CoachReilly

If ahma comes back, makes sense for both sides. If not, makes sense for one side IMO.

must have been a very tough decision which was dwelled upon for a large sum of hours by you. thank you to the BOG for again outdoing themselves. it's a tough job, but srsly get your shit together.

another kick in the dick to davos nbddddd

A chatroom itself may be bad - but chat itself is not bad..... the private chat was super helpful and definitely made things easier as a GM.

I am banning myself from responding after this post because i've aired it all out already, but the thought is that it was just a colossal fuck up by BOG in the end with Cologne's succession and two wrongs don't make a right.

Part Two -- GM Succession As we continue to look at GM succession, we see a number of changes from the S46 and S45 off-seasons, and this is where you really begin to see how vastly the methodology can range. These next three successions were unquestionably beneficial to the respective organizations and make the recent Davos change look incredibly unfair. Please feel free to leave your thoughts below in the comments section, and feel free to tag @CoachReilly. If you'd like to read the first part of this article, please click the link below: GM Succession, Part 1 Cologne: Thaddeus Humbert >> Joel Jarvi Timing: S46 Off-Season Exchange: COL received rights to Joel Jarvi (S47 - D), a top three prospect in his respective class for no particular reason. Cologne was also able to trade Humbert and one other player to New York for a S48 NYA 1st, S48 NYA 2nd, and Tyson Stokes. Comments: Although this only happened exactly one season ago, you can see how ridiculously outlandish the return for Cologne became. Besides receiving a free prospect, they were able to also get a solid return for their former GM. Cologne didn't even have to exchange a second round pick for him in a historically weak draft class. If we were looking at prospect rankings, Jarvi probably would have been the first or second best prospect from this class. There were no two sides to this transition - just a blatant miss by the board of governors with no offsetting detraction from the Express. Rating: 1st MENGSK SPEAKS TO THE MEDIA, SHORTLY AFTER BEING NAMED GM OF SEATTLE Toronto: Sachimo Zoidberg >> Max Molholt and Seattle: Brady Stropko/James Faraday >> Arcturus Mengsk Timing: S45 Off-Season TOR Exchange: Top S45 player Max Molholt was acquired in exchange for voiding Toronto's S46 2nd round pick SEA Exchange: Top S45 player Arcturus Mengsk was acquired in exchange for voiding Toronto's S46 2nd round pick Comments: The Toronto/Seattle transitions were both incredibly one-sided. Although the S45 draft was strong, neither team had to give up a pick in that draft. Instead, they were able to defer their voided draft choice to S46's second round. Both players are undoubted, first round talents. Additionally, the two teams were able to respectively leverage Zoidberg as well as Faraday for some great draft choices. Again, the two teams vastly underpaid for their original acquisition of their new general managers' players, while also getting a direct bonus from trading their former GMs. This one is again, very, very favorable to the respective franchises. Rating: T-2nd As we reach our conclusion, it's clear to see that the patterns of GM succession are all over the map. The VHL's Board of Governors needs to take a serious look in the mirror and decide to employ some sort of consistent methodology moving forward, taking a range of factors into consideration, including but not limited to: (1) worth of exchange -- does this greatly hurt a team or does this greatly help a team? Are we really giving the VHL overall a fair shake? Does the future value of the player match what we're exchanging? Are we exchanging anything at all? (2) current team situation -- how much help does this team currently need? (3) precedent -- how does this compare to prior GM changes? In the long run, I'm hoping we can trust the BOG to take these matters more seriously than they have in the past. If there's major disagreement when a decision is announced, you can reconsider. Be flexible. There's no shame in reversing an unfair decision.

You just admitted that they at least slightly overpaid, when in comparison, every other team has gotten a boatload of benefit from new GM changes. Even teams that have gone through poor GM transitions where the GM has just up and left. Those situations are NOT irrelevant to this conversation.

Waiting on @Mike I think.

I agree, but trying to emphasize why I'm being such a pain in the ass about this. That's a fair point, but let's not discount the fact that Podarok looks like an absolute stud in the making. @ADwyer87 is part of the VHLMag, is a VHLM GM, so he's already maxed out at his 9 TPE per week. The difference will likely grow. Read the above and respond back.

right. but we know the world is not perfect, right? not everything will operate under perfect circumstances. the league DID have control over the succession plan though, and it went poorly. not sure how you can debate that. i've explained how shit went awry with me as GM, and i don't know Ahma's story, but i'll explain mine yet again. i know it was difficult timing with both transitions. i informed the league where i would be for a few weeks and it ended up conflicting with crucial off-season tasks. like everyone, i sometimes go on vacation -- i was probably gone from the VHL for 10 days... which were the worst 10 days to miss... but again, I told Draper about it. Draper is a good dude and he's not to blame here... ultimately, i am. But to say everyone was totally in the dark is, in my opinion, not right.

Again, you're not reading what I'm saying. DGFX was 70+ TPE ahead of Komarov vs. Komarov being ahead of 13th by 50 or so TPE. Again, BOG mentions other teams needing a boost in certain circumstances and feel fine with that reasoning, but not with this particular selection? 13th would have been pretty close to fair if you take TPE into consideration.

I don't understand why I have to give it a rest, but I will after today even though I can't seem to get any sort of agreement/validation that things will improve. i'm not making anything personal at this point. i apologize if i did on draft day. From Victor in that thread: "all these decisions have merit and aren't made on a whim" >> apparently, the merit is a lot weaker in some cases. this is my main issue with the process. this, to me, reads like there was good reason for all of the GM Succession exchanges and that everything is well-considered, when things clearly were not in 3 of the most recent cases (and in every case where there was an external GM brought in). From Victor on Toronto: "Molholt is the only incorrect valuation as I see it but then this was probably a case of not fucking over Toronto more, feeling guilty for not making Mike GM there when we had the chance, and the fact that it was at the same time as the Seattle GM change and it would have been difficult to have one giving up a 1st and one a 2nd." >>> how is Davos any different? in terms of feeling guilty, I'd say DAV/TOR were in the exact same situation. except Davos basically has nothing whereas Toronto had a good deal of resources when Molholt took over. Davos also in a very similar bind in terms of resources when compared to Cologne. maybe not quite as bad of a bind, but damn close. From Victor on Cologne: " Perhaps compensation was agreed but not enforced by the commishes or anyone else, which seems to have been alluded to. In that case it is not a failure of the GM succession process but a failure higher up." >>> how is that not a failure of GM Succession Process? is implementation not part of the process? saying the 'process' didn't fail but something else did is such petty semantics i probably shouldn't even get into it.

Victor still doesn't think TOR/SEA/COL were bad? Hence the joking being somewhat worrisome. Also - still think Davos overpaid and that 13th would have been more appropriate than 7th. I get Komarov was the 8th or 9th-rated prospect, but he was still as close to 13 as he was 7 - if not closer.

surprise surprise. no one taking anything seriously. can't wait for when Draper passes higgins on and they get to keep his recreate and get Green for free.

I was calling Street senior historian - it's cool, be flippant. you clearly don't want to understand my argument - this is what leads to my frustration.

except it is in certain respects. facts have been presented, and i think you are ignoring them. let's not just posture that, "oh, i don't know 100% of the facts." we know the key facts in front of us. i'm really not trying to get argumentative in a disrespectful nature about this anymore, but to deny you have the facts on the cologne situation is simply misguided.

VHL Senior Historian IMO so as long as there are 12 rookies coming up from VHLM, we will have the 1,000th. guaranteed: 1) Black Velvet 2) Unassisted 3) Atticus Von Braxton 4) Felipe Rodriguez 5) Artom Zhumbayev 6) Tyson Kohler 7) Vincent Adultman 8) Sir William Covington III 9) Jakab Holik possibilities: 1) Saul Hackett 2) Kendrick Cole 3) Sean Blacker 4) Vincent Virtanen 5) Dmitri Dadonov

probably my best draft pick or free agent acquisition. i forget how i got you, but doesn't that make it all the more beautiful?

my issue is with you saying this: "Molholt is the only incorrect valuation as I see it " -- what? just because you weren't around for greg's or feel like you didn't give any input on it, that doesn't make it a correct valuation. believe it or not, this isn't an attack on victor. it's an attack on the process. Mike, Molholt, greg all ridiculously kind exchanges, and now Komarov is well on the overpay side. i'm making a point, so that the give/take isn't constantly swinging back and forth.

as it always does - and guess what - depreciation still not done even though updates have happened. you guys always fly through the off-season.

so greg is not also an incorrect valuation? confused. also, doesn't matter if mike wouldn't have come back seattle got something and paid virtually nothing. don't twist it based on extenuating circumstances as weak as that.

The only loophole is with 'Free GMs' are teams who get GMs who have players under contract with other teams (i.e. Riga getting Toast from Davos). Do you just screw the team over who has that player under contract?

WTF commishes do your damn jobs. Also I agree that many variables are not accounted for. Just thought this would be entertaining.

This shows how warped the thinking is. Point 1 - not sure I fully understand... yes, I would give a shit there. In that case, it would be like Cologne ... not giving up anything for Jarvi and gaming the hell out of a BOG that doesn't take anything into consideration. It also fucks teams over who traded for draft picks assuming certain players would be in that draft. These decisions are made well-after those trades are made. Again, something that is NEVER taken into consideration. Point 2 - I agree that this is the most ideal scenario. but your Point #3 disapproves what you're saying here. Bushito/Zoidberg up and left and they got an INCREDIBLE package for basically nothing. In the end, I agree there shouldn't be 100% set, ironclad rules around it, but you should use the concept of value in order to make a decision. Davos lost a shot at a very good player and Helsinki majorly benefited in that regard. Davos got a bit fucked in my opinion. Glad to see all of the discussion.