17[hockeydisk] Re: Faceoff rating
- Jul 5, 1999The APBA Disk is a yearly Disk and should reflect how a player played during
that "year" otherwise the ratings would never change and there would be no
need for a big disk change every year, just a stats updated disk. The Disk
reflect what that player did during "that" year. Nothing more nothing less.
From: nickh68@... <nickh68@...>
To: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
Date: July 5, 1999 5:51 PM
Subject: [hockeydisk] Re: Faceoff rating
>Brett Hall wrote:------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Judging by his statistics . . . Francis would most likely be given a 4
>> 'FO' rating. In the past he has certainly been one of the best, and if
>> statistics were not readily available for faceoffs, he would probably
>> receive a 5 based upon his reputation. However, a 4 would be the
>> 'correct' rating.
>> You may disagree with this, but permit me to ask you, sir, would
>> you rather the players be rated on reputation or how they actually
>> performed that particular year? There are players that receive
>> tremendous ratings year after year, based on reputation alone.
>---> I think that the "veterans" in the league, who have been
>around for a couple of seasons, should be given ratings going
>by reputation, but not reputation only. But when it comes to
>Francis, you know that he's one of the best faceoffers in the
>league, so you give him 4 or 5 on faceoffs instead of maybe 3,
>because of his reputation. That's correct (at least that's my
>opinion). But when we talk about other ratings, such as skating
>or speed, a player can be known for his speed or skating abilities,
>but over the years his age might have caught up with him and he
>shouldn't get 5's on skating and speed anymore.
>So I think that reputation is important, but it depends what
>ratings we're talking about. A guy like Messier is so good
>allround, that he should still have 4's and 5's, but not for
>skating and speed and maybe some other ratings if he's not
>I also think that the players shouldn't be judged by their +/-
>too much. Players in Tampa Bay get very bad +/-, but might
>actually be solid or even good defensively. One good example
>is rookie Pavel Kubina, who had -32. I've seen him play when
>the Czech Republic won the World Championships. I know that
>you can't compare it to the NHL, but he was very impressing
>in his own end and should get 3 on D...I don't know what he'll
>get, but it's not impossible that he'll end up with 2 or maybe
>even 1 because of his poor +/-. He was playing a lot while
>killing penalties, which also proves that he is solid on D.
>There are many examples I could bring up here, but I think
>that Kubina is a perfect example. Bad team, bad ratings.
>> Chelios and Messier are good examples. Chelios is still a very
>> good defensive defenseman, but has he deserved a 5 'D' and 'CL'
>> rating the last couple of years? I would say 'no'.
>---> True, but I still think that they should stay good, since
>they are valuable to their teams as Captains or veterans
>and they bring leadership. This leadership must be shown in
>the ratings and to give them high D ratings and other important
>ratings, will mean that they help your team in the playoffs.
>(When it comes to Messier and Chelios that is)
>At least I like to think so.
>> Mark Messier is more of a perimeter player now, but continues to
>> receive high marks in 'PH' and 'IN' due to his reputation.
>> It's really no different than a top scorer having an 'off-year' or a
>> mediocre player having a 'career-year'. The idea is for the players
>> to perform, as close as possible, the way they did that particular
>---> I agree, but I also think that when there is a top scorer
>having an "off-year", then he still should recieve the good
>ratings and not get worse. His stats are worse, so he'll perform
>worse. The ratings should be changed when a player goes from 1st
>or 2nd liner to the checking line or 4th line. Or when someone
>has a tremendous year without having done much in earlier seasons,
>then he should get the ratings of a good player or star.
>> Bruce Carriker could give you the exact cutoff points, as I don't
>> remember them. However, the amount of faceoffs is taken into
>> consideration when determining the faceoff rating. Someone like
>> Francis with a 51% FOW% might normally receive a 3 (or maybe a
>> 2 if he only took 20 faceoffs or some low figure), however since he
>> took almost 30% of his team's faceoffs, he would be raised to a 4.
>> Hope this helps.
>---> Yes, this was what I was looking for, thanks !
>And I'm glad to see that reputation will be considered when it
>comes to faceoffs, something I think is very important in the NHL
>as well as in APBA leagues.
>Once again, thanks Brett.
>FreeShop is the #1 place for free and trial offers and great deals!
>Try something new and find out how you could win two round-trip tickets
>anywhere in the U.S.! http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/368
>eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/hockeydisk
>http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/hockeydisk
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>