Re-rates for review (two options) - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Jiri Hrdina · 06-15-2021, 11:17 AM

yes. Unless they haven't played for more than a year, in which case probably not. At that point there's nothing to base on.

TheScorpion · 06-15-2021, 11:21 AM

OK. I'm voting for package 1, largely because the defensive ratings in the second one are extremely suspect.

Harry Lime · 06-15-2021, 11:27 AM

Micheal Hutchinson 421 Minutes played 2.42AVG .919SV 68OVR
Filip Gustafsson 471 Minutes played 2.16AVG .933SV 59OVR

Filip Zadina 65OVR19 points
Nic Petan 66OVR 1 point
Sam Gagner 69OVR 15 points

That's in the second package. I like that the primary focus is on the last season, but there are some wild discrepancies out there. I'll look into it further, but I'm not sure which way I'm going yet.

savardandjokinen · 06-15-2021, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Micheal Hutchinson 421 Minutes played 2.42AVG .919SV 68OVR
Filip Gustafsson 471 Minutes played 2.16AVG .933SV 59OVR

Filip Zadina 65OVR19 points
Nic Petan 66OVR 1 point
Sam Gagner 69OVR 15 points

That's in the second package. I like that the primary focus is on the last season, but there are some wild discrepancies out there. I'll look into it further, but I'm not sure which way I'm going yet.

This occurs every year with every package. In the last package Alex formenton had a weirdly high rating. It’s more the general consistencies that need to be evaluated

Swayze11 · 06-15-2021, 11:31 AM

There will always be outliers but I still feel Option 2 makes way more sense as a whole. I am surprised we are looking at the DF ratings and making a decision based off that.

The grouping of players is far superior in option 2 IMO.

savardandjokinen · 06-15-2021, 11:33 AM

Yeah to me package 2 just makes a lot more sense. The forwards and dmen are on par with how I’d expect a normal ratings package, and GMs did make moves based on the fact we always do an 80/20 and it’s not fair to them to switch it up now either. The goalie ratings are not great in package 2 but that was a complaint in package 1 as well so it’s not good in either

TheScorpion · 06-15-2021, 11:34 AM

I think the defensemen as a whole in the second one are way out of whack... Ristolainen, Jones, Barrie, OEL, Zaitsev, Myers, Andersson, and Subban ahead of Pulock, Girard, Pelech, McDonagh, Leddy, Cernak, and Brodie?

MJK · 06-15-2021, 11:38 AM

I finally took the time to compare, I like Option 2 a bit better but really don't mind Option 1 either. So I voted #2

thirstychimp · 06-15-2021, 11:46 AM

My vote is for 2, but I am fine either way.

devo22 · 06-15-2021, 12:32 PM

pretty close call, but from what I've seen, I prefer option 1. I feel the forwards are better in the second package, but I prefer the balance of defensemen and especially goalies in the first one. Good with either one though. Thanks for giving us the chance to look at these Grant.

Harry Lime · 06-15-2021, 12:38 PM

Here is the breakdown of how many players fall into certain OVR categories. I was curious how this would effect trading in the league. The forwards, the superstars are really given an advantage, and the goalies and defense are less incentivized in the second grouping. I'm worried that making such a big discrepancy in the value of the highest end players and the rest of the league would negatively effect trading. Also, would forwards suddenly have much more value than the defense or goal?

All this chart is, is the counting of players that are at a certain OVR or above and seeing how it plays out to the middle of the league.

Spoiler!

savardandjokinen · 06-15-2021, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Here is the breakdown of how many players fall into certain OVR categories. I was curious how this would effect trading in the league. The forwards, the superstars are really given an advantage, and the goalies and defense are less incentivized in the second grouping. I'm worried that making such a big discrepancy in the value of the highest end players and the rest of the league would negatively effect trading. Also, would forwards suddenly have much more value than the defense or goal?

All this chart is, is the counting of players that are at a certain OVR or above and seeing how it plays out to the middle of the league.

Spoiler!

Its been like this before. I don’t believe its made a difference, there were just equivalents. So a lower rating on defense was equal to a higher rating on forwards. You’d never see a 75 ovr forward traded for a 75 ovr dman because they weren’t equal

Harry Lime · 06-15-2021, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by savardandjokinen

Its been like this before. I don’t believe its made a difference, there were just equivalents. So a lower rating on defense was equal to a higher rating on forwards. You’d never see a 75 ovr forward traded for a 75 ovr dman because they weren’t equal

But if it plays out in the SIM that the goalies are letting everything in, and the defense are a non-factor on offense, would that not alter the value of the players in trading?

I don't like the 50-50 that the old package ended up as, but the devil you know seems to handle the values in comparison to actual play pretty well.

SportsJunky · 06-15-2021, 12:48 PM

Yeah, after spending more time with this, I like option #2 slightly better. It seems closer to the type of re-rates we have had in the past.

flambers · 06-15-2021, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

OK. I'm voting for package 1, largely because the defensive ratings in the second one are extremely suspect.

Defense package (option 2) looks like its from 2019-2020

i.e. Brent Burns etc...

Goffie · 06-15-2021, 01:43 PM

I voted option 1. Both are far from perfect, I just found that the discrepancy between the high end goalies and the rest of the pack in 2 looks off to me.

Swayze11 · 06-15-2021, 02:05 PM

What are you guys seeing in terms of the goalies in option 2 that stands out in a bad way?

If I look at the top 30 goalies for the most part are the starting goalies for each NHL team.

The bottom 1/3 of the goalies seems bang on based off regular season performance. Guys like Price, Markstrom, Jarry, Kuemper had really poor regular seasons compared to their career numbers.

The top 10 is bang on in terms of the top goalies of last year. From 10-20 are guys that were around what they expected or new guys who are getting a large bump from last season (Campbell, Oettinger, Sorokin, Shesterkin, Driedger).

Swayze11 · 06-15-2021, 02:37 PM

I looked into this a bit more to see where the ratings were in comparison to goalies regular season stats.

As we said before, there are certainly a few outliers but I feel like the groupings (at least for the top 10 are pretty decent).

I only used SV% as the filter and pulled all goalies who played 20 or more games. When you look at the left list and it seems weird they are ranked that high you then look at GAA and it makes sense.

Cheese · 06-15-2021, 02:54 PM

Regardless of how the 2nd package looks, basing our leagues ratings on a shortened NHL season is not something we should aspire to. The 1st set is better.

Cheese · 06-15-2021, 02:56 PM

Rask as a 73 vs Smith as an 80 is an outlier based purely on a shortened NHL seaason where Smith was playing in a weaker northern division. These types of ratings are not what we should base our league on considering we play a full sched agaisnt every team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swayze11

What are you guys seeing in terms of the goalies in option 2 that stands out in a bad way?

If I look at the top 30 goalies for the most part are the starting goalies for each NHL team.

The bottom 1/3 of the goalies seems bang on based off regular season performance. Guys like Price, Markstrom, Jarry, Kuemper had really poor regular seasons compared to their career numbers.

The top 10 is bang on in terms of the top goalies of last year. From 10-20 are guys that were around what they expected or new guys who are getting a large bump from last season (Campbell, Oettinger, Sorokin, Shesterkin, Driedger).