Joined: Jun. 2015
Posts: 332
Likes: 13
Just curious if anyone else has a system for rating ACGM teams? Mine is
* - Trades are literally impossible due to Cap ceiling, number of NHL Contracts limit, or gross inviability (Tanner Glass for Connor McDavid straight up)
** - Trades are severely one sided, create bad roster imbalance, or center around the needs of only one team. Acquired players are poor and/or do not fit the team well.
*** - Team is viable and decently constructed. Trades are close to fair value. Acquired players may be less than ideal but provide average value.
**** - Trades are fair value to both teams. Acquired players represent an improvement for the team. Long term questions remain about the roster.
***** - Trades are fair value and fulfill needs for both teams. Acquired players will give both teams a marked improvement / meet their respective goals. Contracts are balanced. Team will feature a high quality roster for the near and long term.
I try to use this guide with every team I rate. And I'm not afraid to change my rating if I'm convinced that my initial evaluation missed something.
How do others rate teams?