Banackock

Now we’re starting to heat up!

LETS GO OILERS

Also very hard to keep track after such a long time but reminded me of this cool spreadsheet here 172 trades so far

IDK if this counts, but I think in 42 seasons I've had it happens once or twice at least. I'm sure other GM's have too. S77 - Seattle trades for Venus Thightrap (HSK) ------- S79: PRG/SEA. (July 11, 2021) Seattle sends Thightrap and a 2nd to Prague for two 1sts --------- S80 - Signs with Seattle after not picking up an option, hmm, hmm... (sept 19, 2021) ----- S80: SEA'PRG. (September 22, 2021) Seattle sends Thightrap back to Prague for a 4th despite leaving for FA and almost going back to Prague. Everyone was REALLY upset she didn't go back to Prague. I don't even remember it but I sent Blade back so people would stop trying to gain membership to cancel culture R US during a dark period in sim league history. It was a nice journey with such a happy ending for all. Anyone else wanna share in on some campfire stories? PS 116 days until Xmas. 50-62 days until stores play christmas music

Alright then BEARZ

VHL under investigation; International Agency of Hockey Simulation Reports NOT SEATTLE - The hockey simulation world was rocked this morning by explosive allegations that the Victory Hockey League commissioning colluded the system to give advantage to the Seattle Bears organization. Early in the morning for Perth, Western Australia, news was broken out from the VHL's League Financier that the league commissioners were vetoing the transaction and stated: "As per section 6.8 of the rulebook, any trades involving a player going back to the a team they were traded for within 2 seasons and on the same contract will be reviewed by the Commissioners. After a review, the @ Commissioner team has decided to veto this trade under section 6.8. Any questions can be brought up directly with the Commissioners." The trade cancels out and makes it back to its original form that seen Seattle shuffle a 2nd to Calgary, which they in turn received Diggler, a lower forward, and a back up goalie that the team had traded to Calgary only a couple weeks prior. The deal was no harm, no foul and we're sure moves have been made in similar fashion in the past. However, the smallest of them all was unable to make it through the cracks and the deal was vetoed shortly before the daily sim. Then the daily simulation happened. Seattle lost their back up goalie and their 6th forward.. and yet, somehow still managed to have the best sim of their entire season, going 2-0-0 and only allowing 1 goal on 63 shots.. hmmm

Ty @Ricer13 and @Alex Condition: (jk) Bryzgalov touched down in Seattle for a 4 hour layover. @Firekiss https://discord.gg/P5KCZqyx

Sure did. Thanks for the chat on Discord. An answer and explanation provided is greatly appreciated so we can be educated on situations that don’t happen to often like his. Much better than a straight up no and “this is why because this is the rule lol” Cheers

Awe, shucks.. that’s largely disappointing. I appreciate you providing the rule. May a reason be provided so we can understand more.. Why has it been vetoed? It’s two competent, active GM’s, it’s an inactive, back up goalie.. I understand the rule as it is written.. and I understand what it would try to circumvent.. but that’s not this.. so I don’t understand why it was rejected and would appreciate some insight as it would be educational and helpful because it’s based off simple principle that could easily go the other way next time “just because”. It’s all subject to review and personal opinion and emotion. I know there’s nothing malicious at all here.. i needed a 6th forward.. I also had a new hole at BUG.. so why the hell not just take Bryzgalov back for 8 games..? Better rated than a CPU. I get it’s a rule but.. a 550, 2.5M back up goalie that doesn’t even count against the cap and will only play 8 games.. They haven’t earned TPE since the week of April 30 and hasn’t visited since May.. The rule doesn’t state “you can’t do it”. It simply means it will be reviewed. This is the lowest valued, smallest situation to review.. an inactive back up goalie that will never be a starter etc.. their money doesn’t even count against the teams salary.. the deal and value has increased/changed.. there are no open goalie spots in the league…and yet it was denied. So why even say “review” if the smallest thing will be denied? Just do us all a favour and change the rule and say no. I can’t see a bigger player or deal being approved if this inactive back up from S84 (it’s S90) is being denied.

Bana's S90 Quick Q's - Hey... It's Monday for me #5 Press Conference Rules Seattle Bears Team Page S90 VHL Entry Draft This season's PC's: #1 2 #3 #4 *Follow PC Rules. Each time PC is posted, there enough questions for you to answer for multiple weeks if there isn't for the following week. Old weeks/posts will be above as "S87PC - #X". You have to answer or ask 6 questions, in any combination. ANYONE is more than welcome to ask and answer questions. ENJOY! 44. Rough start for Seattle. What went wrong? 45. Seattle started with 5 forwards but recently dealt for Diggler @Jbeezy76. How do you think they'll fit into the line up? 46. If you were GM for a day, what is the first thing you would do to help the team? 47. The Seattle Bears came out with a new branded alcohol. What is it? Flavour, brand, bottle etc? 48. If the E were to ever expand again, where would you like to see teams? Pick NEW places! 49. If the VHL teams had money or market value, which teams would be worth the most? Why? 50. If the VHL teams had money or market value, which teams would be worth the least? Why?

me too

HOLY HOLY WE GOT A GOALIE @DMaximus

Welcome back @Devise, lol.. @Tbeez99 PM'd ya. Welcome!! @Ricer13 easy chats. Thank you

also SAKA

GOALS

hype

MONEY TALKS

What were the Vegas odds for Ahma this season to get the C?