Re Rates

Ratings are updated!

https://sthl.simhockey.ca/File/2024-PreSeason/STHL-index.html

We are using  Re Rates Created by @Chris - LA Kings  and @MagiKarp.   Great Work guys! Thanks! Much Appreciated.

Please double check the Unassigned page. 

https://sthl.simhockey.ca/File/2024-PreSeason/STHL-Unassigned.html

 Make sure you have no players or prospects that belong to you in that list.  Most should be good, but i may have missed a few as I had to go thru and double check the spelling on them all to match up with the rating file.  Please double check your rosters before FA starts. (which will be announced soon) Any errors, send me a PM. 

The following been rated with 6s since they didn't play enough to get rated and didn't leave for Europe and so they are LTIR (added an injury for 99 games so they don't affect cap):
Gabriel Landeskog
Jonathan Toews
Logan Couture
Nicklas Backstrom

Overview about the Ratings package: In previous years, ratings were based on nearly singular and simple stats. A backup goalie would have the same durability or endurance as a starter, but just be a lesser quality goalie in all other categories. With the approach we've taken, the idea/goal is more that the ratings are based on quality of player, while on the ice. So stats are all normalized to their Average Time on Ice (ATOI), not just games played (GP), etc. This helps with players who are hurt for large portions of the season or players who get call-ups for a portion of the season. 

This approach has led to a lot of  players seemingly being better or worse than they are at face value. Common questions we've seen from a number of you who have given feedback can be generalized as: "Why does player x have a 95 SK rating? he's a 2nd year player on the fourth line". With a lot of these, this can be answered, by looking at a number of other stats that play into the bigger picture of the player. You may see that these skaters also have limited EN or DU ratings. So while they may rate well in certain categories that would be seen as "valuable", they are handicapped by how much you'll be able to play them. Don't expect to be able to play a player with EN/DU in the 60s/70s top line minutes without getting exhausted or injured. 

These ratings have been discussed among the BoD, and feel this more accurately reflects in the sim how the players perform on the ice. NHL players are exceptional talents, but part of what separates your fourth liners from the first liners is how long they can keep that talent level high, differentiates them. 

There will be instances and outlier to this. "Well McDavid had 100 assists, and should be better at passing" is a common one we've heard, and frankly, that's not 100% right or wrong. Your argument is valid, if passing was measured only by assists. It's part of a larger formula. 

All ratings were done by taking league percentiles in relevant stats and applying those to the rating values. This should help not only have a more consistent application year over year, but also makes adjustments easier if the league starts to trend in a certain direction (ie we start seeing more high scoring games and 90+ point players become more frequent, we can adjust to that).

The final thing to consider is that a rating of 99, compared to 95, really isn't that great of a difference in the larger picture of how your players are used, for how long, and other sim factors.