Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

ratings progress

Expand Messages
  • Herb Garbutt
    Hey everyone, We ve hit the 1/3 mark. We ve got ratings for 10 teams completed. We still have 20 to go and we d like to have them in three weeks time so that
    Message 1 of 16 , Jul 8, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey everyone,
      We've hit the 1/3 mark. We've got ratings for 10 teams completed. We
      still have 20 to go and we'd like to have them in three weeks time so
      that they are ready for Dave to start testing.

      Teams completed are:
      Anaheim, Atlanta, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Philadelphia, Phoenix,
      Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay and Washington

      I'm not sure where we stand on many of the other teams so if anyone is
      involved in the groups for the other teams, please let me know what the
      status is so I know where we need help and where I should be focusing my
      attention.

      Thanks,

      Herb
    • dadadove@aol.com
      Herb, seems like our Rangers ratings were done....we debated and revised and i thought we had finished them... Chris Wolter ... From: Herb Garbutt
      Message 2 of 16 , Jul 8, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Herb, seems like our Rangers ratings were done....we debated and revised and i thought we had finished them...

        Chris Wolter


        -----Original Message-----
        From: Herb Garbutt <herbgarbutt@...>
        To: Hockey Disk <hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 8:45 pm
        Subject: [hockeydisk] ratings progress

        Hey everyone,
        We've hit the 1/3 mark. We've got ratings for 10 teams completed. We
        still have 20 to go and we'd like to have them in three weeks time so
        that they are ready for Dave to start testing.

        Teams completed are:
        Anaheim, Atlanta, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Philadelphia, Phoenix,
        Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay and Washington

        I'm not sure where we stand on many of the other teams so if anyone is
        involved in the groups for the other teams, please let me know what the
        status is so I know where we need help and where I should be focusing my
        attention.

        Thanks,

        Herb

      • Tom Welch
        Herb, the Blue Jackets ratings were done too even though we only have two participating so far and half point ratings. I will wait for other raters but not
        Message 3 of 16 , Jul 9, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Herb, the Blue Jackets ratings were done too even though we only have two participating so far and half point ratings. I will wait for other raters but not sure if they will submit. I can correct the half ratings in the meantime if you want.
           
          Tom Welch 




          To: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com
          From: dadadove@...
          Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 00:36:01 -0400
          Subject: Re: [hockeydisk] ratings progress


          Herb, seems like our Rangers ratings were done....we debated and revised and i thought we had finished them...

          Chris Wolter


          -----Original Message-----
          From: Herb Garbutt <herbgarbutt@ cogeco.ca>
          To: Hockey Disk <hockeydisk@yahoogro ups.com>
          Sent: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 8:45 pm
          Subject: [hockeydisk] ratings progress

          Hey everyone,
          We've hit the 1/3 mark. We've got ratings for 10 teams completed. We
          still have 20 to go and we'd like to have them in three weeks time so
          that they are ready for Dave to start testing.

          Teams completed are:
          Anaheim, Atlanta, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Philadelphia, Phoenix,
          Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay and Washington

          I'm not sure where we stand on many of the other teams so if anyone is
          involved in the groups for the other teams, please let me know what the
          status is so I know where we need help and where I should be focusing my
          attention.

          Thanks,

          Herb




          Need to know now? Get instant answers with Windows Live Messenger. IM on your terms.
        • Herb Garbutt
          Thanks Tom, I would move ahead with the two of you. Try to eliminate the halfs by coming up with a consensus through discussions. Herb
          Message 4 of 16 , Jul 9, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks Tom,
            I would move ahead with the two of you. Try to eliminate the halfs by coming up with a consensus through discussions.

            Herb

            Tom Welch wrote:

            Herb, the Blue Jackets ratings were done too even though we only have two participating so far and half point ratings. I will wait for other raters but not sure if they will submit. I can correct the half ratings in the meantime if you want.

            Tom Welch
             



            To: hockeydisk@yahoogro ups.com
            From: dadadove@aol. com
            Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 00:36:01 -0400
            Subject: Re: [hockeydisk] ratings progress
             
             
            Herb, seems like our Rangers ratings were done....we debated and revised and i thought we had finished them...

            Chris Wolter  -----Original Message-----
            From: Herb Garbutt <herbgarbutt@ cogeco.ca>
            To: Hockey Disk <hockeydisk@yahoogro ups.com>
            Sent: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 8:45 pm
            Subject: [hockeydisk] ratings progress
             

            Hey everyone,
            We've hit the 1/3 mark. We've got ratings for 10 teams completed. We
            still have 20 to go and we'd like to have them in three weeks time so
            that they are ready for Dave to start testing.

            Teams completed are:
            Anaheim, Atlanta, Calgary, Colorado, Montreal, Philadelphia, Phoenix,
            Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay and Washington

            I'm not sure where we stand on many of the other teams so if anyone is
            involved in the groups for the other teams, please let me know what the
            s tatus is so I know where we need help and where I should be focusing my
            attention.

            Thanks,

            Herb
             



            Need to know now? Get instant answers with Windows Live Messenger. IM on your terms.
          • Herb Garbutt
            Hey everyone, I m going to try to keep everyone updated as much as I can on the ratings end. So here s where things stand right now. I ve put together the list
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 14, 2011
            • 0 Attachment

              Hey everyone,

               

              I’m going to try to keep everyone updated as much as I can on the ratings end. So here’s where things stand right now.

               

              I’ve put together the list of players that will appear on the disk. The basic rule is 10 games for skaters, 6 games for goalies. 10 was chosen for skaters because junior eligible players are allowed to play up to 9 games before teams must either return them to junior or keep them with the team. (Niederreiter, NYI, was returned after 9; B.Schenn, LA, was returned after 8). If this is when teams have to decide when if they are legit NHLers, then it seems like a good way for us to determine legit NHLers too.

               

              This gave us 743 skaters (24.8 per team) and 70 goalies (2.3 per team). The goalies seemed unusually low but looking back to last season, there were only 68 goalies on the disk. There were no goalies who played 5 this year so that made the 6-game cutoff really easy. Adding any more would mean dropping down to 4 games played. Two of the three goalies, Mike Brodeur (Ott) and Mikko Koistinen (NYI) with 4 games, come from teams who already have four goalies (five if you count multi-team players), so it makes even less sense to add them.

               

              Of course, every year there are exceptions for players under the cutoff. For the reasons above, there were no goalies added. For skaters, nine players have been added. For exceptions, I try to lean toward veteran players with a lot of games under their belt, simply because they are easier to rate than some guy who’s only played 9 NHL games. Here are the exceptions (there are 9 of them) and how they qualify:

               

              Any player with 9 games who has played 10 or more games in any previous season (3):

              Nathan Oystrick (StL); Rick Rypien (Van); Frazer McLaren (SJ).

               

              Any player with 8 games who has been on two or more previous disks: (3):

              Alexander Giroux (Edm); Mike Zigomanis (Tor); Dave Scatchard (StL).

               

              Any player with 7 games who has been on four or more previous disks (1):

              Andrei Markov (Mon).

               

              Ensuring every team had at least 24 skaters, 15 forwards and 8 defencemen, including multi-team players (2):

              Tomas Tatar, 9 games (Det), Doug Janik, 7 games (Det).

               

              So with the list complete, I’ve created a base to start from. Essentially, I’ve filled in every player’s ratings from the last time they appeared on a disk. I will now go through and rate the 100 or so players who have never appeared on a disk before to come up with a complete ratings set. This is what I will send out to the raters, asking for their suggestions for changes.

               

              I’m guessing the rookies are going to take a minimum of three-four weeks to rate them as I have to put scouting reports together on all of them. I’m just starting that process tonight.

               

              So that’s where we are.

               

              Herb

            • Joe Sutherland
              Great news Dave and Herb! If there s anything I can do to lend a helping hand, simply point and say go ! Joe To: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com From:
              Message 6 of 16 , May 13, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Great news Dave and Herb!  If there's anything I can do to lend a helping hand, simply point and say "go"!
                 
                Joe 
                 

                To: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com
                From: herbgarbutt@...
                Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:14:27 -0400
                Subject: [hockeydisk] ratings progress

                 

                Hey everyone,

                 

                I’m going to try to keep everyone updated as much as I can on the ratings end. So here’s where things stand right now.

                 

                I’ve put together the list of players that will appear on the disk. The basic rule is 10 games for skaters, 6 games for goalies. 10 was chosen for skaters because junior eligible players are allowed to play up to 9 games before teams must either return them to junior or keep them with the team. (Niederreiter, NYI, was returned after 9; B.Schenn, LA, was returned after 8). If this is when teams have to decide when if they are legit NHLers, then it seems like a good way for us to determine legit NHLers too.

                 

                This gave us 743 skaters (24.8 per team) and 70 goalies (2.3 per team). The goalies seemed unusually low but looking back to last season, there were only 68 goalies on the disk. There were no goalies who played 5 this year so that made the 6-game cutoff really easy. Adding any more would mean dropping down to 4 games played. Two of the three goalies, Mike Brodeur (Ott) and Mikko Koistinen (NYI) with 4 games, come from teams who already have four goalies (five if you count multi-team players), so it makes even less sense to add them.

                 

                Of course, every year there are exceptions for players under the cutoff. For the reasons above, there were no goalies added. For skaters, nine players have been added. For exceptions, I try to lean toward veteran players with a lot of games under their belt, simply because they are easier to rate than some guy who’s only played 9 NHL games. Here are the exceptions (there are 9 of them) and how they qualify:

                 

                Any player with 9 games who has played 10 or more games in any previous season (3):

                Nathan Oystrick (StL); Rick Rypien (Van); Frazer McLaren (SJ).

                 

                Any player with 8 games who has been on two or more previous disks: (3):

                Alexander Giroux (Edm); Mike Zigomanis (Tor); Dave Scatchard (StL).

                 

                Any player with 7 games who has been on four or more previous disks (1):

                Andrei Markov (Mon).

                 

                Ensuring every team had at least 24 skaters, 15 forwards and 8 defencemen, including multi-team players (2):

                Tomas Tatar, 9 games (Det), Doug Janik, 7 games (Det).

                 

                So with the list complete, I’ve created a base to start from. Essentially, I’ve filled in every player’s ratings from the last time they appeared on a disk. I will now go through and rate the 100 or so players who have never appeared on a disk before to come up with a complete ratings set. This is what I will send out to the raters, asking for their suggestions for changes.

                 

                I’m guessing the rookies are going to take a minimum of three-four weeks to rate them as I have to put scouting reports together on all of them. I’m just starting that process tonight.

                 

                So that’s where we are.

                 

                Herb


              • Peter Dallara
                I m ready for the Islanders, Rangers and Devils. Pete Dallara From: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joe Sutherland
                Message 7 of 16 , May 13, 2011
                • 0 Attachment

                  I’m ready for the Islanders, Rangers and Devils.

                   

                  Pete Dallara

                   

                  From: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joe Sutherland
                  Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 4:01 PM
                  To: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [hockeydisk] ratings progress

                   

                   

                  Great news Dave and Herb!  If there's anything I can do to lend a helping hand, simply point and say "go"!
                   
                  Joe 
                   


                  To: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com
                  From: herbgarbutt@...
                  Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:14:27 -0400
                  Subject: [hockeydisk] ratings progress

                   

                  Hey everyone,

                   

                  I’m going to try to keep everyone updated as much as I can on the ratings end. So here’s where things stand right now.

                   

                  I’ve put together the list of players that will appear on the disk. The basic rule is 10 games for skaters, 6 games for goalies. 10 was chosen for skaters because junior eligible players are allowed to play up to 9 games before teams must either return them to junior or keep them with the team. (Niederreiter, NYI, was returned after 9; B.Schenn, LA, was returned after 8). If this is when teams have to decide when if they are legit NHLers, then it seems like a good way for us to determine legit NHLers too.

                   

                  This gave us 743 skaters (24.8 per team) and 70 goalies (2.3 per team). The goalies seemed unusually low but looking back to last season, there were only 68 goalies on the disk. There were no goalies who played 5 this year so that made the 6-game cutoff really easy. Adding any more would mean dropping down to 4 games played. Two of the three goalies, Mike Brodeur (Ott) and Mikko Koistinen (NYI) with 4 games, come from teams who already have four goalies (five if you count multi-team players), so it makes even less sense to add them.

                   

                  Of course, every year there are exceptions for players under the cutoff. For the reasons above, there were no goalies added. For skaters, nine players have been added. For exceptions, I try to lean toward veteran players with a lot of games under their belt, simply because they are easier to rate than some guy who’s only played 9 NHL games. Here are the exceptions (there are 9 of them) and how they qualify:

                   

                  Any player with 9 games who has played 10 or more games in any previous season (3):

                  Nathan Oystrick (StL); Rick Rypien (Van); Frazer McLaren (SJ).

                   

                  Any player with 8 games who has been on two or more previous disks: (3):

                  Alexander Giroux (Edm); Mike Zigomanis (Tor); Dave Scatchard (StL).

                   

                  Any player with 7 games who has been on four or more previous disks (1):

                  Andrei Markov (Mon).

                   

                  Ensuring every team had at least 24 skaters, 15 forwards and 8 defencemen, including multi-team players (2):

                  Tomas Tatar, 9 games (Det), Doug Janik, 7 games (Det).

                   

                  So with the list complete, I’ve created a base to start from. Essentially, I’ve filled in every player’s ratings from the last time they appeared on a disk. I will now go through and rate the 100 or so players who have never appeared on a disk before to come up with a complete ratings set. This is what I will send out to the raters, asking for their suggestions for changes.

                   

                  I’m guessing the rookies are going to take a minimum of three-four weeks to rate them as I have to put scouting reports together on all of them. I’m just starting that process tonight.

                   

                  So that’s where we are.

                   

                  Herb

                   

                • Herb Garbutt
                  So in terms of where we are in the ratings process. Right now we have a basic test set. It s essentially last year s ratings, or in some cases the player s
                  Message 8 of 16 , Jun 2, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment

                    So in terms of where we are in the ratings process. Right now we have a basic test set. It’s essentially last year’s ratings, or in some cases the player’s ratings the last time he appeared on the disk. I’ve rated the rookies based on scouting report information I could find on the players from a variety of sources (hockey annuals—McKeen’s & Sports Forecaster; websites – Fantasy Sports Services & Hockey’s Future; magazines – The Hockey News, particularly its Future Watch issue, which was very helpful for the rookies) plus a statistical analysis.

                     

                    It took me a little longer than I anticipated to do this….6 weeks instead of the 3-4 I thought it would take. There were a lot of first-time players on the disk this year…..more than 100, or one in every eight players on the disk.

                     

                    Now what I need reviewers to do is to look at this set and review it for necessary changes. While the majority of ratings don’t change a lot from year to year, there are improving young players, declining veterans, players who have had breakthrough years, or simply ratings that you feel were not accurate last year.

                     

                    We’re going to do something a little different this year. Any changes you suggest, we’d like them done to a tenth of a point, based on how strongly you feel about the change. If you’re torn between a 2 and 3, give him a 2.5. If you feel he’s closer to a 2 but he’s better than another guy who is a 2, give him a 2.2.  

                     

                    This will assist us when it comes time to make adjustments. If we feel that decreasing one rating will help bring a team in line, then we will change the 2.2 instead of the 2.3, and not have to go back to the raters to ask, between player A and player B…….

                     

                    The aim is to have this process done in about 3 weeks, though even by the end of the month would have us way ahead of schedule from last year. But Dave is now at the point that he needs a ratings set to move forward so obviously, the quicker we finish, the quicker he gets started. That said, take your time and have a good look at them. The better the job we do now will make things easier down the road.

                     

                    Thanks,

                     

                    Herb

                  • Peter Dallara
                    Herb, I ve seen virtually every Devil, Islander and Ranger games this year except when there was a conflict. I m willing to rate all three. Pete Dallara From:
                    Message 9 of 16 , Jun 3, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment

                      Herb, I’ve seen virtually every Devil, Islander and Ranger games this year except when there was a conflict. I’m willing to rate all three.

                       

                      Pete Dallara

                       

                      From: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Herb Garbutt
                      Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 2:48 AM
                      To: hockeydisk@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [hockeydisk] ratings progress

                       

                       

                      So in terms of where we are in the ratings process. Right now we have a basic test set. It’s essentially last year’s ratings, or in some cases the player’s ratings the last time he appeared on the disk. I’ve rated the rookies based on scouting report information I could find on the players from a variety of sources (hockey annuals—McKeen’s & Sports Forecaster; websites – Fantasy Sports Services & Hockey’s Future; magazines – The Hockey News, particularly its Future Watch issue, which was very helpful for the rookies) plus a statistical analysis.

                       

                      It took me a little longer than I anticipated to do this….6 weeks instead of the 3-4 I thought it would take. There were a lot of first-time players on the disk this year…..more than 100, or one in every eight players on the disk.

                       

                      Now what I need reviewers to do is to look at this set and review it for necessary changes. While the majority of ratings don’t change a lot from year to year, there are improving young players, declining veterans, players who have had breakthrough years, or simply ratings that you feel were not accurate last year.

                       

                      We’re going to do something a little different this year. Any changes you suggest, we’d like them done to a tenth of a point, based on how strongly you feel about the change. If you’re torn between a 2 and 3, give him a 2.5. If you feel he’s closer to a 2 but he’s better than another guy who is a 2, give him a 2.2.  

                       

                      This will assist us when it comes time to make adjustments. If we feel that decreasing one rating will help bring a team in line, then we will change the 2.2 instead of the 2.3, and not have to go back to the raters to ask, between player A and player B…….

                       

                      The aim is to have this process done in about 3 weeks, though even by the end of the month would have us way ahead of schedule from last year. But Dave is now at the point that he needs a ratings set to move forward so obviously, the quicker we finish, the quicker he gets started. That said, take your time and have a good look at them. The better the job we do now will make things easier down the road.

                       

                      Thanks,

                       

                      Herb

                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.