Re-rates for review (two options)

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by JonDuke

Jiri, did you say that package 1 was the same that you've bought last year and the year before?

yes but this year they shifted to using the last 2 seasons instead of basing mostly on the last single season

[TheScorpion]

I compiled this list of guys who missed the majority of last season due to injury (except for DeAngelo), save for a maximum of six games:

Nikita Kucherov
Jonathan Toews
Tyler Seguin
Oscar Klefbom
Ben Bishop
Morgan Frost
Zemgus Girgensons
Alex Nylander
Pavel Francouz
Erik Johnson
Tony DeAngelo*
Gustav Nyquist
Luca Sbisa
Michal Kempny
Henrik Lundqvist

Might not be exhaustive.

[JonDuke]

I see positives and negatives for both and honestly am not swayed too much either way.
I don't love the split but like the consistency of using package 1 cause it's from the same provider. So I would lean that way.
But then maybe having a package from someone else would finally help Philly get past round 1!
It think it's a coin flip. I'll take #1

[SportsJunky]

Didn't Seguin play under 6 games last year?

[TheScorpion]

Yup! Completely missed him. Added to the list. Anybody know of any others?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Ok that seals it i guess

[3thirty]

I know a votes a vote, but it feels like a lot of people voted for what benefits them the most, not what's consistent and best for the league. IMO going to a package that completely switched the way players are rated based on every other year I've been in this league seems wrong.

[savardandjokinen]

Originally Posted by 3thirty

I know a votes a vote, but it feels like a lot of people voted for what benefits them the most, not what's consistent and best for the league. IMO going to a package that completely switched the way players are rated based on every other year I've been in this league seems wrong.

Agreed. Some people basically said that was their reasoning. And there’s lots of moves I look back on now not sure if I should’ve made because i thought it would be 80/20.

[TheScorpion]

Honestly, I think going with the same package on a year-by-year basis is more consistent and better for the league. If the provider feels the best course of action is to alter the methodology slightly for this unprecedented season, I'm okay with maintaining that continuity.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by savardandjokinen

Agreed. Some people basically said that was their reasoning. And there’s lots of moves I look back on now not sure if I should’ve made because i thought it would be 80/20.

OK but let's be real, there have been plenty of occasions in the past where players have gotten a "veteran's benefit" after seasons where they've missed a decent chunk of time. There have also been years where rookies have played well and remained much lower than their more experienced counterparts with similar scoring.

There's always been a degree of uncertainty around this that makes pre-rerate trades so difficult to gauge. Really don't think this year is that much different.

[3thirty]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Honestly, I think going with the same package on a year-by-year basis is more consistent and better for the league. If the provider feels the best course of action is to alter the methodology slightly for this unprecedented season, I'm okay with maintaining that continuity.

I'm sure there is no bias when you go from "the best D in the league" to an Oilers defense based on each package...

[savardandjokinen]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

OK but let's be real, there have been plenty of occasions in the past where players have gotten a "veteran's benefit" after seasons where they've missed a decent chunk of time. There have also been years where rookies have played well and remained much lower than their more experienced counterparts with similar scoring.

There's always been a degree of uncertainty around this that makes pre-rerate trades so difficult to gauge. Really don't think this year is that much different.

When I compare the ratings package to package of the guys who traded who had down seasons, they had basically no change. I traded them for the reason that they would have a downgrade, and they didn’t have any at all

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by 3thirty

I'm sure there is no bias when you go from "the best D in the league" to an Oilers defense based on each package...

My defense looks fantastic in both packages. Not at all concerned with that.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I suspect that next year the ratings provider we use will move back to a single year focus, but can't say with certainty. There's always risk too that ratings packages go away - there used be around 5 at one point, now there are 2.

[Jiri Hrdina]

It'll take a bit now to look at the grids. Those will not be something the league votes on though. Usually all this stuff happens post draft so give us a bit of time.

[Monahammer]

I understand the want to vote based on the total package, fair enough, but when it's a valuable goaltending contract on my team dropping 21 points that weighs pretty heavily on my decision making process. Lol

[Jiri Hrdina]

I guess that's why we shouldn't vote on this stuff then. Lesson learned.

[Swayze11]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Frederik andersen is an 88 in one and a 67 in the other.

Originally Posted by Quigz17

Package 2 absolutely destroys my goaltending. Can't support that.

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I understand the want to vote based on the total package, fair enough, but when it's a valuable goaltending contract on my team dropping 21 points that weighs pretty heavily on my decision making process. Lol

[SportsJunky]

Lol, I just noticed the spreadsheet is titled "Forwads".

[CaptainCrunch]

lol voted package 2