would hinder him from being a top line center. I thought he was outstanding in the Q, and good in the AHL, but I never thought he would be successful in the NHL with his flawes. That's how it goes.

montreal is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:26 PM
  #15
looooob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal
I don't think having Garon as an 8 is that far off base, he just hasn't had the chance to play a lot yet. If the NHL ever starts up, Kings fans will likely be very happy with him, imo. Markov as a 9 is a bit high, but he was also named the top defensmen in the RSL twice, so I can see why the writer would have him that high, as I'm sure I would have too back then.

But to be fair to all writers, hindsight is 20/20 and it's downright impossible to predict what kind of impact or development a player will have in 2-5 years. I try and just look at what the prospects strength and weaknesses are, as I find that's what's most important to the casual fan, as I first came to HF to get info on the more obscure prospects that I had never really heard of or seen play. I wasn't really concerned with what number some guy or girl put next their name, but what kind of game they played, what kind of team/league did they play for, how was their progression/development going. I'm not saying ranking players is a waste of time, cause I'll likely get rocks hurled at me and I don't think it is, but when your talking about potential it's based off opinions and all opinions can vary widely since it's not an extact science.

Lots of writers work very hard, but how can someone really know what's to come of a player four years from now? It's fun for the readers to see where their prospects stand against one another, and it's fun for the writers, or at least I really enjoy do it, but to go back and try and put down writers from the past based on their opinions is childish to me. No kidding many will be way off. It's very hard to keep track of 40+ prospects and get to see them play on a consistent basis unless your getting paid to do so and paid well since the travel would be costly.

If I had put Michael Ryder at an 8 two years ago, I would have been laughed at and called another Hab homer overrating their prospects again. But the reality is that I had no idea he would end up scoring 25 goals in his rookie year in the NHL. After his 2nd demotion to the ECHL, I figured he was done, although at that time our prospect depth was thin, I figured his skating would hold him back until I saw him make the ECHL all star team and go on a tear in the AHL after his recall. Even then I never would have said he'd be the top rookie scorer in the NHL. I had big question marks on Mike Ribeiro as well, as I figured his lack of strength, foot speed and skating would hinder him from being a top line center. I thought he was outstanding in the Q, and good in the AHL, but I never thought he would be successful in the NHL with his flawes. That's how it goes.
i think all of that is understood. I'm not sure the thread starter was really trying to slam the work of people from 4 years ago, simply reminding folks to keep current rankings in perspective

looooob is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:32 PM
  #16
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Balearic Islands
Posts: 23,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by looooob
i think all of that is understood. I'm not sure the thread starter was really trying to slam the work of people from 4 years ago, simply reminding folks to keep current rankings in perspective

You could be right, and if so then my bad. But I took it a different way. Guess Im defensive of anything Hab related.

montreal is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 02:40 PM
  #17
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal
I don't think having Garon as an 8 is that far off base, he just hasn't had the chance to play a lot yet. If the NHL ever starts up, Kings fans will likely be very happy with him, imo. Markov as a 9 is a bit high, but he was also named the top defensmen in the RSL twice, so I can see why the writer would have him that high, as I'm sure I would have too back then.

But to be fair to all writers, hindsight is 20/20 and it's downright impossible to predict what kind of impact or development a player will have in 2-5 years. I try and just look at what the prospects strength and weaknesses are, as I find that's what's most important to the casual fan, as I first came to HF to get info on the more obscure prospects that I had never really heard of or seen play. I wasn't really concerned with what number some guy or girl put next their name, but what kind of game they played, what kind of team/league did they play for, how was their progression/development going. I'm not saying ranking players is a waste of time, cause I'll likely get rocks hurled at me and I don't think it is, but when your talking about potential it's based off opinions and all opinions can vary widely since it's not an extact science.

Lots of writers work very hard, but how can someone really know what's to come of a player four years from now? It's fun for the readers to see where their prospects stand against one another, and it's fun for the writers, or at least I really enjoy do it, but to go back and try and put down writers from the past based on their opinions is childish to me. No kidding many will be way off. It's very hard to keep track of 40+ prospects and get to see them play on a consistent basis unless your getting paid to do so and paid well since the travel would be costly.

If I had put Michael Ryder at an 8 two years ago, I would have been laughed at and called another Hab homer overrating their prospects again. But the reality is that I had no idea he would end up scoring 25 goals in his rookie year in the NHL. After his 2nd demotion to the ECHL, I figured he was done, although at that time our prospect depth was thin, I figured his skating would hold him back until I saw him make the ECHL all star team and go on a tear in the AHL after his recall. Even then I never would have said he'd be the top rookie scorer in the NHL. I had big question marks on Mike Ribeiro as well, as I figured his lack of strength, foot speed and skating would hinder him from being a top line center. I thought he was outstanding in the Q, and good in the AHL, but I never thought he would be successful in the NHL with his flawes. That's how it goes.
This post pretty much says it all. Dan.

Slats432 is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 03:50 PM
  #18
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,726
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal
Lots of writers work very hard,
That may be true as of now but if you've interacted with writers four years ago, you know it was not so true back then.

I sure do.

And yeah, hindsight is 20/20 and all that but some of those ratings were spectacularly wrong when they were written.

I agree with you that nobody should expect 100% accuracy but it was more lacking back then. Also, writers were not applying ratings equally. HF has made a lot of progress and contrary to what you think, there's nothing childish about this.

I like to think that criticisms have helped HF improve over time. There is way more consistency, less bias and more fact-checking right now. Anybody remember when an editor wrote an article on Desrochers being moved from goaltending to defesne and Safronov moving from defense to wing?

HF benefits from years of experience just like any person or organization. I think it's really cool to see the improvements. And I don't think this is the end of it.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 04:01 PM
  #19
trahans99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Home of the 2005 Memorial Cup
Posts: 1,443
vCash: 500
Where was SCOTT KELMAN on the Phoenix Coyotes depth chart back then? He was drafted 15th overall in 1999!

trahans99 is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:03 PM
  #20
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 59,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad The Impaler
That may be true as of now but if you've interacted with writers four years ago, you know it was not so true back then.

I sure do.

And yeah, hindsight is 20/20 and all that but some of those ratings were spectacularly wrong when they were written.

I agree with you that nobody should expect 100% accuracy but it was more lacking back then. Also, writers were not applying ratings equally. HF has made a lot of progress and contrary to what you think, there's nothing childish about this.

I like to think that criticisms have helped HF improve over time. There is way more consistency, less bias and more fact-checking right now. Anybody remember when an editor wrote an article on Desrochers being moved from goaltending to defesne and Safronov moving from defense to wing?

HF benefits from years of experience just like any person or organization. I think it's really cool to see the improvements. And I don't think this is the end of it.
Let me see if I have it ..

So what you are saying is ....

Criticism while it is unappreciated and unwanted and frowned upon yet it makes the site better overall..

and the other moral is that Prospect Evaluation and Potential measurement is not an exact Science and even if done by Professionals you will not be able to set your watch by the Accuracy of the predictions .....

Mess is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:07 PM
  #21
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Messenger
Let me see if I have it ..

So what you are saying is ....

Criticism while it is unappreciated and unwanted and frowned upon yet it makes the site better overall..

and the other moral is that Prospect Evaluation and Potential measurement is not an exact Science and even if done by Professionals you will not be able to set your watch by the Accuracy of the predictions .....

And what you're saying is...

Arbitrary capitalization Is an effective Means to confuse the Reader?

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:21 PM
  #22
leafaholix*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ron Hainsey is King!
Country: Botswana
Posts: 22,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal
I don't think having Garon as an 8 is that far off base, he just hasn't had the chance to play a lot yet. If the NHL ever starts up, Kings fans will likely be very happy with him, imo. Markov as a 9 is a bit high, but he was also named the top defensmen in the RSL twice, so I can see why the writer would have him that high, as I'm sure I would have too back then.

But to be fair to all writers, hindsight is 20/20 and it's downright impossible to predict what kind of impact or development a player will have in 2-5 years. I try and just look at what the prospects strength and weaknesses are, as I find that's what's most important to the casual fan, as I first came to HF to get info on the more obscure prospects that I had never really heard of or seen play. I wasn't really concerned with what number some guy or girl put next their name, but what kind of game they played, what kind of team/league did they play for, how was their progression/development going. I'm not saying ranking players is a waste of time, cause I'll likely get rocks hurled at me and I don't think it is, but when your talking about potential it's based off opinions and all opinions can vary widely since it's not an extact science.

Lots of writers work very hard, but how can someone really know what's to come of a player four years from now? It's fun for the readers to see where their prospects stand against one another, and it's fun for the writers, or at least I really enjoy do it, but to go back and try and put down writers from the past based on their opinions is childish to me. No kidding many will be way off. It's very hard to keep track of 40+ prospects and get to see them play on a consistent basis unless your getting paid to do so and paid well since the travel would be costly.

If I had put Michael Ryder at an 8 two years ago, I would have been laughed at and called another Hab homer overrating their prospects again. But the reality is that I had no idea he would end up scoring 25 goals in his rookie year in the NHL. After his 2nd demotion to the ECHL, I figured he was done, although at that time our prospect depth was thin, I figured his skating would hold him back until I saw him make the ECHL all star team and go on a tear in the AHL after his recall. Even then I never would have said he'd be the top rookie scorer in the NHL. I had big question marks on Mike Ribeiro as well, as I figured his lack of strength, foot speed and skating would hinder him from being a top line center. I thought he was outstanding in the Q, and good in the AHL, but I never thought he would be successful in the NHL with his flawes. That's how it goes.
I agree 100%, but the point is that the numbers put next to a player or where your favourite organization ranks means nothing. So don't get a hard on when your team is ranked in the top 10, because history shows us that HF.com has a very small percentage of accuracy with things like this.

As for going back in time to put down writers, I don't think I've mentioned any writers in this thread. The writers work represents HF.com, so this thread represents the accuracy of the website. And when I see fans of certain teams being so sure of their organization and future while discrediting a team ranked in the 20's, I think it's very reasonable to bring up the websites credibility in ranking teams and players.

Now, the individual scouting reports on the players (strengths, weaknesses, potential) seems to be more credible.

leafaholix* is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:33 PM
  #23
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 59,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomorekids
And what you're saying is...

Arbitrary capitalization Is an effective Means to confuse the Reader?
In fact it Seldom ever Works...

Its like throwing a fishing LINE in the Water with a hook but no Bait ..

Seldom catches anything, most leave it completely ALONE, but every so often some Unaware Fish gets Caught ..

and this time its a pretty blue one even ..

However In this case it was nothing more than a post in this thread to tell the Author of the thread that I have read his work and I appreciated it as usual ...

Now get off my Hook .... I'm looking for a bigger Fish..


Last edited by Mess: 10-01-2004 at 05:45 PM.
Mess is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:53 PM
  #24
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafaholix
And when I see fans of certain teams being so sure of their organization and future while discrediting a team ranked in the 20's, I think it's very reasonable to bring up the websites credibility in ranking teams and players.
OK...now let's not continue this in every thread , although you wanted to make a point of inaccuracy in your post, I will grant you on several points.(Rankings can be off, players can be misjudged, some writers are stronger than others, but regardless of how good a writer is, mistakes are made.)

But, this all comes down to your and The Messenger's insistance that the Leafs are ranked too low at 29. No more, no less. The above quote says one thing in a paraphrased manner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafaholix
And when I see The Messenger, myself and many others on the Leaf's board being so sure of our organization and future while the organization ranking committee ranks us at 29, I think it's very reasonable to bring up the websites credibility in ranking teams and players.
I like criticism that is constructive. I get it all the time from the Nashville board. Guy's fans on the Oiler board ride him on things all the time. But constructive criticism hardly ever starts with "My team..."

Slats432 is offline  
Old
10-01-2004, 05:59 PM
  #25
Vic Rattlehead*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: St-Hubert, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,790
vCash: 500
Stop whining if your team is ranked lower than you want it to be, because we don't care!

Vic Rattlehead* is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:34 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.