Post by Edmonton Oilers on May 11, 2020 17:30:13 GMT -5
I'm going to answer this once, here, in this thread, and then never answer it again - I will just link directly to this page, and everyone here can feel free to do the same:
Short Answers
1) "Why is (Default roster NHLer) rated 82 when (new draft pick) is rated 83?"
Because of "The Wayne Gretzky Paradox".
2) "Why is (newly drafted player) rated 82 when (newly drafted player) is rated 83?"
Because math.
3) "But what about defensive defencemen? Why are they rated so low? They were great shut-down defencemen!"
Because it's a sim program and defence does not factor into overalls. Overalls are primarily based on offensive output.
4) "Why not just adjust and compensate?"
Because Barrett Jackman should not be a 91 with the same trade value as Ray Bourque.
5) "Thor, how can I be like you, the strongest man on Earth?"
Heavy Bubbles
Full Explanation
Part 1: The Defaults
When we built the ratings scale for this site, we did so with for every player who was on the site. Wayche Gretzky and Mario Lemieux obviously being the top players, then worked our ratings scale backwards, using that scale as a guide, in primary conjunction with points per game. Toronto Maple Leafs and Edmonton Oilers discussed them at length, for all 643 players, and fine-tuned overalls back and forth many times. We had a general scale we were happy with, posted them, and launched the site. From there, you guys helped us fine-tune some ratings even more. This batch of players are "The Defaults".
Part 2: The Drafts
After the site launched and things got going, I started working on an initial draft of the draft pick overalls. To maintain consistency, I did this with every player who will ever come into this site via draft, all at once. This way, Sidney Crosby was on the same scale as Paul Kariya, and our ratings would be consistent. I developed a general system that was applied across everyone, again, based primarily on points per game. Based on feedback on-site, players with certain games played milestones got a ratings boost, since it only made sense if someone played 1000 NHL games, they would likely be at least an 80, NHL-calibre player and not a fringe 70-something. With this modified scale/range, all 1703 future draft picks were created and rated. After this, the document was sent back and forth between Toronto Maple Leafs and Edmonton Oilers 3 more times, to fine-tune and iron out any potential indiscrepancies. Some, but not many, were manually adjusted based on things like impact, awards, 50+ goal seasons, or something special like that. But again, the scale for comparison remained consistent, with all 1703 future N90 players on the same wavelength. Not a point-and-compare system of 2 hand-picked names.
Part 3: "The Wayne Gretzky Paradox"
Evaluating 20 years of NHL draft picks put things into a perfect scope and scale. FOR THE DRAFT PICKS. But it did accentuate one major problem when compared to our Default players: The Wayne Gretzky Paradox. Because Wayne Gretzky was so much better than anyone else, and his rating was locked in at 97, our scale shrunk really quickly (If Gretszky is 97, Messier is 95, Andreychuk is a 91...and those account for some of the top 30 point producers of all time (not surpassed by anyone still playing), then our scale needs adjusted moving forward. So we basically have a new scale for draft picks. One that incorporates most of the elements of the first scale, but to avoid bringing Crosby and McDavid onto the site as 91-overall players, the scale needed fine-tuned to work out mathematically. And now, it does. But the trade-off is drafted guys are NOT comparable to default roster players. Any attempt at comparison will pretty much immediately invalidate your point, so I would recommend never trying to use a comparison between a Default and a Draftee.
Part 4: Defensive Defencemen
Since there is no objective way to evaluate the contributions of a defensive defenceman, the base rating of a defensive defenceman is created based on points per game, like everyone else. Their defensive skills in the program are boosted, but that skill does not contribute to a players overall. Because of this, based on site suggestions, we did boost all players who played a substantial number of games, since generally that includes things like shut-down defencemen.
Short Answers
1) "Why is (Default roster NHLer) rated 82 when (new draft pick) is rated 83?"
Because of "The Wayne Gretzky Paradox".
2) "Why is (newly drafted player) rated 82 when (newly drafted player) is rated 83?"
Because math.
3) "But what about defensive defencemen? Why are they rated so low? They were great shut-down defencemen!"
Because it's a sim program and defence does not factor into overalls. Overalls are primarily based on offensive output.
4) "Why not just adjust and compensate?"
Because Barrett Jackman should not be a 91 with the same trade value as Ray Bourque.
5) "Thor, how can I be like you, the strongest man on Earth?"
Heavy Bubbles
Full Explanation
Part 1: The Defaults
When we built the ratings scale for this site, we did so with for every player who was on the site. Wayche Gretzky and Mario Lemieux obviously being the top players, then worked our ratings scale backwards, using that scale as a guide, in primary conjunction with points per game. Toronto Maple Leafs and Edmonton Oilers discussed them at length, for all 643 players, and fine-tuned overalls back and forth many times. We had a general scale we were happy with, posted them, and launched the site. From there, you guys helped us fine-tune some ratings even more. This batch of players are "The Defaults".
Part 2: The Drafts
After the site launched and things got going, I started working on an initial draft of the draft pick overalls. To maintain consistency, I did this with every player who will ever come into this site via draft, all at once. This way, Sidney Crosby was on the same scale as Paul Kariya, and our ratings would be consistent. I developed a general system that was applied across everyone, again, based primarily on points per game. Based on feedback on-site, players with certain games played milestones got a ratings boost, since it only made sense if someone played 1000 NHL games, they would likely be at least an 80, NHL-calibre player and not a fringe 70-something. With this modified scale/range, all 1703 future draft picks were created and rated. After this, the document was sent back and forth between Toronto Maple Leafs and Edmonton Oilers 3 more times, to fine-tune and iron out any potential indiscrepancies. Some, but not many, were manually adjusted based on things like impact, awards, 50+ goal seasons, or something special like that. But again, the scale for comparison remained consistent, with all 1703 future N90 players on the same wavelength. Not a point-and-compare system of 2 hand-picked names.
Part 3: "The Wayne Gretzky Paradox"
Evaluating 20 years of NHL draft picks put things into a perfect scope and scale. FOR THE DRAFT PICKS. But it did accentuate one major problem when compared to our Default players: The Wayne Gretzky Paradox. Because Wayne Gretzky was so much better than anyone else, and his rating was locked in at 97, our scale shrunk really quickly (If Gretszky is 97, Messier is 95, Andreychuk is a 91...and those account for some of the top 30 point producers of all time (not surpassed by anyone still playing), then our scale needs adjusted moving forward. So we basically have a new scale for draft picks. One that incorporates most of the elements of the first scale, but to avoid bringing Crosby and McDavid onto the site as 91-overall players, the scale needed fine-tuned to work out mathematically. And now, it does. But the trade-off is drafted guys are NOT comparable to default roster players. Any attempt at comparison will pretty much immediately invalidate your point, so I would recommend never trying to use a comparison between a Default and a Draftee.
Part 4: Defensive Defencemen
Since there is no objective way to evaluate the contributions of a defensive defenceman, the base rating of a defensive defenceman is created based on points per game, like everyone else. Their defensive skills in the program are boosted, but that skill does not contribute to a players overall. Because of this, based on site suggestions, we did boost all players who played a substantial number of games, since generally that includes things like shut-down defencemen.
