Renomitsu

F - Randoms @street

I'm just... I'm just so happy there are so many goons in the Top Prospects game. ?

D - Ryan Sullivan Jr @Joubo

Start of S67 is coming very soon. Here are some curated questions from reporters around the world: 1. Vancouver recently acquired Ismond Kingfisher, who becomes the clear and obvious starter for S67. How does this shake up the North American conference? 2. Do VHL rosters have enough space to accommodate members now? 3. The recent Top Prospects game ended 10-8 with multiple players over 20 PIMs. What happened? 4. What does the top prospects game say about the incoming class? 5. Welcome new draftee Lincoln Tate! What can you tell him about our team? 6. Would you rather have a very top-heavy team with a handful of stars (e.g. Helsinki) or a deep team with above-average players? 7. High fives, fist bumps, hand shakes, or something else? 8. In your opinion, who is the most interesting member on the site? 9. Early predictions - who wins MVP this year? If you picked a player on our team, who'd be your best choice from a different team? 10. Any thoughts about the recent discussion about TPE inflation?

D - Dan Montgomery @street

G - Kallis Kriketers @Joubo

@Beaviss now my off-season run down is even more wrong :<

Leave Merc lines as they are, thanks!

Sad day. I considered some line changes but our games were so close and our goalies/forwards different enough in TPE that I thought playing the odds based on prior games might be enough. But I was expecting to be out-shot and have Iseult perform well, as he had most of the RR. Instead I got exactly the opposite, huh. Gg Canada, well played!

Riga, Latvia - After a few trades in the off-season, some have been quik to write off Davos and their manager Shawn Glade, arguing that making the playoffs would be an accomplishment this season. Unfortunately, many Riga Reign players and management know this ploy all too well. "How far down are we in the post-season series?" Hackett asked rhetorically. "I don't think we can ever write Davos off as far as I'm concerned. They're still a professional team and have plenty of great players. The moment we start disrespecting any team is the moment we lose the season." At this point in time, it's hard to say exactly where Davos stands in the league. While likely to be better than the full-rebuilding-mode Seattle Bears, it's unclear what the team's goal is right now - and since information is so valuable in this league, maybe that's exactly what Glade wants. Oftentimes managers will commit, and commit hard to either rebuilding/stocking up on draft picks, or entering a win-now mode. "When it comes to why the moves were made, I have no idea. I thought they were in pretty good shape at the end of last season and then they offloaded a bunch," Hackett continued, "Could they have taken the European Conference from Helsinki or be better than us, guaranteed? Nothing's certain in this league. We'll give them a run for their money no matter what."

Very well-deserved. I've heard time and time again that Blade's a hard worker and has a great LR in Philly. Congrats Blade!

Great example of a hard-hitting defense at work. 14 shots blocked, and an equal # of shots on goal in spite of 23 more shots attempted from Western Europe. We definitely squeaked this one out.

Hat trick for @DilIsPickle ? ? ?

Not a pretty win by any means, but I'll take a gritty defensive victory over a good team any day of the week. Another good one from Peace & Wilinsky.

Great games from Peace and Wilinsky. I'm disappointed with the loss but we're in a good spot at the end of the RR.

Scroll all the way up to the first post in this thread and you'll see the draft order for this fantasy league. There are 6 owners, and they all get to pick in order. Since you've already picked Matt Thompson, FBR now has his turn to pick, as you can see in the first post. Tag FBR to let him know it's his turn.

Close! But the next player in your league is actually FBR. Take a look at the first post in this thread and you'll see the order. Try tagging him instead since you've already picked.

Yup! Pick your guy.

Yup! All you have to do is put the name in THIS THREAD and they get put on your fantasy team automatically! Make sure you tag the guy going second when you pick your player. For example, if YOU were going after me, I'd write a post like this: "F - Best Forward Ever @Strooper99"

Nope, you can draft anyone in the league you want. A good place to start might be here (click!). It's a catalog of all of the players. Click "TPE" to sort by the highest, best players.

F - Matt Thompson @street

I agree. I think I should have tamped down on how ambitious I was with this article; it pretty quickly got out of hand length-wise and I was looking for a few shortcuts. I probably would have ruffled fewer feathers with a pared-down power ranking more similar to most sports networks, and maybe not worrying as much about stars/risers. People have the right to an opinion in the same way I have the right to write media spots. Doesn't bother me - I quite like discussion and these are the first two (and hopefully not the last two) of this type I've ever written. Gives me some food for thought if I decide to write power rankings later, but I'll probably shelve this idea for a while.

? This changes all of the things.

I was actually just talking to Advantage about this. The criteria for star changed about halfway through writing (it was initially ~850-900 TPE) and there were a few players I skipped over when adjusting for the new threshold - so yes, you were supposed to be included but I can't risk the wrath of the ~35 members I tagged to make individual edits

With regard to the expansion selection bit, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. The way I've written it is objectively true, and I did not make a judgmental statement on your decision-making method. Were I to suggest that was the case, I'd probably have appended "...when other, more promising options were available." Nobody in this league would argue that the selection pools are favorable for expansion GMs, and I've even written a 2,500+ word article to that point (albeit for the VHLM). To be clear, I am on your side in this. Players go inactive. I've gotten flak from a LOT of people for saying Seattle's S66 draft grade wasn't great because Mars went inactive, regardless of whether it was actually true or not (it was). Did I, at any point, even suggest Bana was a bad GM for making a selection on a home-run, no-brainer, long-time active pick that unfortunately went inactive? No. Like this current article, I took currently-available data and analyzed it without regard to membership. Mars went inactive, and so the pick wasn't ideal. This is the same case. Players go inactive, and it's impossible to predict who will. You work off of the best logical explanation for your picks, and that's obvious from the transaction rationales you post; I really appreciate your perspective on them and will continue to read your media spots on those topics because they're compelling. I have said as much for some of your other transaction/draft articles. As an aside, even if I were to believe the expansion draft line to be a slight against your management abilities, I'd assume the much larger portion of Malmo's entry is a better-represented example of your acumen. As far as the 'risers' section, that is a mistake with my process and I'm sorry if it had a negative impact on your team. I did the Risers selections early on July 4th and unsafely + unwisely assumed that players would apply their TPE because it'd been a handful of days since they were moved up to the majors (I think they were moved up a few days before the draft). I only looked at player pages for the last entry and recorded the date; I instead prioritizing TPA from the team page for quik data entry (and easier interpretation of regression). That's why Marleau wasn't listed as a riser (had 200 TPA when I did my rating, but much better TPE), and while I am not certain, I would assume that was also the case for Johnson vs. Eagles. Can we blame this on biased, opinionated writing? On working too many hours a week? On trying to fit too much into (technically two) articles? Possibly, maybe, and yes. This isn't my cleanest work, as you've clearly pointed out and I have now given an explanation for. But I want to be clear that my intention was not malicious, and I apologize again if this caused a stir in your team.