Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
Please don't take our feedback any more than an effort to make the content more valuable.
For me I think you have to set clear criteria, to remove the subjectivity. Probably around # of NHL games played. Or others solve it just by making it an age thing that evaluates the health of an organization for any player 23 years or under (the Athletic does this I think).
People will still criticize but at least you set a bar and remove the human judgement call out of it.
But the content is always appreciated.
|
Agree with all of this, and at the end of the day, the criteria can be whatever, as long as they are applied consistently.
But my vote is definitely for an age limit (i.e. anyone 23 and under, or whatever). That is the fairest comparison between teams, because it shouldn't hurt your rank that some of your young guys are good enough to be in the NHL. That should be a plus, not a minus.