| Top 300 Players | Tweet |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Dobber | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Thursday, 01 September 2011 00:00 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
May, 2013.
Please read: These rankings only capture keeper leagues that are points-only, do not factor positions. They also give some value bonus (very small) to teams who have a bright future and a good chance of becoming/maintaining a big powerhouse in terms of lots of fantasy-relevant players.
Because there are so many different league types, one cannot satisfy them all with a single list. Factors taken into account: predicted points for the current season; age; upside; proven/unproven; team bonus (if the team is on the rise or consistently scoring a lot); proneness to injury; and the "name" factor (if it's a big name, he gets a few extra bonus due to the trade value boost).
Kindly ease up on slagging me for: 1) Player A being ranked 10 spots above Player B when their "rating" is only 6.5 apart. Two players within 10 rating points are pretty much a wash and an argument can be made for either. 2) A defenseman (for example) who is great for penalty minutes and points being ranked so low. That is valuable in your league, but not for the league I described above (read "Please read" above).
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Write comment
Comments (195)
Dobber
said:
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed |
... number - yes, upside. I wouldn't trade my Granlund for O'Reilly if he threw in two first round picks. 4horseman - Arnott, what an oversight. Sorry. Clarkson - 31 spots is nothing. That's not knee-jerk, that's a normal jump or drop for a month of hot/cold. 200 - now that would be a big knee-jerk. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Isle B. - still feel that way? lol the rankings are to help you both compete now and build for the future. If you listened to my rankings three months ago, you would have Ovechkin and he would have cost you a song. You can't discount that kind of upside over 18 months of futility. 36 months, maybe. frozenpools - formula is this year, last year, distance from prime age (set at 25), proven vs. unproven, injury proneness, strength of team and a small bonus for the power of a "name" - i.e. if a superstar sucks, but still has weight in trade talks. |
frozenpools
said:
 |
... @4horsemen: I agree. The 3rd factor is luck which I think it is more important for predicting the future as SOG tends to be fairly constant for a player during his career. After the Feb 10 vs Pitts, Clarkson's shooting percentage was 18%. At that point its a good time to expect his goal scoring rate to regress to the league average of 11% (or whatever his career average is) and sell high. His current shooting percentage is 8.6% so your right, its probably a good time to buy low on him (goal-wise). I think its a good idea to estimate goals and assists separately as shots on goal alone can undervalue a player such as MSL or Kadri (who is another sell high). |
4horsemen
said:
 |
... @frozenpools - Two of the most rock solid indicators to use when predicting future production: SOG and TOI. Here are the league leaders in SOG: Ovi, Kane, Clarkson, Parise, Nash, Zetterberg, Skinner, Max Pac, Stamkos, Kessel, Moulson, Tavares, Williams, Brown, Crosby, Seguin, Gaborik and Semin. Anything stand out here? Clarkson is averaging 18 min/game and 3:38 on the PP. As long as he's logging these sorts of minutes and shooting the way he has his ranking is nuts. His shooting % is now well below his career average. Use his ranking at your own risk because a market correction would actually have him scoring a lot of goals before this season is out! |
frozenpools
said:
|
... @4horsemen: Its likely that Dobbers formula uses a weighted formula of the current season combined with 1-3 recent seasons. The current year would have the highest weight (it should, its the most recent data and the objective is typically to win the current year). So Clarkson having a bad streak and dropping 31 spots isn't a drastic change. His initial hot streak combined with his his recent games are more in line with his career numbers. He's just back to expectations - an average offensive player. Last year Scott Hartnell did the same thing but kept it going the full season. During the year, his ranking likely steadily grew. Clarkson wasn't able to sustain his scoring pace and reverted to his career numbers. Id imagine there is more to the formula to predict the future rather then painting a picture of the past (pp toi, shooting %, assists vs pts on/60). But that's Dobber's magic  |
Isle B.
said:
 |
... @Dobber Yes I do. The Caps are rolling now, but they were lousy earlier in the year and Ovechkin and Backstrom were ineffective in a way that players like Datsyuk, Tavares and Giroux, for example, would never be. Ovie's upside is higher than most but his downside is a lot lower than many of the other top forwards in the league. If you counted on Ovechkin and/or Backstrom to be your top forwards the past couple of years then your season was probably over 20 games in. If you built your team's offense around Datsyuk, Giroux, JT, Toews, St. Louis and/or the Sedins then you have probably been competitive. |
erneufel
said:
 |
Archived rankings Do you have archived rankings beyond 3 months? Would be great to compare longer term trends. Maybe a separate Excel download? |
number54
said:
 |
Granlund vs. O'Reilly I'm amazed that you have Granlund and O'Reilly neck and neck; O'Reilly's been playing some great hockey since signing in COL. Meanwhile, Granlund basically played his way out of a roster spot, with Zucker and Coyle handily out-playing him. I'm hoping your answer to this one is "upside". |
4horsemen
said:
|
Clarkson If you're not swayed by short trends then why did you just drop him 31 slots for a cold streak?!? He's still playing top line minutes and shooting a lot....below his career average now it should be noted. You're now recommending people value him on par with Arnott  |
Dobber
said:
|
... horsemen - hopefully Clarkson has now convinced you that he's not. Isle B - still feel that way? Moral of the story - it's a fickle business, fantasy hockey. But I try my best not to be swayed by short trends and try to stick with the bigger, long-term picture. Clarkson has 4 points in last 21 games. Ovechkin has 24 points in his last 19 games. Market corrections with those two are almost complete... |
Isle B.
said:
|
... Ovie, and all the other key Capitals for that matter, are way too high. Part of their value was in the wide-open style that the team ceased to play years ago. Plus a lot of their scoring depth is now gone. They could go blazing up and down the ice because they also had Semin and Fleischmann (and even Fedorov) and could also score dirty goals with Laich and Knuble. Sadly, they are now a different, and much more pedestrian, team. Ovechkin, Backstrom and Green will never come close to hitting those numbers again and Carlson arrived just as the party was ending. |
TangerineDreamTeam
said:
 |
loui Ross please read the Please Read above My comment is a little too much but still think Eriksson should be higher Only read the extra paragraph afterwards... my bad Still love this site and all the work you guys put into it Reminds me of the hockey fans article you linked the other day |
ross10019
said:
 |
TangeringDreamTeam re Loui Eriksson Tangerine, If you are suggesting that Loui Eriksson is more valuable than Dustin Byfuglien or Alex Pietrangelo, in a league with positional (C, W, D etc) requirements, most (including me) would compeletely disagree. A 50-pt dman is worth more than Loui Eriksson, in a points only league, and Byf and AP are more like 60+ pt dmen. In my league, I would never trade Byf or AP for Eriksson, that would be a steal for the other side. |
TangerineDreamTeam
said:
|
Loui Loui, ooo NOOO How is he behind 2 men who have never had 70 points!? He's only done it 3times... in a row... by age 27... dot dot dot A slow start can bring him down in value fine, but explain to me that you would trade Loui for BOTH D.Buf and A.Pie, so I can join your league and make that trade! (trading him for just 1 would be sooo silly, why not make it 2 players ranked higher!) The amount of times i have read the point system at the top of the page and been not told not to squabble over the small point gaps in players does not matter to me because a.) 27 year old puts up 278points in 325 game over the past 4years b.) Jamie Benn is 19 spots higher, has never outpointed him and is solely based off potential, and what his start was better? how did he do in january? c.) Dmen ranked higher than him will NOT have 70 points anytime soon, i'd wager on that |
4horsemen
said:
|
Crosby Time #1 with a bullet....if there's an argument to be made against this I'd love to hear it. It took For anyone who hasn't tuned into a Pittsburgh game yet this year please do yourself a favour and witness the best player in the world making the league his b*tch! |
mcarmody
said:
 |
... Far too high: Alex Ovechkin Too high: Nail Yakupov Too low: Jamie Benn Not low enough: Nathan Gerbe Only because you asked. Been enjoying and relying on your lists for a while. Thanks. |
ddp
said:
 |
... Come on...I realize a few years ago you could say toews was more valuable to his team then fantasy pts leagues...but he's been putting up pt per game for his career. That is more than you can say for a dozen ahead of him. I'm not a toews owner! Dobs ill trade you kessel, getzlaf or staal for toews anyday!! |
Isle B.
said:
|
... Dobber, There is no question that he was the most prolific goal scorer and the most exciting player in the world from 2005-2010, but isn't it time for a little bit of a market correction on AO? Obviously, he still has the upside and the durability, but this now the 4th season in a row in which he seems to be declining. I'd rather have Tavares, Giroux, the Sedins, Datsyuk and any of the Oilers' young guns than Ovechkin at this point. |
Dobber
said:
|
... austeane - fixed mabus - remove the post-lockout year from your analysis, do not count that year for career highs. It skews numbers badly. That being said, your hypothesis is very solid and I agree with it. I have been using 25 as the peak age in my formula for three or four years now, but I don't punish 30 year olds as much as 20 year olds |
mabus
said:
 |
... Dobber - my numbers indicate that players are peaking earlier post-lockout than they did pre-lockout. 27 was the correct number between the mid 80s and mid 00s, but it is now outdated. My hypothesis is that the up-tempo game is putting an emphasis on speed and reactions (which peak earlier in life) compared to strength and experience/strategy (which peak a bit later). It's time to use some of that stats knowledge and update your formula. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Mike - Quant hockey can say all they want. A player's best year is when he is 27. I believe that, as a graduate with a Stats Degree and Math Minor. My study on the matter is a dozen years old, granted, but I'll go to my grave believing that the peak is late 20s. So many factors skew the best year stats that I'm sure Quant is presenting, such as a 23-year-old getting 20 games in and then never playing in the NHL again. Well, his 'best year' would be when he's 23. Just like that, numbers are skewed. I'm sure they filtered out much of that crap, but impossible to get it all. Innocent - I assume by AP you mean Pietrangelo - just an adjustment. Alec - In a points only pool, Weber is overrated and the move has nothing to do with Suter. He's not "behind Green". Green is "ahead of him". Perspective. First Green injury though, and Weber is back on top. ddp - yes, I have all my rankings. |
ddp
said:
 |
question Hey Dobs, Is there anyway we can see your predictions on the site from the past 10 years? or however long you have been doing these rankings? I'd enjoy reading how your rankings have turned out. |
aleco83
said:
 |
... Wow Webber took a sh*t kicking. I know Suter is gone and his #s weren't great without him but to rank him behind Green seems a bit harsh. |
MikeV
said:
 |
... Adam Oates may improve things but offensive hockey players tend to peak early to mid 20's. Go look at QuantHockey and you'll see the amount of high scoring players drops off once they hit their late 20's. Ovechkin is now 27 years old. We've likely seen the best that we are going to see from him. Sure he may bounce back to 90 points, but I would say a young sniper like Stamkos (early 20's, in his prime) is more likely to top that than Ovie. But I truly hope that you and Ovie prove me wrong this year because that would mean we would actually have NHL games to watch... |
Dobber
said:
|
... You'll see Mike. Man, Fantasy Hockey owners are like weathervanes  We have no experience with Adam Oates, but one would think that things will open up under him. Ovechkin didn't suddenly "lose it" as he enters his mid-20s. He's still got it. |
MikeV
said:
|
... I little bit too optimistic for Washington for my tastes, specifically Ovie and Backstrom. We've basically gotten to the point where if Crosby can even stay healthy for half a season, then he can outscore Ovechkin playing a full season. |
Dobber
said:
|
... October - I was waiting for training camps to begin...then it just became too late in the month. So I missed my first month in eight years Formula - it's very long. Not gut feeling, though gut feelings can adjust some of the criteria which impacts the result. |
jff100
said:
 |
October update? Any update for October? P.S. to doctor06: This list is the same as thn.com's ranking because the thn article was provided by Dobber, who makes this list. So no worries. |
doctor06
said:
 |
This is a Duplicate List From The Hockey News Web Site I hope Im wrong, but this list is exactly the same as the player rankings on thn.com. |
Rylant
said:
 |
... Dobber, I have always loved these lists. Is there an exact formula that you use or is it mostly how you feel about any given player at the time? I see that Crosby and Stamkos have switched between 3 and 4, and I wonder what has happened in the last month that makes you feel Sidney has passed Stamkos? |
Dobber
said:
|
number54 Thanks for this. Food for thought. I'll look at doing that very thing over the next month. It is very hard to compare a prospect to a 45-point guy...or 55-point guy vs. a lesser prospect. How do you compare? Different value for different needs, too. Lots of factors at play, and the rankings do depend on age using 25 as the base year. But perhaps more can be done. |
number54
said:
 |
Position-Dependent Parameters I was thinking about something Mabus said, concerning how you weigh upside against proven production. I think Mabus is right, to some extent, in saying that nobody would trade a top prospect for a 40 point player. So it made me think on how one could fix the algorithm you use to account for this, and I came up with a few ideas. First, I recently came up with an algorithm to compensate our league's GMs for KHL defectors. Essentially, it weights the player's age and production something along the lines of [ age + N - r ] / age, where N is the number of players expected to be drafted in the league and r is the league ranking (i.e. 20th in the league) of the player. Anyway, I was thinking you might try something similar for ranking players here, so that their potentials get greater weights as their age decreases. You could even use this to make your list more interactive and more personalized: if you leave the N parameter free, and have the end-user enter the number of players drafted in their league, then the rankings displayed would intrinsically account for the 'baseline' production required before a high end prospect becomes as valuable as a lesser proven talent. It's really doubtful this would have a large effect on most of the top-end talent. |
claudius
said:
 |
... Where is Tim Connolly? I know he had a poor season, but he should at least be in the 300, from my point of view. How about Yakupov? |
Le Jule
said:
 |
Jordan Staal Jordan staal will play with his brother as 1st line center and probably skinner. He wil play on PP and mre ice time too. I see him put more points then Matt Moulson, Heatley or kesler ... Dont you ? Nice top 300 reading ! |
Dre
said:
 |
Louis Leblanc In the Dobber's 2012 Prospect report, why Louis Leblanc have the big down grade for the LTU and 3YP???? He pass the 78/59 to 70/35. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Chara - in points-only leagues, no way you should prefer him over Shattenkirk, Fowler or Carlson, or even Elliott. You're looking at it through your-own-league-rules goggles. O'Reilly and Lewis vs. Meyers. This was just an oversight. But also don't overrate Meyers. His future is not in producing points. Perron vs. Gerbe or Stewart - I'd rather Gerbe or Stewart. No interest in Perron in any of my leagues. I don't see the upside, and I do see a (injury) downside |
Dunnder
said:
 |
chara chara is on the list at 222, or 29th in defencemen, just below Dan Boyle at 28th for dmen. I thought they were both kind of low... Chara and Boyle should both be ahead of guys like Wideman, Fowler, Carlson, Phaneuf, Carle, Shattenkirk, and Elliott IMO. |
frozenpools
said:
|
Perron vs Gerbe or Stewart As an owner of Gerbe or Stewart, Id do cartwheels down the street if I could get Perron for either of them. |
Ryan
said:
 |
... Getzlaf is where I am completely confused. January he had 9 points in 12 games, 0.75ppg, and he was ranked 11th. February he had 9 points in 15 games, 0.6ppg, and he remained at 11th. March he had 11 points in 14 games, 0.79ppg and he falls to 25th. I just dont understand how he can show signs that he is regaining his form, and fall that dramatically. |
hazetech
said:
 |
... I have two small questions for you Jeff, I know you see almost all Canuks game. What about the Sedin/Sedin/Burrows. My impression is that they won't be togeter for a long time. Do you have the same impression. Then, for Getzlaf, what is your call for the next season. Do you think he will keep this mediocrity ? This guy is a quite good multi-cat player (PIM). But it seem that his points are constantly going down. Is it just a bad year ? By the way, thanks for your good job ! |
Seth
said:
 |
New ratings Hey Dobber, I'd be interested to know what changes you've made in relation to your ratings of prospects. You might have already posted an explanation somewhere if so sorry I missed it, but I'd like to know how their ratings have been tweaked. |
Dobber
said:
 |
Mike Thanks Mike, yes it's best to use just as a guide for points. I've stripped away all the possible categories and left it as just the basic points monitor. As for "future" and "prospects", you'll be happy to know that I've tweaked the formula to treat the unproven prospects differently |
mike hess
said:
 |
rankings for points I love all the comments. When I look at the rankings based on actual performance in a league that is more than goals, assists, +-, PPP, SOG the rankings are very different especially because this ranking approach here seems to relegate the defense to second class citizens. Actually in my league that also counts hits, blocks, shg and PIMs the D men tend to get higher rankings. I think the ranking approach here includes too much of the future and that is not now in fantasy hockey. I use it as a guide not as the rule. Fantasy points matter in a league and the totality of that is not in this ranking. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Perron - in settings where points carry over in trades, his value takes a hit because he wouldn't help a single contending team. When it resets in May, his value will rise. Brian - I'm in two of them, and know of several more. Must be an Ontario thing. There are 100s of different leagues out there (see "Free Features/Starting a Keeper" on the top menu to get an idea). But the beauty thing about using this one as a base is that it ranks the players on the base statistic. Points. So all leagues can at least take a look and get a feel for a player's value both now and in the future in terms of offense. |
cberg
said:
 |
JT! Way to go JT at #8! At this date next year, he will have passed Backstrom, the Sedins and Giroux IMO. Benn also on the rise. Way to go. Not sure I get Eberle dropping 6 positions but then again looking at players ahead of him in these rankings and it may be hard to argue for a higher spot for him at this time. Well done. |
Brian
said:
 |
League parameters Does anybody actually use these settings - Points-only with no minimum requirement for defensemen? I've never seen one of them so I'm curious, because it must be widespread enough in order to use it for the top 300 rankings. What site do people use for this setup? |
Santo (aka Ross10019)
said:
|
Perron Love the list Dobber, but Perron at 207? Just don't understand that. I understood that the jury was out when he first came back and you had him at 230ish, but by now he should be top 100 or very close to it. |
Dobber
said:
|
BTM BTM, and the person who voted "up" on his comment - how do you feel now? Believe it or not, I actually know a thing or two about ranking players  Mabus - it's a tough balance, but I'm catering to full keepers, deeper leagues. |
Isle B.
said:
 |
... @BTM If Tavares is 'maybe a top 30 player' as opposed to #8, then which additional 20+ players should be ranked ahead of him? |
Mabus
said:
|
... Dobber - what is your assumption about replacement level players. For example, about 160 to 180 players get more than 40 points each year. 90 to 110 get more than 50. If your league drafts less than 180 players, anyone that is getting more than 40 points is useless regardless of whether he is in the league this year or not. We end up in a situation where someone like me looks at the list and says - Is Dobber really saying I should trade Granlund for Stempniak straight up? It might make sense to make that trade if you need a few of Stempniak's points this year, but for most leagues, I assume that it would be crazy to move a 40 point guy with a 45 point upside for a guy of Granlund's pedigree. I have a similar nitpick for the prospects list as well. I love the lists, but my leagues are relatively shallow. This means that someone that can get you 55 points or more this year has the most value. Someone that will get more than 55 soon has good value. Someone that is currently getting less than 55 that will never pass it has absolutely no value. Clarifying this in your heading will help those of us find less things to nitpick. Do you do any retrospective looks at past lists to see if there are some players you are consistently high on or down on? For example, for a guy that has broken 70 points once, Rick Nash seems to always be about 10 or 20 places higher than I'd ever put him. It would be interesting to see how many points people have had over the past 3 years and compare that to your list three years ago. Sounds like an interesting spreadsheet exercise for me for one weekend. |
BTM
said:
 |
... Tavares at #8 is simply mind boggling. He might be a top 30 player, but not top 10. Sorry. |
Bryan Lachance
said:
 |
Dobber follower Where do I find the 2011/12 hockey draft downloads that I buy every year? Bryan |
Jeff
said:
|
To be continued elsewhere, if at all... I'm putting my reply in the player discussion forum; this is the wrong place to put this much effort into one minora disagreement. It's here: http://www.dobberhockey.com/in...post790800 I will say this, though: calling me "ill-informed" or implying that I'm being a troll won't make your arguments sound any better. |
Isle B.
said:
|
... This site is more or less troll-free, so I'll bite... Why do you insist on arguing this point when it is clear that all you know about the Islanders comes from stat sheets and/or ill-informed line projections? The Isles played well in the second half of the season, and the biggest reason why was the emergence of the Okposo-Nielsen-Grabner line. Okposo didn't score much after missing most of training camp and the first half of the season with a major shoulder injury. However, he was able to do the little things that don't show up on the scoresheet, like digging the puck out of the corners, etc., that enabled his linemates' success. |
Jeff
said:
|
Sorry bro, but no... Grabner and Neilsen were successful together, granted. However, Okposo's 20 in 38 prorates to only 43 points over a full season playing the same proportion of time on that line. His 5 goals over that span are also the worst goals/G of his career. According to your logic, Okposo was a great fit on this line, while posting the WORST totals of his career (his prior totals were 39/65, 52/80) during that stint. Think for a moment about that. In his career, Okposo has never been as starved for points as he was with Grabner and Neilsen. If you think they're going to put Okposo back on that line, keep dreaming. |
Isle B.
said:
|
... Jeff, You clearly don't know what you are talking about when it comes to the Isles. Grabner-Nielsen-Okposo will absolutely be playing together as the 2nd line. They were an outstanding combo last year and there is zero reason to break them apart. Tavares and Moulson will be playing together on the 1st line and Comeau will be playing with Bailey on the 3rd line. The only questions on the Isles' top 3 lines are where exactly Niederreiter, Parenteau and Rolston will be slotted. |
Jeff
said:
|
HAH! @ Isle B: Grabner was lucky to be playing on the 2nd line with Okposo last year 'cause they're both natural RW's. This year Okposo will likely play 1st line with Tavares. Grabner, on the other hand, will probably be playing with Nielsen and Comeau on line 2. As you said, Grabner's points came with Okposo last year & it's unlikely the pair will be reunited in 201-12. I don't think Grabner's underrated on this list at all; rather, I think Gagner and Brassard are a bit overrated. Both of those guys have basically lost any hope of taking their natural positions back within the top 6 of their current teams. Without a trade, I think both of them are going to be huge busts. I can tell you that they're both more coveted assets than Grabner in my keeper league, though. |
Isle B.
said:
|
... Dobber, Not to beat a dead horse with Grabner, but you seem to be fairly optimistic about the Isles in general for this season (more so than I am), yet you've seemingly singled out Grabner as the one player who will take a step back on this team. Grabner's numbers over the last 39 games of the 2010-11 were: 25g-15a-40p and a +15 (which, obviously, pro-rates out to a stellar 50-goal season). He also produced consistently during this last half of the season which coincided, nearly to the game, with Okposo's return and the formation of the Nielsen-Grabner-Okposo line. This brings me to the last dig at Grabner in the guide where you write that Nielsen will improve on his +/- and Grabner's +/- will recede, yet the fact of the matter is that they were linemates who played most of their shifts together at even strength and on the PK (during the 2nd half of last season when their pluses were accrued) and will almost certainly continue to do so this season. I just don't see why he's so low on this list, well behind the likes of Gagner, Brassard, Voracek, and, even, Okposo, none of whom, after several NHL seasons, have ever come close to producing at a clip that Grabner did for such a significant stretch last year. (In fact, if Grabner and Okposo switched places on this list, both would be more accurate assessments IMHO.) BTW, your predictions for Grabner are in line with the others I have seen so far, so maybe it's just me. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Jeff/Derrek: +/- was messed up in August, sorry Fred - Subban should be over Bozak. I didn't/missed/forgot to adjust Bozo Dave - I wouldn't trade Ennis for Couture in a BILLION years if I owned him. You're on your own with this one - either you listen to my advice, or you don't. If you don't on this, I feel strongly that within three years you will see what a monumental mistake that was. |
Jeff
said:
|
Small suggestion Maybe I'm nitpicking, but you might consider changing the way that you display monthly changes in player rankings. Personally, I find it strange that when a player moves up the list, his "change" value is negative. Maybe just flip the sign? |
Fred Poulin
said:
 |
Subban? Tyler Bozak in front of PK Subban?? Tell me the name of your pusher because he's good!  |
Isle B.
said:
|
... Dobber, Yes it was a short time ago that Bailey was considered a cornerstone and Grabner was a waiver wire flier, but fortunes have changed dramatically since then. Grabner was deservedly nominated for the Calder and signed a 5-year extension. He has now, along with JT, become the face of the franchise. Meanwhile, the Islanders drafted Strome and traded for Rolston who may very well be the long- and short-term replacements for Bailey who, incidentally, is still an RFA. |
Dean Youngblood
said:
 |
Miettinen? I could be wrong but hasn't Miettinen signed on to play in the KHL? If so, why has his value/ranking improved? |
Derrek
said:
|
+ and - and i dont mean the stat It's all messed up for this month. I think they are opposite? |
Dobber
said:
|
... Lecavalier - simple as this: if he plays with St. Louis, 85. If he doesn't, 65. The potential is why he is ranked so high. Ennis - just you wait Derrek, haha Isle - Grabner is not a Golden Boy. Bailey is. Islander fan or not, it doesn't matter which player is better - in this case, Golden Boy status has more impact. And Grabner fits all the criteria for a sophomore slump, per my fantasy guide. |
Ryan Lenethen
said:
 |
Vincent Lecavalier? I'm surprised to see Vincent Lecavalier, so high. As a owner of that player last year, I can't say I was thrilled. I know this is future looking, and he finished a bit stronger near the end, but still. Underwhelmed. Also I saw that Shattenkirk was rated above Subban, Boyle, and Weber and Chara! Is he that good? I am an owner, should I be looking to keep him? |
Isle B.
said:
|
... As someone who follows the Isles closely, I gotta chime in on these two things: Michael Grabner ought to be about 40 spots higher than #91. Josh Bailey ought to be about 100 spots lower than #157. |
Jeff
said:
|
Lovin' the Tweaks I love your respect for the high-end young talent on the list: Tavares, Skinner, Eberle, Stepan & Brassard. Especially considering the teams they play for, these kids are all but guaranteed the minutes to succeed as 2nd or 1st liners imminently. Side note: I know the top 6 isn't very stable in SJ, but their top 5 are locked up through 2011-12, so Couture/Setoguchi are going to duke it out for that last spot. We'll know for sure in training camp how McLellan's going to use them to start 2011-12, but I'd put my money on Couture winning the spot by November if he doesn't get it out of camp. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Jeff - you are right, but you are not considering this - a top six spot in SJ is not stable. See Setoguchi, Devon |
Ron Burgundy
said:
 |
Purcell Damn you Dobber - right again! And by damn you I mean thank you. This crow doesn't taste too bad. |
Pokerface
said:
 |
.... Dobber- I'm curious about your thoughts on Gerbe- what do you think his pts upside is? I see that you have him ranked currently in the same range as Evander Kane, Oshie, Ladd, etc.... |
ccsitdown
said:
 |
M Johansson WAS No Marcus Johansson in the top 300 yet, or have I missed him? Kid has really seemed to exhibit some future to me over the second chunk of the year. |
Jeff
said:
|
Skinner vs. Couture - Round 2 I'd have to say I disagree with you here Dobber. There's something to be said for a kid who can crack the top 6 with the SJS and get 1st PP minutes. McLellan has a lot of options for his top 6; the fact that he has that kind of confidence in Couture makes me think there's something to it. With Skinner, on the other hand, just had to beat some AHLers (Boychuk, Bowman, Dalpe) to get into CAR's top 6. Best player whose ice time Skinner's eating into: Jussi Jokinen... nothing special. I've said it a million times... kids who can steal ice time from big names aren't doing it by accident. |
Dobber
said:
|
... With Spezza, I had him ranked in March as if he would go out and get 28 points in 26 games. So he went out and did that. It's about time, but he justified my March ranking, that's all. I took a leap of faith and he came through. If he didn't, he would have dropped. So think of it as "Spezza avoided dropping further"! |
Martin
said:
 |
Spezza?? How come Spezza hasn't moved up? He's put up 28 pts. in 26 games since his return from injury, and doing it with guys like Greening and Condra on his wings..Producing a ppg with those guys should get him back into the top 30... Seems like an oversight. Dobbs, I thought you had a crush on for Spezza?! Where's the love? |
KJ
said:
 |
April Fool's Day! Ha ha...I woke up and choked on my bagel when I saw this list...but then I realized it was April Fool's Day. Good one, guys! Had it not been for that then I would have thought someone had hacked the Dobber site and put 4 Leafs players in the top 23 and 9 Leafs player in the top 90. But that would have been insane. Clearly, Dobber has security than that. So April Fool's Day it is.  |
iamlilc
said:
 |
Nice! Now is the time to trade Clarke MacArthur for anyone from Getzlaf to Cammalleri! |
Czechline
said:
 |
Another good April fools joke by the fine folks at Dobberhockey I cant believe the Huge Specimen didnt make the top 10 given his recent debute in Florida. I think a few of you picked up on it, but the moment any Toronto player breaks the top 20... You know it's a joke! |
Chris
said:
 |
Radulov #3 Nice to see Radulov make it to #3. Finally a "Big 3" everyone can agree on! Also, Mike Brown (TML) should be higher. With a duster like his, you gotta give him the respect he deserves! |
Marc
said:
 |
... I don't agree with ANY of these rankings except for rankings of Radulov and all the Toronto players haha |
Dobber
said:
|
... Jeff - valid points, but if a player is injured then he has little value to any team in the Top 5 in your league. So the trade market is cut by 40%. Staal and Kopitar - agree to disagree. They're awesome and coveted greatly in both my leagues. Kovalchuk - same as what I said in point one - trade market is cut by 40% in my leagues because he lacks the points to help anyone. Skinner is 100 times better to own than Couture, and I say this as a Couture owner. More upside, more durability, more consistency. Not close. |
Jeff
said:
|
Popping the Top 300 Cherry for Complaining I don't think I've ever griped about the ratings in the top 300 before, probably because there usually isn't anything to complain about (tip of the hat @ Dobber). Having said that, this month's top 300 has a pretty poorly ordered top 50 IMHO. So, I suppose there's a first time for everything... I thought I'd list the obvious ones that I take issue with: 1) Staal doesn't even belong in the discussion for the top 10. Neither does Kopitar. 2) Kovalchuk should be easily 10 points ahead of Mike Richards. Flatly, he should be more valuable than Heatley. 3) How does Getzlaf have the 4th best month in the NHL (and best p/g over that stretch) and not move? 4) Rating Parise outside the top 30 is nonsense. Fine, he's out for the year, but so are Derek Roy and Sam Gagner and they GAINED value??? Also, even with the value Roy gained, he's DRASTICALLY underrated and is a perennial threat to finish in the top 30. 5) Skinner vs. Couture: separated by 3 NHL points, but somehow Skinner has 19 rating points on Couture |
Mike
said:
 |
Hudler He was awful in 2010. January was better, but not great. Since February 7 he has been what was predicted of him throughout the summer. Due to injuries I more or less had to keep Hudler (and no one would have taken him anyway), and am now reaping the rewards. Finally. With Datsyuk, Sharp, Hudler, Kovalev, and Wheeler I now have a very competitive LW. Too bad to took 3 years to build it and I'll only really benefit from it this year as I lose Wheeler, Kovalev, and Datsyuk at the end of the year to free agancy. Well, like in the NHL Wheeler is RFA, but I don't reckon I will keep him. |
Marc
said:
|
Thanks Dobber After reading some of these posts, it sounds like some people take your word as gospel, and have a hard time disagreeing with you. This is an awesome list, and although mine would be slightly/significantly different in some cases, I don't have the time/energy/motivation to do something this thorough right now. Thanks so much for doing this The hard work is very much appreciated |
Pokerface
said:
|
..... How close do you have Reilly Smith to cracking the list? He could replace Austin Smith down at the bottom. Where do you see Clitsome by the end of the season? (Small sample size, but like Calvert hasn't slowed down) |
Dobber
said:
|
... Oshie - don't overrate, as he is not only injury prone, but his upside is not as high as most poolies think. Purcell - I think/thought you had a point so I studied him further relative to other players. He's a Top 90 scorer and he's only 25 on a top playoff team. I'm not sure he should be moved down at all. He is an example of underrated in fantasy leagues. Desharnais - oops. Thank you Chara - he is slowing down. In order: 51, 50, 44, and on pace for 40. Can't argue with a four-year trend like that. |
Joe
said:
 |
Defensmen What I don't understand about the ranking system is how the D-men are ranked. How on earth is a guy like Matt Carle the equal of Zdeno Chara? How are Liles and Shattenkirk ahead? I know that age is a factor, but does Big Z look like he's slowing down? I've always thought that looking 3 years ahead maximum was the way to compete in hockey pools. Does it look like Big Z will slow down in three years? I doubt it. The same goes for a guy like Chris Pronger. Where is the love for old warhorse d-men that produce consistently year after year? (besides Lidstrom at 82.9) From my experience, these guys win you pools. |
mike hess
said:
|
How I use the rankings I use the rankings to check my teams. I circle all my team and look at their relative ranking comparied to who is available on the waiver/free agent list. I then check it against lineups to ensure if I am dropping or adding someone it is not impacted by playing time. I also look at who is hot or not as moves in my leagues tend to be not limited. I usually end up with one or two small changes that make my team stronger. This month I picked up Leino and dropped Smyth. My leagues tend to be 10-12 team leagues with standard Yahoo/ESPN or CBS point scoring. |
Derrick
said:
 |
... Does anyone use the list for pool purposes? Or is it just to check against your own subjective opinions on players? I glance at it but other than that I don't have a specific use for it. I suppose I could use it for my mid season draft / entry draft, but I don't usually. Overall I value the opinions on the site and frozen pool but the rankings I don't know what to do with... |
Ron Burgundy
said:
|
Edward I enjoy this list every month and usually agree or mildly disagree with the choices, but I really need to know why the love for Edward Purcell. 92? Can't see it, unless he is actually a different player than Teddy Purcell. I also surely don't see him deserving of a bump in the rankings after scoring in 3 of 12 January games (3 of 16 if you go back before xmas). Yeah 2 of those games were multi-pointers but if that's the driver then where is David Moss? He just seems to me to fit in better with the guys you have in the low 100s/high 200s on the list, so I'm wondering what you see differently. |
krisco
said:
 |
Oshie Is Oshies "low" 88th due to just coming back from injury? I wanted to see where he was at but was a little disappointed he was lower than i expected. Im assuming it is, just like anyone who's been injured has dropped. Look forward to your new rankings coming out sometime today! |
Dobber
said:
|
... Excellent posts this month! I love it when they put me in high spirits! Thanks to Cliff for bringing us all back to the ground with a dose of reality! And Dave thanks for getting my back . And the other guys, thanks for asking about missing players. Those are the best posts, as they get me to double check. Brunette - last month was 387, this month is 365. Let's face it, the market for players on pace for 40-45 points with an upside (at his age) of 60 points at best, for 36-year-olds is not a good one. Sutter - 356 last month, 355 this month. On pace for under 40 points, upside is high 50's. I'm just not feelin' it. |
Cliff de Jong
said:
 |
This is the weirdest post I've ever read Seriously, this is bizarre. Dobber et al, produces a player by player rating/ranking and then puts up with and entertains rants and ravings from poolies that disagree with his/their specific rankings. I am new to keeper hockey pools, but I'm a vet of football keeper pools. The thing that drew me to a hockey keeper pool was the level of intricacy that is available - and I hate baseball so unless you are a fan of the "association" that leaves the NHL. This website is pretty useful - AND very entertaining. I've not seen anything like it - particularly for free - in the NFL fantasy ranks. All the strings of complaints of how these guys have ranked players strikes me as odd, on a multitude of fronts. First, this is just statistical probability. It's not like they know the exact points that any one of these players is going to obtain. It does seem like they weight it according to actual performance and with a dash of gut instinct. Cool, good for them. There are always going to be disagreements when you rank players so specifically. I bet these guys love the debate! As do most of you I'm sure. I for one, am loving the fact that I came across this website. I was actually looking for a string or discussion on Kovalchuk as I'm in a keeper league with a salary cap and I can't trade this guy so I wanted to see if people had been dumping him and his .58 ppg average for one of a dozen $500-$900k guys with upside or not. Then I find this site! Wow, am I glad I did. I love the banter, I love the passion, but I am confused as to the seeming anger towards the rankings. As a seasoned NFL keeper poolie, this is the kind of site I would refer to but never solely base my decisions on in terms of player pickup or trade. Its very useful information, but not without flaw. Yo Dobber et al, I wonder if you have given thought to an NFL fantasy trick which is to lump players into star ratings? 5 stars for those that you figure are well above the rest of the league, 3 stars for slightly above, 0 for guys with no real potential. This sort of rating is what I have always found to be the most useful as you are really lumping players into a statistical probability category. Your ratings are slightly misleading. Are you really saying that Crosby, Ovechkin and Malkin are heads and shoulders above Stamkos, Sedin twins and Backstrom? Or is there room to say that these 6 players are 5 star players? The next bunch would be 4 star and then you could identify the next drop off and so on. Not that I would want to curtail this highly entertaining debate amongst those who disagree with number 102 vs 89. To be sure, I do find this useful and entertaining. Although I must say, Kovalchuk isn't even in my top 3 wingers on MY team. He's been riding the pine for 3 weeks now and I'm ready to drop him. Number 26? He's terrible and after half a season, his trend is established. |
David
said:
 |
Dobber your Top 300 list is great. Don't change a thing! All the complainers need to give their head a shake. If you follow fantasy hockey, Dobberhockey, and spend time on the forums you should be WELL aware that player values change extremely quickly in many people's eyes. This list changes all the time and seems more based on the current situation rather than long term keeper concept. (AND SO IT SHOULD!!!) Predicting LONG term keeper value is VERY difficult and a list focused on that would be largely wrong in most cases and pretty much useless. Dig out some old hockey pool magazines and take a look at who the next "big names" in hockey USED to be. Then pull your head out of your arse and show some respect. Byfuglien will WIN you your pool this year, Green will NOT. Hence the current rating. If Green explodes over the next month you will see that next time the list is updated. If a star player suffers a long term injury his value should take a big hit for now. It doesn't mean you should trade him for a lesser player. When he's ready to come back Dobber WILL be on it and you will see his value jump again. If you are too dumb to see that "artificial" value change then you shouldn't be making comments here. The Dobberhockey forums are really suffering (IMO) lately with all the bickering and arguments based on short term/long term values about certain players. If you've spent the past few seasons here you will have seen Green compared with the Big 3 last year and now this season there are several respected regulars valuing him lower than Tavares. If Stamkos goes thru a slump his value WILL sink like a stone in many people's eyes. Byfuglien has gone from almost nobody to stud over night. That is how fickle fantasy hockey GM's are. The "What have you done for me lately" attitude prevails EVERY single time. If you can't see that then you are either blind, ignorant, or just inexperienced. Stick around for a couple more seasons and you will see all sorts of crazy ups and downs with player values. That's how it works and complaining about a monthly list is pretty stupid. If you are one of those idiots complaining that your favorite player isn't ranked high enough it's time to STFU. You can't expect Dobber (or anyone) to write player values in stone when there is SO much change on a weekly/monthly/yearly basis. Not to mention the fact that almost EVERY pool has different scoring systems. THE TASK YOU ARE CRITICIZING HIM FOR IS ALMOST AN IMPOSSIBLE ONE!!! DON'T BE AN ASS!!! He gives his opinions and rankings and gets criticized to death yet his critics don't even take the time to read the reasoning and factors that go into them. Meanwhile, keep up the good work Dobber. Your rankings and the system you use is great and totally suited for all the pools that I know of in my area. I don't always agree with your views on certain players either. I've been burned by some of your opinions but have also benefitted greatly on others. It seems so obvious, but that's how it goes. |
bball
said:
 |
... Dobber, In response 1. The fact is that in a keeper league, there should not be merely 10 points seperating the two players. You want us to all buy into the Malkin is superior because of what he did 18 months ago argument but you fail to give the same consideration to many other situations. This was the most glaring issue. Where was Dustin Byf 18 months ago? He was a third line player on offense who occasionally switched back to D. Where was Green? He was arguably a top 5 draft pick in ANY league. Has Green had a rough year? Yes he has. But so has Malkin. I agree. Malkin is an elite talent. But you can't use one argument to defend him in your rankings and then trash another player citing the exact opposite. 2. Fair point and it is appreciated when things develop over time. I realize that no system is foolproof and I also understand that although you devote countless hours to this site, you cannot possibly watch every player and be able to comment on all of them. But to be fair, I never said that I would trade Hall for a top 10 talent. The point I was trying to make is that I feel that your list is so based on the last months stats that the shifts appear to be unrealistic. 3. My issue is not that Lecalvier is ranked where he is right now, my issue is again, you have players that you latch on to. Prior to the 2008/2009 season, Vinny was ranked in the top 5. It took three years for him to drop 40 slots in your rankings? Again sir, with all due respect, I know that you love this guy and even into this year, you were making comments along the lines that those of us that have given up on him will regret it. That, in my mind, is latching on. 4. I definitely agree that his value in a keeper league has taken a hit this year due to his injury. The point I was trying to make, and perhaps this is due to my way of thinking, but if I can acquire an elite LW for pennies on the dollar, well, I am all over it. But I am certainly not going to sell uber low on a guy like Parise just because he is injured Again sir, I mean no disrespect but there has to be some consistency in your rankings. I know that you cannot please everyone but your argument becomes so much more plausible when you treat all players equally and do not play favorites. |
Dobber
said:
|
ARGH This bugs me - IF TWO PLAYERS ARE WITHIN 10 OF EACH OTHER, UNDER "RATING", THEN I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT. TOO CLOSE TO CALL! It won't be the last time I say it, because newbies will always jump on, glance at the list, and judge. But hopefully it will stem the tide for the time being. I really want these comments to ask questions of my opinion, or point out HUGE discrepancies. I don't care if Byfuglien is rated 98 and Green is rated 97, when in your league it should be vice versa. Who cares? Point out something with 50 points difference, something that matters. Please and thank you. |
Dobber
said:
|
... bball Here goes 1. Byfuglien has 40 points, Green has 18, and you can't admit that their value in keeper leagues are equal? Shame on you. I'd expand further, but I swore that I wouldn't get into a discussion if two player's RATINGS are within 10 of each other. Their difference in rating is 0.3 LOL. Rest assured, in my TWO leagues Green would be traded for Byfuglien. 2. Hall - in both my leagues he would not be traded straight up for any player not in the Top 10. His value is still too low. Sorry man, it looks like your keeper league isn't the only one in this world. As for "why" he moved up so many - that's the result of my new factor. I said in the intro at the very top: "January is up, complete with the new factor that I discussed in the forum in the Dobber's Take section." If read that, then you wouldn't have asked that question. 3. Lecavalier - last month I traded him for Omark and seven very high draft picks over the next three years. Basically, only about 15 players in the NHL could have received such a return. So having him ranked 18th on November 1, while you considered it "latching on", I was actually bang on with my evaluation. Proving again that there are other leagues in this world, with other personalities and other rules. I "latched on", then traded him when I felt that "latching on" was no longer correct. Knee-jerk reactions will lose you more pools than it will win. 4. Your point about Parise is exactly right - he is useless to win this year, and in keeper leagues you not only have to look ahead, but look to the current year as well. Anyone going for the trophy this season in your league is uninterested in acquiring Parise. So would that not, in theory, hurt his value in a keeper league? |
bball
said:
|
... No disrespect Dobber but it is hard to take this list seriously anymore. You have shown time and time again that you will latch onto specific players and ride them keeping them way up on your rankings without anything more then a hunch (Lecalvier for the last two seasons). But at the same time, you have some significant movement due to recent play (Hall moves up 22 spots? UMMMM, Why? Because you had moved him so far down due to his poor play). You can't have it both ways sir. Stick to your guns and stop playing favorites. Then other players will move MASSIVELY due to an injury (Parise and Roy come to mind right now but there have been others). For a keeper league list, I agree that there should be movement but this kind of significant movement? The only reason I would trade Parise for Paul Stastny right now is because I need to win this season. But other then that, I would prefer to hold onto the proven young LW. I will leave you with this last bit. In what world would you trade Mike Green for Dustin Byfuglien? In what world are they even close than a one year league? |
Ron Burgundy
said:
|
Colborne Big jump for Big Joe II this month - into the top 200. I like his progression with Providence and have been high on the kid for a couple of years. Looks like you are too but if you have any info behind the jump beyond this I'd love to hear it. |
Ross The Boss Palmer
said:
 |
Quick Question Just wondering on Hall, Eberle, and Bobby Ryan. They are deservably ranked well. If all goes as planned, do you see these three skaters moving up to the top 25 or higher in the next year or two? I feel Logan Couture also has the skill set, teammates, and development around him to join the aforementioned in the top 25 in the rankings. Also, Kesler may make the leap next year into a top 10 spot. |
crazyman
said:
 |
take it easy Yeah guys take it easy, just use dobber's input for a bit of help. Don't rely on it, afterall, nevermind stamkos/malkin, guy still has Ovechkin #1 ahead of Crosby. THAT is redonkulous! |
gfunkb7
said:
 |
stamkos vs malkin Y'all who aren't happy with the top 300, have yourselves a math degree, perform well-balanced statistical analysis, construct your own website, wait 3 to 5 years of following on daily basis statistical data and create your own effing Top 300. This is HIS own perception of the NHL as of now (and future value). Take the ratings he has put, perform your own, compare results, apply a weighted-average of YOUR Top 300 and DOBBER's Top 300 ET VOILA ---> Stamkos is a top 4. For gawd's sake, who gives if Stamkos is not considered in the top four!!! Seriously. Doesn't change the fact he's gonna put up the numbers. This is redonkulous! |
barneyg
said:
 |
Malkin MT319 -- if you get too emotional we may end up losing your point, that post was way too long. Before that playoff run, Malkin posted 113 points with a healthy Crosby, in his 3rd NHL season. Hitting 120 points? Sounds reasonable. |
MT319
said:
 |
... “Give you better feedback than this” every single statement you made in that post was already touched on by someone below and none of what you said was back up by anything other than your subjective opinion...you’re kidding yourself if you think Malkin is putting up 140 points playing second fiddle to Crosby in Pittsburgh..only if he get’s moved elsewhere will he ever make good on his 120+ upside and reach his peak potential capacity on an individual level..playing with Crosby thwarts his individual development...until then he is a perennial 90-100 point option and most certainly is not at least by any considerable extent, if even at all, a better option than Stamkos which is the main point here anyway...you want to think he is personally for whatever reason that’s fine just like it’s fine if you want to think the sun revolves around the earth simply because you see it moving laterally across the sky each day..however in both cases these things do not reflect reality. You keep citing his “playoff points-per-game average from 18 months ago” before he won a cup like it’s the end all be all of statistics then just turn around and completely negate the fact that PIT was in the playoffs last year and he scored at below point-per-game pace (11 points in 13 games) which is even below the 90-95 point pace he scored at in the regular season last year and about the same 90-95 point pace he will finish at this season and PIT was in the playoffs the year prior to that as well where he scored 22 in 20 at again 90-95 point pace...you speak of Stamkos like his 51 goals 95 points last year is nothing to take seriously only to watch him rip out of the gates at 130 point pace will he slow down..I believe so..but he will likely finish in that 100-110 block that Malkin even with his assist-heavy production in comparison to Stamkos’s goal-heavy production will be extremely hard pressed to reach given his current 68 point pace...like I said you like Malkin personally over Stamkos that’s one thing but to sit there and say to the people who follow your site mockingly “give you better feedback than this” and essentially “I’m right because I said I’m right” and “because he’s scored at 1.5 point per game pace in the playoffs of 2009” again in complete negligence to the fact that he scored at just over point per game pace (22 in 20) in the 2008 playoffs, below point-per-game in last years 2010 playoffs (11 in 13), scored at that same 90-95 point pace in the regular season last year, and will be extremely hard pressed to even hit an assist-heavy 95 points again this season is laughable and not at all in touch with reality in terms of being indicative that he is a superior option to Stamkos...long story short Malkin on Pittsburgh and Stamkos on TB are both perennial 90-110 point options for the foreseeable future with Stamkos having the more impressive production of the two as his is goal heavy...and again until Malkin finds himself in a place where he doesn’t have to play second fiddle to a superior option in Crosby (which you also clearly acknowledge since you have him ranked below Crosby on that chart) he will not reach his 120+ upside..nevermind hit 140 points |
D M
said:
 |
... Doughty drops 45 spots? After putting up 59 points last year? Why? Should I really swap him for Big Buff in a heartbeat, as the list seems to suggest? |
Dobber
said:
|
... Everyone who doubts Malkin - you're wrong. We'll see in a few years, let's readdress in 2015. Until then, trust in me (and win). Or don't (and takes your chances). Malkin WILL get 120+ points and I think he'll get 140. Sigh...how quickly we forget his 1.50 points per game pace in the PLAYOFFS just 18 months ago...not even a memory... Malkin is the most talented player in the NHL, when he wants to be. And I think, some day soon, he will be fully healthy and fully hungry. Then you will see. This is NOT just about numbers. This is about my opinion on a player's upside. Malkin's is WAY higher than Stamkos. Not even a discussion. Either believe me, or don't. I've been wrong before. But it will be 2015 before I ease off on this stance. All I ask is for five years to prove my point. Five years. Burp - Parise is out for the season, so in keeper leagues he holds no value to those who are looking to win this year. That eliminates half your trade partners right there. So for this year, as a contender, give me Spezza C'mon gentlemen and ladies! Give me better feedback than this. The Stamkos vs. Malkin thing grows tiring. You'll NEVER change my mind. Just like you were never able to change my mind about Carey Price being in the Top 10 of my goalies last year. When will you learn? |
mike hess
said:
|
Malkin versus Stamkos Dobber...this should be about numbers and not personal preferences....A stastical model only works if you keep the personal bias out of the system. If the model has a a measure of acceration based on the stats then it should move Stamkos above Malkin ver very soon.... |
jason
said:
 |
Stamkos Vs Malkin (continued) This debate is getting more and more clear each day. Malkin and Stamkos both have played 15 games. Malkin has 12 points (4G, 8A = 12Pts). Stamkos has 14 Goals. Stamkos has 12 Assists. (14G, 12A = 26Pts). You don't even have to count Stamkos' assists and he is outperforming Malkin! Stamkos is Brett Hull with better vision and a motor that never stops. He is probably the best player in the NHL in terms of how he plays when he does not have possession of the puck. To excel at fantasy hockey, you have to recognize changes in the NHL landscape a month before they occur, not a month after they occur. |
jason
said:
|
Stamkos Vs Malkin Dobber: I have to agree with Michael and bball. Regardless of which player you like better, it makes no sense that your rating system creates a 213 gap between Stamkos and Malkin. Many execs around the NHL believe Stamkos will score 50-60 goals on a yearly basis, if healthy. Even in points-only leagues, its reasonable to argue that Stamkos will still outpace Malkin. I'm not saying Stamkos is better, but clearly the two of them are neck-and-neck. Like it or not, the big three is now the big four. |
Burp
said:
|
why? Why O why you have that Dork Spezza way ahead of Parise is beyond me. Spezza the bandaid boy has done nothing. |
Michael
said:
|
... You overvalue Malkin...he will never reach his peak potential capacity on an individual level playing under Crosby and 16 months ago he did not have a cup...i'm sure you've noticed the same story with Staal...year he was battling for Cup 100pts plus big playoff numbers on top of it, now with that in tow numbers around 75-85 range are what he's gonna put up..same story with Malkin and it's gonna be the same story with Patrick Kane this season...it's not a coincidence to see Malkin's numbers dip to the 90-100 range and start off 2010 again on 60 point pace (which he'll obviously improve on...but not to these mythical 110-120 point seasons people over-project for him). Best Malkin has ever been was when he had the sole role as teams top offensive threat with Crosby out (with I believe a foot injury a few years back)...he needs to find himself in a situation where he is the sole leader of his teams offense before he'll ever make good on his 110-120 pt upside and that's not gonna happen until he finds his way out of Pittsburgh...until then he's a 90-100 point player no different than Steve Stamkos |
Dobber
said:
|
... bball See my column for my thoughts on this: http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/36017-Fantasy-Pool-Look-Does-Stamkos-make-it-the-Big-Four.html |
bball
said:
|
... Dobber, Just curious as to the ranking of the big three. I do not argue that they have the highest ceiling but to have the ranking of Malkin be over twice the ranking of the next player, Stamkos in this case, well, does it seem a little excessive? Is this huge differential due to the difference in the ceiling that Malkin has in relation to Stamkos? Age does not seem to be the issue as Stamkos is younger than Malkin. I realize that this is only the third year that Stamkos has been a pro but he showed last season that he can straight score and this year he has picked up right where he left off. Meanwhile Malkin has come off a dismal injury plagued season and has really not gotten off to any kind and now he has another undisclosed injury. I agree that I still would not trade Malkin straight up for Stamkos but in the same breathe, there is no way in the world that I would trade two Stamkos for one Malkin. Even in a keeper league. So the question then is aside from the ceiling that Malikn has, what about Malkin is so superior that your rankings show he is twice as valuable than Stamkos. Or am I misinterpretting the "rating" column? Thank you sir |
Mabus
said:
|
... Yea Dobber - the most fun thing about fantasy hockey is pointing out the times we are right and hoping nobody noticed the times when we were wrong. Oilers - Yes, Kane is number 164. Mabus |
Jon Dey
said:
 |
WOW.... really going off the board with some of these, it seems. I don't know the formula, but I am guess gut feeling is trumping formula in a lot of instances. Some are affect by injuries I understand, but damn. Again, I think I use these as a decent basis, and not as scripture. I advise all of you to do the same. Dobber will get you started by you have to disagree a lot of the time. He may claim to be right 52% of the time, but 48% is a big number too. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Mabus - if we were in the same pool, you would make a good trade partner. We disagree on this. I'm not a big Lecavalier fan, but I have a healthy respect for what he did three years ago and I acknowledge all his recent injuries. Are they behind him for next season? I believe so. Did he finally find a linemate? I believe so. The rankings are just my belief on players to help my readers get a leg up. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I'm gambling that I am right and it will win me the pool if I am. |
Mabus
said:
|
... I know you like stats but were smart not to become a stock analyst. Your attitude on some guys like Lecavalier is the classic - I'm losing money, but I'd rather go down with the ship than admit defeat. I can think of a few instances where you were the last guy on the ship (I think I was commenting the same way about Kariya last year at this time). In a points only keeper, choosing Lecavalier over Stamkos seems crazy to me. Very crazy. It's in the same ballpark as Tavares over Kane - kind of crazy. You said I was crazy last year when I said Stamkos would get more points than Tavares - and it wasn't even close. This year I'm sure I'll catch the same flack for saying Stamkos will get 15+ more points than Vinny, but I'll still stick by it anyway. Mabus |
Dobber
said:
|
... Fantasy Guide - this year These Rankings - keeper INCLUDING PLAYOFFS. Big changes every August, as I said in the intro. August is the month where I audit each and every variable on the chart. The April-July rankings are the least reliable, and the August rankings are the reliable. (I should copy and paste this speech next August - the newcomers always make the same comments LOL) |
DeadSkinMask
said:
 |
... Why did Jamie Benn drop 38 spots?? Look at all the bums that rank ahead of him? Anyone? I don't get it.... |
torrock
said:
 |
grrrr Our protected lists are due by August 1st ... I protected Mueller (ranked 56th) over Eberle (ranked 126th) A day later I saw the August update: Eberle jumped 87 spots to 38th overall ... Mueller dropped 13 spots to 69th OUCH!!! What a difference a month makes |
Derrek
said:
|
Hossa vs Lecav. Well I'm hoping that you're wrong and Hossa does well... but I recently traded Boyes and Lecavelier to get Hossa and Pavelski. If your predictions are right i lose out in points on this trade... How can Hossa be ranked higher than Lecav here if you think theres a 20 point difference this year?!!? Oh and Lecav is a year younger. Or these rankings mean nothing? and i should have just waited for the guide? some insight on the difference would be appreciated. |
PuckOff
said:
 |
Frolik vs. B. Ryan Hey Dobber, just wondering- You have Frolik and Bobby Ryan dangerously close. I have a post on this in the forums... How would you view them as trade value long term? It is a tough call, as Ryan is proven but I see great stuff out of Frolik. Very similar play styles as well. Could you elaborate on your views for these two? |
Dean Read
said:
 |
Erik Christensen Did he sign in Europe or something? Does the MZA signing really push him that far down there depth charts? I quite enjoyed the points he put up for me down the stretch at next to no cost and am considering keeping him if he signs for dirt cheap again next year. (20 team, 12-15 forwards per team, salary cap unlimited keeper league) |
Claudio
said:
 |
Voracek I can't believe he is so high. Should I go after him in my 2 pools even if im in contention to win again this year?? |
Martin
said:
|
Joe Who?? and Jamie Benn Shouldn't Joe Thornton and Joe Pavelski get switched on this board for the playoffs?? haha How is Tyler Bozak and Tyler Ennis ahead of Jamie Benn?? He scored 20+ goals in his rookie year.. Ennis only played 3 regular season games and Bozak didn't even get in for half a season. Are the roles these two going to play going to equal that many more pts. next year than what Benn is going to do in Dallas?? I thought his progress this year was very similar to Neal in his rookie year and look forward to a similar 2nd season (hopefully without the 2nd half drop out). |
mike hess
said:
|
keeper league thoughts loved the rankings, especially the move of new talent into the middle...My issue is with the logic that suggests I would keep Ollie Jokinen 62 when I can have stewart at 63, Raymond at 79, Jussi at 86, Clowe at 105. I had Ollie early and dropped him early due to poor point output. I would not keep him again until he returned to a more consistent point per game player. You taught me a few years ago it is about points and not rankings. Every year I drop the inconsistent and injury prone old guard to take a gamble on new potentials. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Jake - that shocked me as well. Funny enough, that was the first thing that jumped out at me. But let's call a spade a spade - Vanek has now gone three years in a row without getting to 65 points. Meanwhile, Connolly's injury rating I bumped up from a 5.0 (the worst) to a 4.5 - congrats to him for getting in so many games (ironically he's hurt now lol). That did the trick. Rossi - Detroit's massive run of late boosted their playoff value of all players, adding about three ratings points to each of them. Nyqvist was going up regardless though. Renegade - Gionta's value will reset after the playoffs and we again look ahead to next year. The injury hurt. |
Jake
said:
 |
Never Thought I'd see the day where Vanek is below Connolly on the list. Not saying I disagree, but just shocking to see that from you Dobber. Shows how low Vanek's value is right now. |
Rossi
said:
 |
Detroit Benefits Huge Interesting that 5 of the 8 TOP INCREASERS for April come from the Detroit Red Wings. What gives? Is detroit cleaning house? Clearly Kronwall ccoming back from injury is one reason and Nyquist winning (speculate) the Hobey Baker helps. I love how Jussi is literally on top of Olli Jokinen. |
Renegade
said:
 |
Gionta Huge increase in the April rankings? Definitely does not deserve a at 133. Personally, I would have him around the high 70s/low 80s. |
Palmofluv
said:
|
Nevermind Stamkos The fact that Lecavallier is still in the top 10 is mind boggling. |
Mike Terrion
said:
 |
... I love the Dobber rankings, but I just don't understand how he can justify such a high ranking for Tavares. Junior numbers are pretty much irrelevant when trying to determine what a kid can do in the show. And it's premature to think he can emulate what Stamkos has done this year. Tavares has size and skating issues... Stammer didn't have those - even when he struggled last season. |
Ed
said:
 |
... The highest Hemsky was rated #18 for Jan '09 and Nov '08. FYI - I have data that goes back to Jan '08 |
Rossi
said:
|
Hemsky - Former Ranking I know that Ales Hemsky (last season) used to be ranked pretty high on the Top 300 Forwards list. I was wondering if anyone could remember or tell me how high Hemsky was at one point and what place you think he'd be in if he was healthy and playing this season. maybe there should be a column that lists the highest rank that player has ever reached - that would be interesting. Cheers |
Andrew - duducks
said:
 |
Wash the Semin off your face Where would you rank a 25 year old who is putting up his second season of 100 point pace hockey. Let's add that he's in the top 15 in scoring despite missing 9 games. I expect Semin to be top 10 in scoring next year, while only playing 72 games. He'll be in a UFA season, expecting to move to a new team. Meanwhile, (to pick on one of the dozen players I think Semin should be ranked higher than) Marleau has played 9 more games to get 1 less point, is 5 years older, and is a UFA now who will likely move to a weaker situation, is ranked 20 points (11 ranks) higher. Your rankings are my Fantasy Hockey bible Dobber, but I think it's time to make the top 15 rated R, and add a little Semin. |
Patrick
said:
 |
Non-Playoff list Dobber - love this list and would be interested to see a similar list that did not include playoffs. Is this something you could easily produce by just taking the playoff value out of the formula as I think there are a lot (if not the majority) of leagues out there that do not count playoffs. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Lecavalier has 26 points in his last 22 games and you still say stuff like that? Funny! Just run your team as if Lecavalier is ranked 50th. Simply ignore him on this list. I'll run my team to this list and I recommend others do as well. You come here for my opinion (I hope) and I'm giving it. He is a Top 7 keeper player for points. |
Oilers rock 99
said:
 |
Vinny Dobbs , Vinny is no longer a top 20 guy I would struggle in taking him in a keeper leauge before anyone in the top 20 time to slide him down to reality and forget what he did a couple YEARS ago |
Dobber
said:
|
... Fleischmann - 12 points in his last 13 games Vinny - After seeing what he did three years ago, I am hesitant to bring his upside down from 120 points. And that's what is keeping him up there. I don't see Zach Parise ever hitting that number. There's you difference. Doesn't help that Lemaire will keep Parise under 85 points this year (and in the end, that will only beat Vinny by 10 at the most). Spezza - finally took a big hit, though his injury had most of the impact. Horton - has more points this year than Frolik and in the end will have about 15 more. Upside is only part of it. "Here and now" is another factor. |
santa
said:
|
Frolik You have Frolik pegged for 90pts and Horton 85 yet you have Horton ahead of Frolik in the rankings. I'm confused. |
bball
said:
|
... Dobber, Just curious as to your assessment of Spezza and Vinny. At some point in time, they have to drop in your ratings. Parise has shown for the past two years that he is legit and Kane is still a pup and producing at an incredibly rate for his position and age. And yet, two guys that have produced pretty much nothing over the past two years (I have noticed as I have had them both years...YIKES!!!) are ahead of these two guys. I realize that Vinny is scoring at a pretty good clip this year but Spezza did nothing last year and even less this year and is not showing any signs of breaking back out of this funk. Help me to understand. Thanks Dobber |
mike hess
said:
|
Fleischmann I think you need to him drop farther and not move him up 22 spots. He has been falling off quickly since his hot run with the return or top 6 forwards. The only reason not to is if you expect him to continue to do well even with Ovie, first line and second line now back from injuries. Even when WA scores 7 he is not in the mix. Mike |
Rad64
said:
 |
Ups and Downs Wow, that's one of the biggest adjustments I've seen in a while. Very interesting. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Hey Jerry - just posted the update and now I see your Gaborik note. He budged, (completely unprompted by your comment - just had to be clear on that ) It's very hard to budge an inch when you are already in the Top 50. However, it is very easy to budge many inches the further down the list you are. A player 33rd can gain three ratings points and not move up a single spot, whereas a player ranked 350th can go up 100 spots on three ratings points. So check the ratings - and not the rankings. |
Jerry
said:
 |
... Interesting to see if Dobber gives any respect to Gaborik in the next update. He didn't budge Gaborik up an inch after his killer October. Yet I bet the permanently injured Eric Fehr skyrockets in the next update. |
Alain Brosseau
said:
 |
Tomas Holmstrom I dont see him on list, i think he deserves to be in top 300. What you think? |
Dobber
said:
|
... Thanks for the continued comments guys, and being polite about them to boot haha. Tavares vs. Stamkos - both will get equal points. Both on similar weak teams. Both are similar in age. The difference here is upside - Tavares 120+ points vs. Stammer at 105 or so. Kariya - You are correct. I tried to fidget with the variables in the formula for him, but honestly couldn't knock him down any further. I do believe he will get 70 or 75 points this year, despite his start. But regardless, I wouldn't knock a player ranked 30th down to 100th in a single month unless he got hurt. Filatov - Incorrect on this one. One of just 20 players, give or take, with 100-plus upside. Too priceless to give up. Clarkson - my oversight. I've added him to the template for next month. He would fall in around 156. Thanks for this. |
Mabus
said:
|
Kariya and Filatov Hey Dobber, It feels like you are being stubborn on Kariya and Filatov. Both seem to be greatly overvalued here. |
MLG
said:
 |
Clarkson why no love for David Clarkson? he's not even ranked. several think he's this years Backes and so far he's done well. |
DeadSkinMask
said:
|
... Tavares is up at #18, but you have Stamkos all the way down at #42? O_o I fail to understand this logic. Do you really think there is that big of gap between the two? For my money, I'll take Stamkos this year, and based on the way he looks so far, I'd feel safe taking him over Tavares 2 or 3 years. After that, they should have similar numbers for years to come. I've never questioned you in the comment section, but this one just punched me in the face when I saw it, and had to ask. Cheers, and Keep up the good work. |
Dobber
said:
|
... Keith - Kovy will never get 120 points. The Big 3 could and in my opinion should get to 150 when they hit their prime. There's your difference. You can't put a price on stacking so many points into one roster spot. Oiler's Rock - Ribeiro - yes. O'Sullivan - yes. Staal - in my pools with my rules (i.e. playoffs count) YES. Lupul - no. Frolov - no. But I don't go through all 700 players on my list and manually give my opinion one by one every month. I use a formula so my own bias is kept out of these rankings as much as possible. Also don't go by where they rank, but go by what their RATING is. So if the difference between Player A (40th) and Player B (70th) is 5.5 rating points, then they are virtually the same and as I've said before - not worth arguing over. |
Oilers rock 99
said:
|
would you really?? Dobber, Dobber,Dobber, would you really take..... Antoine Vermette(91), Stephen Weiss(79), Joffrey Lupul(6  , Jordan Staal(57), Alexander Frolov(52), Patrick O'Sullivan(41), Mike Ribeiro(29), Before Loui Eriksson(9?? would you really trade any of thoose guys straight up for Loui Eriksson?? |
Keith
said:
|
why so far??? why would kovalchuk be so far behind the big 3 in point rating system ?? kovy was only 12 pts back of crosby and other stats are very close as well so what gives is there really a 250 pt diffrence?? compare the little drop off in pts between kovy and Vincent Lecavalier yet there is only 12 ranling pts between them can you explain further?? |
madiba72
said:
 |
Patrick O'Sullivan Over-rated He would never be in my top 40. Hes 25 yrs old now, so if he was going to do something signicant he would have done it by now. Im dropping him from my keeper list in favour of some younger guys that that might actually do somehting significant (Voracek, Oshie, Okposo, Horton) |
RoughEmUp
said:
 |
Colin Wilson? Not listed. Oversight? I suppose JVR might become interested now that he is in the NHL, but Wilson thoroughly outplayed him for two seasons in Hockey East. Like the addition of Nyquist here- He looked really slick last year and could a POY favorite in Hockey East this coming year. |
tmlpowerplay
said:
 |
... Hey dobber why no love for Wheeler? Especially with Krejci & Kessel on the IR for a while. I thought he had a decent rookie campaign. I see in the guide you have him on the 4th line. |
lanky522
said:
 |
... Hey dobber... i know this is an indication of "typical value" in keeper leagues... but unless you're including pitiful novice pools in this calculation, do you really think that tavares warrants being a top 30 player before he's even played a game? I mean seriously... you have him ranked higher than toews, mike green, vanek, hossa, briere... the list goes on and on... I wouldn't trade any one of those guys straight up for tavares at this point in time. And on the flip side, if i owned tavares, and i was offered any of those guys for him straight up, i'd take the deal without thinking twice. When you consider that these rankings include playoffs too, it just seems kind of inappropriate to have his "value" that high at this point. Because anyone that isn't a fantasy novice would likely take the more established guys ranked behind him first any day of the week. |
Dobber
said:
|
... I explained in the first note - these aren't rises or drops. These are market corrections. Players are where they should be now. |
sircountalot
said:
 |
... Pronger at 217, Coburn at 229, but no love for Timonen? Wow...I'm surprised, talk about flying under the radar. |
chimp82x
said:
 |
... Buck0198: They look like the largest rank increase, largest rank decrease, and new additions. |
dcarrbaby
said:
 |
... Kariya at 32, no way. There is some big moves, not the typical safe adjustments to the rankings. |
buck0198
said:
 |
hmmm? What are the little segments after the top 300? They are like 10,7,6 players long...what are they supposed to represent? |
ross10019
said:
|
... Dobber, why the precipitous drop for Clowe? I am now wondering whether I should keep Plekanec over Clowe in my keeper league (points only). |
Slantman
said:
 |
Kovalchuk I was in the car the other day thinking about hockey as usual. I was trying to come up with who I'd take over Kovalchuk in a keeper league and could only come up with Malkin, Crosby and Ovechkin. Given what Kovalchuk did last year with almost no help I HAD to rank him fourth, especially now that he has Antropov, a nice complementary player. It's nice to see I'm not the only one who feels that strongly about Kovy. |
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| Next > |
|---|
