Are we ranking players on how well they have met expectations or just simply how good they are?
If it's the former, then yeah the OP sounds about right. If it's the latter, then there's no way a team that's this bad has this many A's and B's and so little D's and F's.
Going by the "How good are these players" criteria, my list is as follows:
A's (Star players)- None
B's (above average)- Giordano, Hudler, Monahan,
C's (average)- Cammalleri, Russell, Byron, Backlund, Smid, Brodie, Wideman, Ramo, Brodie, Butler
D's (below average)- McGrattan, Westgarth, B. Jones, Stajan, Colborne, Bouma, SOB, Berra
F's (terrible at hockey)- Baertschi, D. Jones, Stempniak, Glencross, Galiardi, Smith, Breen
As for Hartley, I think he's an above average coach (so a B), but he's stuck with a horrible team. I think if we had a worse coach, we would have much more D's and F's and way less B's and C's.
|