NHL Defensemen Ratings, TBL Rosters 2013-14

[CJ]

You must be pretty satisfied with my list then batdad, as we have the same guys in the Top5. (I have Suter at #6)

[batdad]

I believe I said I liked you list did I not???

[CJ]

I believe I said I liked you list did I not???

Maybe you did. You talk too much. Can't remember everything you say!?

[batdad]

I can't either...but that is because I am old. LOL

[alexchl]

You can think what you want about Chara that is fine. He may be down a bit. But when the NHL players themselves say Weber-Keith-Chara....I tend to believe what they think over what others think. They kind of um..have a better idea than us fans I Would say.

Suter is darn good. but he is NOT the best defenseman in the NHL. He plays 40 minutes because he is in Minny. Was he the #1 guy in Nashville? .....No. That other guy was...so how can you say Suter is #1??? Not possible. It is not ALL ABOUT POINTS. Weber does way more in the game than Suter. Period. Sure Suter may have had the points, but I am not sure you will find a hockey scout or guy anywhere to suggest Suter was better than Weber when they played together or now that they do not. Sure..close...but better no.

And yeah...I know the ratings are wrong from before...I think we all do....and I never said your ratings were BAD...in fact .they are pretty good. Just not the way the game should be to be as COMPLETELY ACCURATE as possible. Good ratings you have in fact, not PERFECT is what I am saying. See you say not looking for perfection....um okay. Up to you.

I have not said you were FAR off...I said just off.

Guys who should have higher CA than Suter

1. Weber,
2. Keith
3. Chara (even if down a bit, still top dman in the league)
4. Karlsson (has to be because of points)
5. Subban (same as Karlsson)

And those are just 5 off top of my head. Notice something they have in common that Mr Suter does not have with one exception? And that exception was just named an alternate captain on a team with Duncan Keith who did not get one. Quite honestly---Shea Weber is the best 2 way defenseman with physical abilities in the league, and in the world. No experts would even question that if asked.

Suter--darn good and fits in under those top 5 guys I listed. ANd no it is not lke he should have a 120 CA just he should not be higher than the ones listed above.

Yeah I know Subban is controversial, but darn he is good, and people have to start realizing that just because he is flashy and excitable and a bit of a braggart....that he is still that darn good, just a jerkwad--young and immature. Still darn good.

And Karlsson...wow...Noone would trade him straight up for Suter in their right mind



Top 10 yes, maybe top 5...certainly not 1.

Re Fowler..I was not saying rate him higher. I was saying rate him higher than Beauchemin. Your list has him the same.

I know you are doing it the way you want to for your personal thing and that is great, and sharing it with us is great.

And i believe I said several times in my post that your ratings are pretty darn good....

ANd how can you not go for perfection? THat should be the goal of anyone in anything anywhere. Perfection is awesome. I wish I had it.

Well, Chara if he was 4 years younger would have probably been the nr 1 defenseman. I do think that many ppl value him based on his past to a certain extent, and it's understandable. Anyway, if I decreased Suter by 5 and increased Keith by 5, I would have 6 players tied at first place, where all of those 3 are included. If you compare Suter and Weber when they played together, they were almost identical. Suter was slightly behind in points, mainly because of Weber's PP goals, but the point difference wasn't really anything significant, and Suter's +/- was a bit better. They had similar ice times. Weber has his shot, and Suter is not very physical, but he's probably the smartest defensemen in the league. This is something that he's always had, that ability to read the game, and this is why he was drafted before Weber, on the same year, by the same team. Suter is the more talented player. Talent doesn't equal skill, but it's a part of it.

If you value Karlsson over Suter, that's your opinion. I totally disagree with that. Plus, they are so different that's it's almost impossible to compare the two. If you look at Suter, he's on par with Subban in terms of production, and he's not that much behind Karlsson. On top of that he's a much better defensive defenseman than they are, and eats a lot of ice-time. Karlsson is an interesting player with all of that raw talent, but he's not complete enough to be mentioned as a top 5 defenseman, imo.

I'm not going for perfection because I just haven't got the time for it, and I realize that ratings to a certain extent will always be subjective, so if you overanalyze, it might end up less accurate. If Suter is ranked 5 CA's higher or lower than Weber, it doesn't really change much. They will still be dominant players, both of them, and the difference it would make, would be negligible. The big picture is what matters.

[batdad]

I give up. You are posting in here to show us your own individual stuff, and tell us that it is for your personal use, but this is a thread to set things up for the entire planet, so that we do not have to do things ourselves. If you have no interest in getting things perfect...then there is really no point in posting things.

Everyone else here wants the game as close to perfect as it can be. That is why we are here. You do not. So off you go to 20000 point seasons for your favorite player.

And as to subjective vs overanalyze...LOL...if you say so..

And again, ask any GM if they would trade Karlsson straight up for Suter. You would be laughed out of the building.

[ElPayaso]

Speaking of Fowler, I do rate him highly...but the fact that Doughty and Ekman-Larsson only had a CA of 145 made me a bit unsure. Assuming these players will be given a raise, I'd also up Fowler to at least CA 150.

[alexchl]

I give up. You are posting in here to show us your own individual stuff, and tell us that it is for your personal use, but this is a thread to set things up for the entire planet, so that we do not have to do things ourselves. If you have no interest in getting things perfect...then there is really no point in posting things.

Everyone else here wants the game as close to perfect as it can be. That is why we are here. You do not. So off you go to 20000 point seasons for your favorite player.

And as to subjective vs overanalyze...LOL...if you say so..

And again, ask any GM if they would trade Karlsson straight up for Suter. You would be laughed out of the building.

Dude, what's your problem? Seriously. All I've done is share my rankings, and you just disregard and criticise me, simply because I don't agree with you about every single detail. I'm not interested in lengthy discussions about players moving up or down 5 points. I don't think such discussions are very fruitful, especially not with you.

I mainly wanted to show my work, to get some feedback so that I could fine-tune my rankings a bit, and to gauge if the ppl who are responsible for the "official" rankings were interested in my feedback. I've made it very clear that I've been convinced by your arguments about certain players. I don't agree with you on all accounts though, and you just won't let it go until I do. I know now that I shouldn't have fallen in your trap, by trying to defend my rankings. You're the kind of person who just wants to be "right" about everything. I get that now.

If the person who is responsible for the "official" database reranking update wants my feedback, tell me and I'll send in my excel sheet when it's finished. I wish you good luck! And thanks for making that sheet. It's been very useful for me. And also thanks for updating the lineups and laying all the groundwork.

[nino33]

If the person who is responsible for the "official" database reranking update wants my feedback, tell me and I'll send in my excel sheet when it's finished.

Here's a link to a great thread (the TBL Rosters v6.1 NHL Feedback thread) http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... 10&t=11844
In it Archi gives some background/links and notes the different ways of helping (and gives the email address to send feedback/completed spreadsheets ehmtheblueline@gmail.com)

I'm not interested in lengthy discussions about players moving up or down 5 points. I don't think such discussions are very fruitful

Comparing players with each other is the main methodology of reviewing rankings/ratings (especially after the initial stats/mathematical formulas work has been done). As one who helps with the "official" database (and as a long time database editor and creator of the 1974DB) I for sure am interested in such discussions!

[nino33]

I mainly wanted to show my work, to get some feedback so that I could fine-tune my rankings a bit, and to gauge if the ppl who are responsible for the "official" rankings were interested in my feedback.

FYI - based on the experience of myself and those that do the TBL rosters too, just changing CA hasn't been completely successful, and to get the desired results you'll need to review/edit Attributes too (Players Attributes Guide http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... =13&t=4920).


Regards

[pantsukki]

Ducks sent Vatanen back to AHL as Sbisa came back from the injury. Means that Sbisa should/could have a better CA than Vatanen.

You cannot draw straightforward conclusions like that. As others have stated, that move was a consequence of waiver eligibility. Also supposedly the Ducks want to give Sbisa games so that other teams might get interested. It most definitely is not a case of "Sbisa is better than Vatanen because the latter was sent to the AHL".

[CJ]

Ducks sent Vatanen back to AHL as Sbisa came back from the injury. Means that Sbisa should/could have a better CA than Vatanen.

You cannot draw straightforward conclusions like that. As others have stated, that move was a consequence of waiver eligibility. Also supposedly the Ducks want to give Sbisa games so that other teams might get interested. It most definitely is not a case of "Sbisa is better than Vatanen because the latter was sent to the AHL".

I didn't give an "straightforward" conclusions there. That's why I had the "could" word there. It was a "something to think about statement" more or less.

[ElPayaso]

Sbisa hasn't played in the AHL since 10/11 so he's been a regular for the Ducks for a couple of seasons, he's been injured a lot this season so that's one of the reasons for Vatanen's "success", I'd rate them pretty equally, not similar in how they play but equally good and with a pretty high ceiling.

[CJ]

Sbisa hasn't played in the AHL since 10/11 so he's been a regular for the Ducks for a couple of seasons, he's been injured a lot this season so that's one of the reasons for Vatanen's "success", I'd rate them pretty equally, not similar in how they play but equally good and with a pretty high ceiling.

That's pretty much I have their CA now. Very similar.

[jesterx7769]

dustin byfuglien should have his ability at forward up since has been playing there a lot lately and also won a cup playing as forward so he should be like Burns in the game with the RW/RD ability

[Asbeen]

I find interesting the way people evaluate defensemen, it's kind of difficult being neutral when evaluating when you're a fan..
I think defensemen are hard to rate all together, they should be categorized as;

best all around, best defensive and best offensive defensemen

As an example Karlsson is not the best def all around or defensive defenseman but in my opinion he's the best offensive forward

Chara, Keith, Weber, Pietrangelo, Subban, Karlsson, Suter and others are difficult to rate as they are not all the same kind of defenseman.

[nino33]

I think defensemen are hard to rate all together, they should be categorized as;best all around, best defensive and best offensive defensemen

Except EHM has no such ratings...you can only edit Offensive/Defensive Role, CA/PA and Attributes.

The starting point is CA. From there Attributes can be (and are) distributed based on CA and based on the type/skill level of the player [i.e. there are "defensive Attributes" (like Pokecheck and Positioning) and there are "offensive Attributes" (like Off the Puck) that are used to represent player type/skill]

But the starting point is CA. And using terms beyond CA/PA and the specific EHM Attributes requires researchers to translate the feedback to the EHM specific, editable terms that must be used when you do the actual editing

Chara, Keith, Weber, Pietrangelo, Subban, Karlsson, Suter and others are difficult to rate as they are not all the same kind of defenseman.

While the system's not perfect, in addition to Offensive/Defensive Role and CA there are over 40 individual Attributes to help determine player type/skill (and it's how these values are rated/distributed that help represent player type/skill)

[CJ]

dustin byfuglien should have his ability at forward up since has been playing there a lot lately and also won a cup playing as forward so he should be like Burns in the game with the RW/RD ability

That's been fixed.

I find interesting the way people evaluate defensemen, it's kind of difficult being neutral when evaluating when you're a fan..
I think defensemen are hard to rate all together, they should be categorized as;

best all around, best defensive and best offensive defensemen

As an example Karlsson is not the best def all around or defensive defenseman but in my opinion he's the best offensive forward

Chara, Keith, Weber, Pietrangelo, Subban, Karlsson, Suter and others are difficult to rate as they are not all the same kind of defenseman.

I try my best to evaluate them. Not only are the D-men hard to evaluate, the forwards and G-keepers are also.

[batdad]

Yeah it is hard to represent that in the game. However, the gang is doing their best to do so. They know it is hard to compare CHara and Karlsson. However, it is not as hard to make each guy at least somewhat successful in game.

It is almost impossible to have a dman score like Karlsson, just by playing him in the D position in EHM, but they will do their best.