C Connor McDavid - Erie Otters, OHL (2015 Draft) IV

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
please refer to my prior post where I explain myself instead of me putting vague BS like a quack.

In your previous post you say he should be a 9.5, which means you think he doesn't have a chance to be a generational player, which IMO is wrong.

The ratings, to me at least, mean this:
A= Guaranteed
B= Very likely
C=Good chance

So saying he is a 10C certainly isn't a stretch since he obviously has the tools, I just dont think he completely puts it together.
 
In your previous post you say he should be a 9.5, which means you think he doesn't have a chance to be a generational player, which IMO is wrong.

The ratings, to me at least, mean this:
A= Guaranteed
B= Very likely
C=Good chance

So saying he is a 10C certainly isn't a stretch since he obviously has the tools, I just dont think he completely puts it together.

Going by that I like the 10C. I dont like the "drop 2 ratings" part of C tho. Still believe at worst, McDavid is a 9. To be honest, being a HUMONGOUS BIG (Bryz) McDavid fan, I'd give him a 10B, but I feel compelled to temper my expectations.
 
Going by that I like the 10C. I dont like the "drop 2 ratings" part of C tho. Still believe at worst, McDavid is a 9. To be honest, being a HUMONGOUS BIG (Bryz) McDavid fan, I'd give him a 10B, but I feel compelled to temper my expectations.

That's fair, I think its likely at minimum he ends up a ppg C, but I like to cover myself and say there's a chance he only becomes your average 1st line C.
 
No way he should be a C. 9.5 or 10 B.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was trying to say that I don't think McDavid should drop below 9. YES McDavid absolutely should be a 10 but its only a good to fair chance he becomes 10 while there is almost a certainty he will be a perrenial all star. AKA B. I'm quite used to HF's projection system. However, it IS a matter of ones opinions in the end.

People need to relax. Crosby was a 10C, Ovechkin a 9A and Malkin a 9B. Given how their respective careers turned out, I'd say these rankings were for the most part fairly accurate. Unless you feel like these guys were severely underrated back then as prospects, I don't see how you could possibly say McDavid is a 10B. 10B means he's a guaranteed superstar, and should end up a generational player if all goes well. I think that's going overboard a bit.
 
People need to relax. Crosby was a 10C, Ovechkin a 9A and Malkin a 9B. Given how their respective careers turned out, I'd say these rankings were for the most part fairly accurate. Unless you feel like these guys were severely underrated back then as prospects, I don't see how you could possibly say McDavid is a 10B. 10B means he's a guaranteed superstar, and should end up a generational player if all goes well. I think that's going overboard a bit.

I don't feel like it is overboard. I think your forgetting that rating prospects is HIGHLY opinion based.
 
People need to relax. Crosby was a 10C, Ovechkin a 9A and Malkin a 9B. Given how their respective careers turned out, I'd say these rankings were for the most part fairly accurate. Unless you feel like these guys were severely underrated back then as prospects, I don't see how you could possibly say McDavid is a 10B. 10B means he's a guaranteed superstar, and should end up a generational player if all goes well. I think that's going overboard a bit.

If Crosby was a 10C, no way McDavid should be rated any kind of 10.
 
No way he should be a C. 9.5 or 10 B.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was trying to say that I don't think McDavid should drop below 9. YES McDavid absolutely should be a 10 but its only a good to fair chance he becomes 10 while there is almost a certainty he will be a perrenial all star. AKA B. I'm quite used to HF's projection system. However, it IS a matter of ones opinions in the end.

He could easily end up as an 8. An 8 is a Jason Spezza/Patrick Marleau type of player. Considering Jason Spezza peaked at about 90 points in 68 games, or well over 100 point pace, I don't think that's a stretch to say he could end up as "bad" as that.
 
In your previous post you say he should be a 9.5, which means you think he doesn't have a chance to be a generational player, which IMO is wrong.

The ratings, to me at least, mean this:
A= Guaranteed
B= Very likely
C=Good chance

So saying he is a 10C certainly isn't a stretch since he obviously has the tools, I just dont think he completely puts it together.

C is a bit lower than "good chance". The difference between "very likely" and "good chance" is almost negligible.
 
He could easily end up as an 8. An 8 is a Jason Spezza/Patrick Marleau type of player. Considering Jason Spezza peaked at about 90 points in 68 games, or well over 100 point pace, I don't think that's a stretch to say he could end up as "bad" as that.

This is silly. Easily he could end up at that rate? Based on what? The endless possibilities of the universe? It could happen but its much more likely he is a top center by the time he turns 19 than he has jason spezza's career.
 
This is silly. Easily he could end up at that rate? Based on what? The endless possibilities of the universe? It could happen but its much more likely he is a top center by the time he turns 19 than he has jason spezza's career.

I didn't say it ;):naughty:
 
This is silly. Easily he could end up at that rate? Based on what? The endless possibilities of the universe? It could happen but its much more likely he is a top center by the time he turns 19 than he has jason spezza's career.


Why? The only reason to why that would be more possibily then anything else is if the game is fixed. He plays in a junior league after all, and therefore it should be very uncertain on how good he is and will become.
 

Ad

Ad