Assessing Internal Organizational Player Value

[Captaincanada80]

The state of the franchise is looking great. The big league team is playing fantastic, The farm also poised to make the playoffs despite the number of players being called up to the parent team. And a ton of prospects flourishing in the Junior and College ranks. I wanted to break down all individuals in the organization and interested to hear others thoughts where there are discrepancies, thoughts and opinions.

I have scaled it from 10,000 (Crosby) as the peak and going to 100 valuing a 7th round pick.

Some of my thoughts after completion:
- The majority of players are trending up or still gaining value from there current rating.
- Im sure if this same concept was applied to a team like say the Sharks, there would be a ton of declining assets near the top.
- Alot of positive assets in the mid-ranged 2nd round value. Will be interesting to see if picks/prospects are packaged for higher end talent.
- Say if a guy like Hudler was on the market could he fetch a mid first rounder?
- Glencross's value which i pegged at around Colborne (1100) got a 2nd and 3rd for a total of 1240
- I did place a number of prospects as neutral trending as I feel their play this year has neither helped or hurt there value.



- The way I look at it Mcdavid has some serious value but not quite at Crosby's level. I pinned the Top pick at 8000 for the fact that not even Calgary trading all there picks would land him. Not to mention it appears the race for 1st overall is pretty much over.

- To land in the end of the 1st round (30th) might take 45th and 76th



Looking forward to seeing the discussion

[Ozy_Flame]

Maybe I'm not reading it all here, but how did you come to the numbers you assigned each player? Algorithmic? Sum Totals? Subjective ranking?

[Captaincanada80]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Maybe I'm not reading it all here, but how did you come to the numbers you assigned each player? Algorithmic? Sum Totals? Subjective ranking?

More or less subjective. Assessing current play, contract status, Age and future potential.

[Huntingwhale]

I was sad to see Nugent-Hopkins with a higher ranking then Monahan.

[krynski]

I have scaled it from 10,000 (Crosby) as the peak and going to 100 valuing a 7th round pick.

I feel you should have the ranking from 10,000 at Crosby, down to 100 at setoguchi. Even a 7th is worth more than seto.

[Passe La Puck]

Very highly detailed arbitrary opinion charts!

[Da_Chief]

How are so many prospects neutral? and before you make this a Janko thread. Just change him to neutral or upward lol.

[MonsieurFish]

Cool list - I agree with a lot of what your opinions, except I don't think that Russell has peaked at this point. Still relatively young and definitely trending in the upwards direction. And Culkin should be more around the Jankowski/Sieloff range IMO.

[Oling_Roachinen]

20 year old first line center who plays a 200 foot game and is on pace for 30 goals is our top asset.

Giordano is great and the best player this year, but he's UFA after next year and on the wrong side of 30. I don't see him having higher value than Monahan.

Also wouldn't even entertain the thought of trading Klimchuk for a mid to late second.

[Obsidian]

All I know is Russell has gone from being picked up for a 5th from the Blues, to without a doubt being worth a 1st+ now.

[automaton 3]

How do you figure Toffoli is worth 800 more points than Monahan?

[darthma]

NHL16 numbers?

[Anduril]

*Insert over 9000 joke*

[#-3]

System doesn't make that much sense to me, looks like you are trying to asses long term asset value, ignoring anything other than the snap shoot of how/where the player is playing at this point and time. There are allot of other things that go into it.

Your saying Crosby is worth a teams next 6 first round picks? Even for Sid seems like a stretch, already in his late 20's

Gio at a 1st x 3 doesn't seem so far off, but still high considering his age. But in terms of long term value to a building franchise you have to think Brodie, Monahan, and Gaudreau hold more asset value than Gio.

Also are you saying you would trade Wotherspoon or Klimchuk for any second round pick right now, because you are saying that a late 2nd is worth more than either of them.

Do you really think you could get a high second or even late first for Jooris, Granlund or Ramo, because that is where you have them ranks, and I am here to tell you your out to lunch.

[Captaincanada80]

Originally Posted by #-3

System doesn't make that much sense to me, looks like you are trying to asses long term asset value, ignoring anything other than the snap shoot of how/where the player is playing at this point and time. There are allot of other things that go into it.

Your saying Crosby is worth a teams next 6 first round picks? Even for Sid seems like a stretch, already in his late 20's

Gio at a 1st x 3 doesn't seem so far off, but still high considering his age. But in terms of long term value to a building franchise you have to think Brodie, Monahan, and Gaudreau hold more asset value than Gio.

Also are you saying you would trade Wotherspoon or Klimchuk for any second round pick right now, because you are saying that a late 2nd is worth more than either of them.

Do you really think you could get a high second or even late first for Jooris, Granlund or Ramo, because that is where you have them ranks, and I am here to tell you your out to lunch.

Brodie monahan and gaudreau hold significantly more value combined being 12200 vs gio at 5500

Wotherspoon and klimchuk came from weaker draft classes therefore there current ranking is that of a mid 2nd rounder this year.

I bet if Calgary had an offer at the deadline for a mid/late 2nd for jorris or ramo at the deadline it was declined as they do hold that value at this time.

I'm not saying that this is the end all be all chart, all that was intended was some good Heathly discussion regarding the current state of the franchise. Sorry for trying to bring that to the boards.

[DoubleF]

I get where you're coming from, but with the lack of a so called objective formula, I think the concern is that the chart is too homerish to be used reasonably.

Don't leave, I'm sure you have great insight, but perhaps the chart is a little bit high in terms of overvaluing our players. I'll expose an idea too for solidarity sake captaincanada80.


A chart that shows ability to contribute and ability to contribute based on teams needs (or synergy to team perhaps) which could be easily applied to other teams might have a better ability to determine internal player value.

The question is basically, how good is this guy? And How can this guy help us?

For instance just guessing here... Imagine 3 present/past players on the Flames roster.

X player would be a skill at a 4-6 with a usefulness/synergy probably of a 10. 40-60 range.
Y player would be a skill at a 5-7 with a usefulness/synergy of probably a 8-9. 40-72 range.
Z player would be a skill 7-8 with a usefulness/synergy of 4-5. 28-40.

Let's assume the max is 100 which is a Crosby. Gio let's say is a 9 x 10 with a max of 90 points. Apply this to the whole team, and maybe with the synergy level set higher, we have a higher point score than many other teams. Just an idea.

In the Flames situation, I'm sure they have a lot of players hovering around the 5-6 range and their team synergy is high which allows us to compete as a whole. But individually, most teams would probably look at our players and just laugh. I would likely argue that many Flames players have synergy values of 7-9 while many other teams are getting synergy values of about 6-8 (arbitrarily made up by me). It may explain how we overcome many skilled teams but look awful on paper.

That being said, a traded player may change in value if the synergy value goes up. This sorta coincides with ideas of players that just need a change of environment etc. discussions. A player going from similar organizations may fluctuate a little, but not as much, a misused player going to a good matching organizations may explode, likewise a player going to a bad matching organization may seem to regress even if fans can't see a change in game.

Feel free to flame my idea.


Another point to consider, I like the 100 point system, because it doesn't make varying point assumptions. If Setoguchi or a 7th is worth 100 points, can Crosby beat 100 of these players simultaneously? Assuming average players are about 40-50 points on the chart, I assume it's reasonable that Crosby can beat 2 of them on his own, but 3 is either extremely difficult or not doable on a consistent basis.

Having a range of values per both values would be great too. This could be used for players that aren't consistent. For instance, the player that packs it home and is about half effective or the player playing through nagging injuries.


@ CaptainCanada90: If you could run subjective numbers and maybe did the same on another team similar to us, might be easier to discussion.

[Bingo]

First off that's a pretty cool exercize. Clearly you have to have base assumptions or you don't get anywhere, and then by bringing it to the group you'll probably get those assumptions tested, go away and modify them and then re run your numbers. Either way I think it's an interesting thing to see.

[Captaincanada80]

I'd love to run the same exercise with a few other teams but it's hard considering the knoweldge level of other teams farm systems and prospects. Maybe landshark will do the Sharks for us? Vancouver representative?

[dfsflamesfan]

I was going to share my thoughts a bit earlier, but haven't found the time to finish it up and it is still EXTREMELY raw in numbers. This thread's idea resonates with what my theory was based on, so I think it's appropriate to share.

I apologize to the people who hate advanced stats. Don't click the link if you don't want to read about numbers...

Theory

I'd love to hear some feedback from some people if they get a chance to read it!

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Needs more RGI.