NHL 14 Player Ratings - Top 50 Players (#1-10 Revealed)

[RaychelSnr]

EA Sports has concluded their countdown of the Top 50 players in NHL 14 with the top ten players in this year's game. Are there any surprises? Should the top end of the ratings scale be higher?

Quote:

10. J. Quick (LAK) – OVR 91 09. R. Suter (MIN) – OVR 92 08. S. Weber (NSH) – OVR 92 07. J. Toews (CHI) – OVR 92 06. E. Malkin (PIT) – OVR 92 05. S. Stamkos (TBL) – OVR 92 04. Z. Chara (BOS) – OVR 94 03. A. Ovechkin (WSH) – OVR 94 02. P. Datsyuk (DET) – OVR 95 01. S. Crosby (PIT) – OVR 95

[Fiddy]

Per usual EA's ratings are terrible. Not enough separation from the 50th best player to the 1st.

I will be waiting for the revamped rosters before starting a season.

[bwiggy33]

The key is that EA needs to separate the traits and skills that each player is good or bad at. That's how you separate players and make the replay value of the game soar. They fail to do that. It's like they just bump up the players attributes to get them to a specific overall and are done with it. There's just nothing unique about any player in the game.

Also, I'm still not convinced every single attribute rating has an affect on the player. For instance one rating that I don't think works is poke check. I think that is only tied to the poke check slider. That's only one rating. I think there are definitely more that don't work properly.

[BurghFan]

Yeahh, Crosby and Malkin both in the top 10. Let's Go Pens!!!!

[Predsident Weber]

Quote: Originally Posted by Fiddy

Per usual EA's ratings are terrible. Not enough alteration from the 50th best player to the 1st. I will be waiting for the revamped rosters before starting a season.

i see a lot of complaints about this but ya know there are literally hundreds of NHL players and the difference I see here from 1 to 50 is 7 points. that seems like a pretty good jump to me. what's so great about the NHL is that it's a very competitive league with a lot of players who are all equally good in different ways. there are the exceptional few who stand head and shoulders above the rest but they are not so much better than everyone else that they dominate evry game.
maybe I'm in the minority but I actually think these ratings are pretty close with a few exceptions (Burns as good as Doughty?)

[bwiggy33]

Quote: Originally Posted by Predsident Weber

a lot of players who are all equally good in different ways.

Yes, but EA doesn't show each player off properly, which is why people complain about the ratings. I agree the talent gap isn't necessarily huge, but there are many players in the NHL who are great in one area and decent in the other areas. This needs to be reflected in the game. Here's an example. To me there's no way that Ovechkin should be a 94 OVR and Hossa an 89 OVR. Hossa is a complete player (scorer, PK'er, PP, etc), while Ovechkin is just a straight up goal scorer and not much more. All because Ovechkin is an 80-110 point guy, EA thinks they need to rate him a 94. Getting his rating to a 94 requires them to move his defensive attributes up so he hits that mark. To me that makes no sense at all. IMO Hossa's OVR should be better than Ovechkin's, but Ovechkin should have much better offensive ratings. Ovechkin is better on offense, but Hossa is better in every other area, while still being a very solid offensive player. You would think that if a player is great in numerous areas of his game, compared to someone who's only good at one area, then their OVR would be better.

Just because a player's OVR is low, should not make him useless. It should just tell the user to look at his ratings and see what makes the player useful. A guy like Ovechkin could be rated a 75 OVR (just an example) but due to his great offensive ratings he's on the top line. The same goes for many other players who are great at offense or defense, and struggle in the other area.

To me, EA and other people are just way too focused on OVR. I'd be willing to bet that 98% of users look at OVR alone in BAGM when making a trade. That should never be the case because OVR shouldn't show what the player truly offers. Think about how important guys like fighters, faceoff specialists, and PK specialists, are. They should have much lower OVR's, but since they have one really good area to their game they should be of value. A guy like Daroll Powe is rated an 80 OVR in NHL 13 when in reality he should be way lower because the only strong part to his game at the NHL level is the fact he does a great job on the PK. Instead EA feels they need to get him to an 80 in order to show that he has value. All of this is why we don't see the separation between players. Honestly I wish every sports game got rid of the OVR rating and forced the user to look inside the player and see what makes him good. Sadly the one sports game (MLB The Show) that didn't have the OVR rating decided to put the OVR rating in for 13.

[Gagnon39]

Toews finally with some love. As per usual EA is still in love with Pittsburgh... remind me EA, which team has won two Cups in the last four years?

[xCeeTee]

EA are messing up time after time, just like the NHL! Stamkos had to have been the best player of last season, if not him then St Louis, because they put up the most amount of points! Lundqvist and Quick had some good games, but a mainly mediocre season, mediocre stats and neither one of them even deserve to be rated an 85 this year, but yet EA still favour those two over Crawford and Rask. The two top performing goaltenders, who faced off in the Stanley Cup finals and even Anti Niemmi had an overperforming season last year. EA feen off of opinions and fandoms of teams and players, but not their raw stats or even their actual ability.