HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

GM Ratings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-24-2008, 02:09 PM
  #1
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
GM Ratings

As this came up in the JayBo thread, I did another thread at sjsharks.com with a ratings table for GMs. The following categories were included.

Team Evaluation Categories with scales:
Style of play that has been consistent for more than 3 years Consistent 100, Inconsistent 0

Coach in sync with style of play and development plans GM seeks coaching longevity. Stay the course 100, change coaches or system like underwear 0

UFA negotiations Will get FAs at market or below 100, always overpays 70, can only get dregs and must overpay (signings only late in FA sweeps) 40, can't get FAs

RFA negotiations Contracts on time and at budget 100, contracts on time and over budget 70, repeated arbitrations 40, frequently late on signings=0

General cap management - good cap management 100, moves made purely for cap issues with players who would otherwise be top 10 on the team detract from the score

Personnel consistency (Do not include players who develop within the org, even those who were acquired as prospects. This category defines top 10 as the top 10 players on the team, top 6 forwards and top 4 d regardless of their league wide rating as top 6 or top 4). No more than 2 changes per year 100, 4 or more changes per year 0

Scouting/development efficacy aggregate skill per draft is 19 or better (HF ratings combined for players who make the NHL) 100, aggregate skill per draft 14 or less 0
Skill Ratings 10=Crosby, Ovechkin (generational player) 9=Thornton, Lecavalier, Pronger, Lidstrom, etc. (Perennial All-Star) 8=Marleau, Elias, Brind'Amour, etc. (sometimes All-Star), 7=Ehrhoff, Clowe, Pavelski (players who can be in the top 10 but not All-Stars), 6=Grier (players in the bottom 10 consistently), 5=Rissmiller (players that fill reserve roles)

Euro friendly drafts and develops Euros even in later rounds, can attract Euros on first day of UFA sweeps, and can resign Euros before UFA 100, has Euros on team but no concentration 50, avoids Euros and rates North Americans over Euros at equal skill levels 0

Trades should be a straight win/loss percentage on trades. Picks for picks on draft day should not be included in the rating (yes, they are still important, but too difficult to rate). It should be a 5 year record at a minimum.

Team success 20 points per year over 5 years. 0 points for out of playoffs, 5 for first round exit, 10 for second round exit, 15 for conf finals exit, 20 for SCF.


The Euro category was added because many of the high skill players in the NHL are Euros. It is becoming increasingly difficult to adequately fill out a top ten lineup on a team without including Euros because of the scarcity of North American talent. Eliminating Euros for a team for reasons other than skill sets a taller hill to climb for a GM aspiring to the cup.

Some ratings should have an N/A where there has been a complete changeout of administration for the team. N/A should also apply to some teams for certain categories where changes have obviously been made or the rating should be applied to the previous administration. Dallas, Toronto, Phoenix, and TB have all made significant changes. Other teams have made changes that are superficial (eg Chicago, Philly & St. Louis). Some of the ratings apply to previous administrations such as Feaster for the Bolts.


Last edited by SJeasy: 12-24-2008 at 02:47 PM.
SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 02:17 PM
  #2
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,591
vCash: 500
You missed the most important thing a GM is judged by...how successful his team is.

None of the categories you list matters at all, when you're a GM it's all about what you've won with the budget you're given.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 02:37 PM
  #3
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
NameStyleCoachUFARFACapConsistencyScoutingEuroTradesResultsTotal
Mont10010070100100100100100N/A20790
Det1001001001001001000100N/A55755
Nash10010010070100500100N/A20640
Colo1000100100505095100N/A35630
Minn801004050100508080N/A25605
Dall1001007010010000100N/A40610
Buff1001004040755020100N/A30555
Ana1001007080065750N/A60550
CBJ50507070100500100N/A0490
Edm100100401001000050N/A25515
Wash3050707070500100N/A10450
Caro1000501001003000N/A20400
SJ050608050758560N/A45505
NYR7070100100000100N/A25465
TB1001004010000080N/A40460
NJ800409005010030N/A50440
Phx0100701001000020N/A0390
Fla1000404010000100N/A0380
Bos30080600090100N/A15375
Vanc750401007502050N/A25385
Calg100070100050200N/A35375
Pitt007010010002030N/A25345
Chi5007010050000N/A0270
StL505070100100000N/A10380
Tor7006090000100N/A15335
NYI00407010000100N/A15325
LA00700100030100N/A0300
Atl00405010000100N/A5295
Phil07010010000020N/A45335
Ott5004050009040N/A55315


Last edited by SJeasy: 12-24-2008 at 08:40 PM.
SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 02:43 PM
  #4
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
You missed the most important thing a GM is judged by...how successful his team is.

None of the categories you list matters at all, when you're a GM it's all about what you've won with the budget you're given.
Thank you, I will add it as a category. Hold off as I need a bit of time to make other adjustments to the table. I will add the category description and scoring criteria as well. This is meant as a starting point and joint effort table. I am open to criticism and just want to give a tool to all to clarify thinking. I want all to contribute on trade records and to give an eval for one or two teams which they follow regularly. I will update as you contribute.

Edit: I also think that you will find that by scoring the contributing categories that they will be reflected in the results category. The table is also somewhat predictive (check the Sens).


Last edited by SJeasy: 12-24-2008 at 03:06 PM.
SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 03:01 PM
  #5
Winky
Registered User
 
Winky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
NameStyleCoachUFARFACapConsistencyScoutingEuroTradesTotal
Mont10010070100100100100100N/A770
Det1001001001001001001000N/A700
Doesn't Detroit draft mainly Euros? Isn't Sweden part of Europe? LVC, can you help me out here?

Winky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 03:09 PM
  #6
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,591
vCash: 500
Since you asked and I'm waiting for my wife to get ready...

Team success needs to be worth more points, perhaps even more than all the other categories.

I don't think "style of play" matters at all, never mind it being consistent. Sometimes you plan on playing one way but find, through injuries or team chemistry, that a different style works better. If you had NJ's roster and wanted to play a wide open game you'd fail miserable, and the same would be true if you had PIT's roster and went to a defense first type game.

Another thing that doesn't matter at all is being "Euro friendly". Who you draft is FAR more important than where they came from. And the way you're describing it the RFA category is where it belongs.

Speaking of the RFA category, repeated arbitrations or late signings mean very little in the scope of things. It's not knowing when to cut bait that's the issue...and to be honest, not enough GMs know when to cut bait.

And one final thing, "personnel consistency" doesn't matter at all if you're winning...and if your team is bad keeping those crappy players around isn't a good thing either.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 03:25 PM
  #7
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winky View Post
Doesn't Detroit draft mainly Euros? Isn't Sweden part of Europe? LVC, can you help me out here?
Give me some time, it was a mistake which will be corrected. Table construction takes a while and it doesn't allow me to paste straight from the sheet.

Quote:
Team success needs to be worth more points, perhaps even more than all the other categories.

I don't think "style of play" matters at all, never mind it being consistent. Sometimes you plan on playing one way but find, through injuries or team chemistry, that a different style works better. If you had NJ's roster and wanted to play a wide open game you'd fail miserable, and the same would be true if you had PIT's roster and went to a defense first type game.

Style matters in the sense that players need a system although the system should be set as to the types that are acquired by the team as you point out. Consistent style has been a hallmark of repeat cup winners and it probably has to do with the repetition required to have a successful system.

Another thing that doesn't matter at all is being "Euro friendly". Who you draft is FAR more important than where they came from. And the way you're describing it the RFA category is where it belongs.

I already explained the importance of the category in terms of using an expanded pool of skill. There are still some GMs that have cultural issues.


Speaking of the RFA category, repeated arbitrations or late signings mean very little in the scope of things. It's not knowing when to cut bait that's the issue...and to be honest, not enough GMs know when to cut bait.

In a cap world, RFA negotiations are critical in getting the most value from the players already on the team whether it be in play or trade. Some teams have extreme issues because of the quality of salary negotiations either by bumping the cap (less talent/$) or undesirable player movement.

And one final thing, "personnel consistency" doesn't matter at all if you're winning...and if your team is bad keeping those crappy players around isn't a good thing either.

There is a strong correlation between personnel consistency and winning . . . period. It has to do with players knowing the system and each others tendencies. I already did the study on it and the correlation is dramatic.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 03:34 PM
  #8
Mr Irrelevant
Registered User
 
Mr Irrelevant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 310
vCash: 500
I think "Team Success" isn't that important, since the purpose of this exercise appears to be finding out what makes a good GM, as opposed to just listing accomplishments, which is easy enough to do. At the same time, I'm not sure if applying a subjective score on a scale of 100 in various categories gets us any closer. Harder data that could be useful is stuff like percentage of draft picks who make the NHL, how much players on their teams earn per goal (or some other measure of value for money), etc. Does anyone here have enough free time in their life for that exercise? I hope not.

Mr Irrelevant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 04:02 PM
  #9
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Irrelevant View Post
I think "Team Success" isn't that important, since the purpose of this exercise appears to be finding out what makes a good GM, as opposed to just listing accomplishments, which is easy enough to do. At the same time, I'm not sure if applying a subjective score on a scale of 100 in various categories gets us any closer. Harder data that could be useful is stuff like percentage of draft picks who make the NHL, how much players on their teams earn per goal (or some other measure of value for money), etc. Does anyone here have enough free time in their life for that exercise? I hope not.
The scouting score in the table is the result of just such an effort in that kind of exercise. I won't be doing a $/point or $/toi venture. I am giving this one as a starting point where someone could do something like that to each column.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 04:50 PM
  #10
7150
Lockout Season
 
7150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
NameStyleCoachUFARFACapConsistencyScoutingEuroTradesResultsTotal
Mont10010070100100100100100N/A20790
Det1001001001001001000100N/A55755
Nash10010010070100500100N/A20640
Colo1000100100505095100N/A35630
Minn801004050100508080N/A25605
Dall1001007010010000100N/A40610
Buff1001004040755020100N/A30555
Ana1001007080065750N/A60550
CBJ50507070100500100N/A0490
Shouldn't Dallas auto-lose for signing Sean Avery?

7150 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 05:20 PM
  #11
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,526
vCash: 500
I have some concern WRT "Euro" category, primarily a CBA issue and lack of NHL-IIHF transfer agreement.

In the old CBA, teams held onto European prospects until they were 31. In the new CBA, teams only "hold" onto European prospects for two seasons. And the lack of NHL-IIHF transfer agreement throws even more uncertainty into the mix.

Looking at the past couple of drafts, the CBA and lack of transfer agreement have drastically (IMHO) reduced the number of Europeans drafted. So just because a team isn't drafting from Europe does not make them European unfriendly.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 06:52 PM
  #12
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
I have some concern WRT "Euro" category, primarily a CBA issue and lack of NHL-IIHF transfer agreement.

In the old CBA, teams held onto European prospects until they were 31. In the new CBA, teams only "hold" onto European prospects for two seasons. And the lack of NHL-IIHF transfer agreement throws even more uncertainty into the mix.

Looking at the past couple of drafts, the CBA and lack of transfer agreement have drastically (IMHO) reduced the number of Europeans drafted. So just because a team isn't drafting from Europe does not make them European unfriendly.
I agree with the sentiment and feel that the importance of the category will decrease sans transfer agreement. I did a fair amount of evaluation going into the rating and it was based on drafting AND development before the agreement terminated. In three years, your point could be even stronger if transfers across the pond drop dramatically because of that issue.

I do appreciate the criticism and it made me realize that one of the points was to look at the overall in the ratings. Part of the point is that teams parlay their strengths for results. They all have weaknesses and there are some weaknesses in doing ratings by category. As an example, Detroit scores low on scouting yet because of their strategy, their scouting is effective for their system. They go for homeruns with their picks far and away more strongly than any other org. They are enabled on this strategy by signing vet players far below market and retaining core veterans far past the peak of their playing skills. Another point is to see if any category has a heavy correlation with results which, thanks to 210, I included as a category in itself. Part of the issue is to realize that GMs must bring a lot of skills/strengths to the table. Another part is that it does try to separate out the effect of the front office versus the effect of being so poor at some point so as to bring in slamdunk draft picks (eg Ovechkin, Crosby) where the player(s) have more to do with the results than the GM.


Last edited by SJeasy: 12-24-2008 at 07:00 PM.
SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 08:25 PM
  #13
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I already did the study on it and the correlation is dramatic.
Let's see it.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 08:51 PM
  #14
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
I finished the table.

I am open to updating numbers on evidence and encourage others with quality knowledge of trade history to submit those numbers to be added to the table. I would suggest that the results across the categories do correlate with results and that the table is predictive as is and will be more so with trade history added. I believe Philly will benefit from trade history.

The teams whose results have outdistanced the GM rankings have done so based on the skill of one or two players or where an org is on the downturn or the upswing (eg Sharks, Ducks, Sens, Devils). A team will not win based on the GM alone but that GM/front office will have a significant effect upon the results.

If anyone wants to weight categories, feel free to do so. It would be of interest if one category has a more significant effect than others. I will not weight the categories within this table as it is intended to give relative rankings in each and was much easier to do on a 100 point scale.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2008, 09:01 PM
  #15
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
Let's see it.
When I get time. I have posted it elsewhere and refined it upon criticism. The criteria in the first post, change out within the top 10, was what I used. I did not run the numbers on non-winning teams so that part isn't in the original hypothesis/proof, but I will do so for you when I get time as it will solidify the proof. I will go back 10 years when I do so.

In the meantime, it was a point that Brian Burke made not too long ago when commenting on his cup win. Paraphrasing, he said that it needed time after the ingredients were there. Considering Burke's propensity for trades, I was shocked by the statement and gratified that it supported my original hypothesis.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-28-2008, 05:50 PM
  #16
HipCzech
Just win the game
 
HipCzech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Carlos
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 2,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Irrelevant View Post
Does anyone here have enough free time in their life for that exercise? I hope not.
The point of the thread is to illustrate the complexity of such a debate as much as it is to answer the debate.

If a lot of people contribute a little time, things can be accomplished.

HipCzech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-30-2009, 02:02 PM
  #17
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Data is to be posted shortly. I am trying to get a friend to post the tables on a separate site in that there are multiple tables. The preliminary conclusions and comments will be there. It should be a couple more days.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 10:56 AM
  #18
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
http://gooseman-hockey.blogspot.com/...d-results.html

Goose got back to me. The results are posted as a spreadsheet in the above link.

Comments are welcome here as well.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 12:24 PM
  #19
gooseman
Registered User
 
gooseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: DarkSide of the Moon
Posts: 829
vCash: 500
Sorry to anyone who was having issues with seeing the entire spread sheets. I have re-sized and hopefully that will take care of it for you. If not, and you cannot download for excel, let me know and I will try to figure out something tonight.

gooseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 01:47 PM
  #20
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
http://gooseman-hockey.blogspot.com/...d-results.html

Goose got back to me. The results are posted as a spreadsheet in the above link.

Comments are welcome here as well.
Link doesn't work. Try
http://gooseman-hockey.blogspot.com/...by-sjeasy.html

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 02:21 PM
  #21
gooseman
Registered User
 
gooseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: DarkSide of the Moon
Posts: 829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Can drop to just http://gooseman-hockey.blogspot.com as well. It will stay on the first page for a sure why it is linking to part of the content rather than the title, but then Blogger does several things that do not make sense to me.

gooseman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 06:16 PM
  #22
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Thanks for testing it. Goose and I both use Firefox and it responds a little differently than IE and other browsers sometimes.

For all,
Please click through the tabs below the sheet to see all of the tables. Each contains a different point of interest.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 06:49 PM
  #23
Trojan35
Registered User
 
Trojan35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Thanks for testing it. Goose and I both use Firefox and it responds a little differently than IE and other browsers sometimes.

For all,
Please click through the tabs below the sheet to see all of the tables. Each contains a different point of interest.
I think you're trying to take interesting discussion points and make them into an equation. Further, you're weighting unimportant things (like Euro-friendly) the same as success. That doesn't work. I think, as others have said, there are three factors to judge a GM by.

Success: (Some combination of Regular Season/Postseason normalized vs average league success)

Divide Success by:
Payroll Factor (Payroll normalized vs average league payroll)

This results in an efficiency metric.

Multiply this metric by:
Prosperity Factor (This needs to weigh all 2nd tier objectives, such as profitability, prestige, etc)

You could leave the third one out, but that ignores the real-world issues that some GM's face. Some are rewarded more for ticket sales than success. Another GM's primary goal might be to work with the owner to get the all-star game or the winter classic in their hometown. On the other hand, if a GM constantly says stupid things in the media he probably hurts the prestige of the organization a bit. If that's important to the owner, the GM should be downgraded for it.

You need all three factors. Then, the debate will be on the assumptions rather than the calculation.

Trojan35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-03-2009, 07:04 PM
  #24
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trojan35 View Post
I think you're trying to take interesting discussion points and make them into an equation. Further, you're weighting unimportant things (like Euro-friendly) the same as success. That doesn't work. I think, as others have said, there are three factors to judge a GM by.

Success: (Some combination of Regular Season/Postseason normalized vs average league success)

Divide Success by:
Payroll Factor (Payroll normalized vs average league payroll)

This results in an efficiency metric.

Multiply this metric by:
Prosperity Factor (This needs to weigh all 2nd tier objectives, such as profitability, prestige, etc)

You could leave the third one out, but that ignores the real-world issues that some GM's face. Some are rewarded more for ticket sales than success. Another GM's primary goal might be to work with the owner to get the all-star game or the winter classic in their hometown. On the other hand, if a GM constantly says stupid things in the media he probably hurts the prestige of the organization a bit. If that's important to the owner, the GM should be downgraded for it.

You need all three factors. Then, the debate will be on the assumptions rather than the calculation.
The tables give several competition based success metrics for the last 10 years. I would not narrow the discussion as you suggest. I never intended to weight factors equally in evaluation, but it worked out that way. There are some orgs hitting across the board across a lot of factors. If you want weighting, you can do so with the info provided and I have been very specific in criteria in collecting the statistical info.

I am really interested in different people taking on different orgs and summarizing trade history for that 10 year period. It is a daunting task, but it is a piece of the puzzle.

SJeasy 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 01:32 AM.

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.