Plate

I was not expecting Jakobs to go 7th at all. My read on the draft was the highest I'd go was 9th to London, and even the Warsaw gm apologized because I was someone on his radar but I was not interviewed. We'll see how it pans out for them but I'm planning on staying for the long term.

If you need a press conference bot and nothing else I'm down

Nobody will say hybrid attributes were a negative to the VHL meta. I would say, however, that they didn't go far enough with the hybrid attribute system. There are 15 attributes in total. However, poise, fighting and leadership are pretty useless. It seems like even under the hybrid system the meta can't escape the fact that scoring and defense will always be the most important statistics for simulating. Sure you have others that control how often you lose the puck, how often you retrieve the puck from opponents, etc, however under the decision making formula both scoring and defense will always be the most important attributes to increase. My thought was why not dilute those two core stats? You could reduce the amount of TPE those two attributes put into both defense and scoring, and expand further other attributes that could allow for different archetypes. An example of course could be hand-eye, that improves scoring (By a fraction) and puck handling (Why Deking improves defense might be over my head as defense probably has something to do with losing the puck less). You could also add a shot blocking stat, that improves your defense and strength (Don't know if strength helps with blocking shots but I heard that it does). Those are just a couple of examples but I think they get the point across that you could do a lot more with the system if you expanded on it further.

Alex you're missing the TPE on your own player LMAO. Great read otherwise and I think a fair evaluation of all the players, it depends entirely on what the teams hold for themselves though!

What the hell is this GIF bro, someone cooked. 1. Literally nobody in the locker room had that expectation going into the playoffs. Even when I joined at the start of the season we had the pieces to make something happen but there were a couple other teams in better positions. 2. Gotta give it to the brick wall Ony. He had an incredible contribution to the run only losing two of 14 games, which is insane. 3. I don't think the picks will be able to recover the waiver wire pickups but it'll help mitigate some damage. The redistribution draft could be interesting but ultimately Philly won't be a cup contender again. Maybe a playoff hopeful at best. 4. I don't believe in superstitions at all. To the point I don't entertain them. 5. Jakobs flew to San Diego to fish one last time, cup in hand. (And also to buy his uncle's fishing lodge there to build a rink instead) 6. Winning the cup is less about getting 4 wins in the finals and more about making friends and teammates along the way.

1. Joel Jakobs, Center, I'm building him to be a playmaking two way forward with really good faceoff stats. The plan is to be an essential piece with all the other high shooting builds around and fill a gap in teams that couldn't be filled otherwise. 2. I've never been involved in this because every season my player is either too good or too bad to participate. Really it just comes down to being at 200 TPE when the right moment hits, this happened to be one of them. 3. I'm expecting a PPG with a positive +/-. Other than that I have no expectations. Jakobs just won the founder's cup so I'm interested to see how he does against even tougher challenges. 4. I'm expecting to go to the finals. Win or lose that should be the standard for the team at this point. 5. I expect to be drafted in the top 10 since there aren't that many good forwards in the draft and I just happen to be one of them. There are also like no pure centers and a rebuilding team or a team that could use some short term center depth would love to have my players build on the team I think. 6. Hopefully, if the build works as intended, the special teams should be a big area that gets a lot of attention. A lot of pure offensive players are always available so getting a good two way forward is just one of the best ways to secure top line special teams in the future.

A P P L Y

Okay well good luck everyone else!

This is a weird year for the draft I think. A ton of goaltenders, but they tend to fall pretty late (Or extremely late depending on the GM). Interesting to see how things pan out here for the league especially because Jakobs is finding himself in a draft where forwards are in short supply. Jakobs is the 3rd ranked center, and 5th ranked forward in the class with a playstyle unmatched by anybody else in the entire draft. No other player in the draft appears to be as defensively or pass oriented in a similar position. Jakobs ranks 1st in faceoff potential and just finished a vhlm sprint winning the founders cup with the most points in the playoffs. All skaters included Jakobs is ranked 13th but scouts are showing that a drop out of the top 10 would be surprising, considering the three goalies ahead of him will likely fall to the first portion of the second round. What will gms this draft prioritize? Picking the best player available, drafting for team needs, or will there be a reach or fall for Jakobs? We'll see with the departure of the VHLE and the development curve whether or not Jakobs will continue his legendary success as he did with the Reapers.

How does a player opt-in to the draft? Will there be a list of players available to everyone after the opt-in point or just gms?

(Hi Philly player here but the one thing Halifax has over our team is the fact that the press conference is REGULARLY MADE) 1. It was a pretty close series all things considered. Unfortunately you guys did lose out but next season you guys are going to look really strong so don't fret much about it. 2. Ultimately Joel just sits outside of whatever rink he's playing in and gets some alone time. There's an unspoken rule that nobody talks to him in the locker room or on the ice until the puck gets dropped. Coaches hate him for it but he produces so they let it slide. 3. All of them. With a team like Halifax depth is just as valuable as the front end talent. No team wins with one line or a single goalie, it's always the group effort that pushes everyone forward. 4. As the only person with 4 VHLE cup wins on a single player I'm kind of glad that my record will stick around for the entire history of the league. I don't know if the VHLE will ever come back, but if it does, I hope it's done in a much better capacity. 5. The obvious expansion team for the VHLM would likely be Quebec City. It's a very obvious hockey town that's missing a team. 6. Absolutely. I also think they should have more junior/national championships. Extra activities to put players on new teams and tighten the community even for a week or two.

Good game Halifax.

Cologne or bust baby. CHOO CHOO

Okay let me put my point of view in a theoretical trade between two teams under the old rules. With these assumptions - Team Champion are doing an all-in trade for their current playoff push and team Rebuild has a player they want to sell for a pick. Team Champion acquires - All-Star player (200 TPE). Duration of time spent with the team - 1 playoff run. Team Rebuild acquires - 1st Round Pick (200 TPE player in the future). Duration of time spent with the team - 1-2 seasons. Now this is the same trade with the new rules. Team Champion acquires - All-Star player (400 TPE). Duration of time spent with the team - 1 playoff run. Team Rebuild acquires - 1st Round Pick (400 TPE player in the future). Duration of time spent with the team - 2-3 seasons. Whether at 200 or 400 TPE the championship team has acquired a maxed out player for the league for the same duration as if they were in the new or old rules. That's the risk of the investment. With little time spent with a player, being an asset used for one playoff run, the championship team has given up a long-term asset for a short term one. When you look back at playoffs you don't see the TPE of the team you only see their placement. As winning the cup is the only thing that matters for a team going for it that season. Rebuilds don't care about that. A rebuilding team wants futures in order to construct a core for the future and make attempts at the cup down the line. Under both "systems" the championship team will always give up their futures, no matter how many seasons that negatively affects them, for the short term. That is the price they are paying. To get a maxed out player now and give away a maxed out player in the future. Under both systems the RELATIVE value is the same against the maximum. A 200 TPE player is worth the same now as a 400 TPE one in S96. A 1st round pick this season is worth the same as next season even with the transition of the rules. Simply because you can bet that a 1st round pick will turn into a maxed out player in 2-3 seasons. It just takes longer and having the player in the system longer is neither a benefit or a negative. TLDR: With inheritance, teams that went all in get two seasons worth of service for maxed out players, which is simply impossible under the old and current maximum TPE caps.

Right now that's me but I don't think that's going to be the same way by the time the draft comes along. With Acydburn making their player and a tight race between the top 3 TPE earners I don't think I have the majority chance of being picked 1st overall. One look at my player history and you can see a lot of burnout, pump and dump, and otherwise fleeting earning. I message my locker room every day, check the website regularly and take breaks between VSN articles. Whether this is a long-term strategy is beyond me. What I do know is that I've never had an opportunity to be 1st for many things. I let the pressure get to me. The disappointment of expecting first and then not being given that reward is a feeling all too common. Maybe this time will be different? Ultimately, it'll just come down to whether a GM looks at my profile and can get over the recurring history of potential. That's all my players have ever been. Potential.

I think this argument is flawed because of the intention of the trade. If I'm a GM trading a player for a pick, then I want that pick to be a long term asset for the team. Whereas if I'm trading for a 200 TPE player at the deadline I'm saying goodbye to them at the end of the season. Something that is critical to think about is the current status of teams going into this next season. I'll use Halifax as an example. Last season they traded for a bunch of players and made a cup run, expending all of their picks to do so. Then this season, after all their players left, they traded assets away for picks to start a rebuild. To be then given 5 players back on top of having a potential A class draft would put Halifax on a level that could never be replicated outside of similar circumstances. Gms that have more assets to gain will favour inheritance and GMs that have less will favour a draft. My opinion is that a draft will sustain the status quo. Equally inflating each teams TPE levels is a much healthier option. While it's true a team that sold would get better players (Since you're talking about raw TPE), in this case a 400 TPE player is worth the same as a 200 one, since the cap has now doubled. And a 1st round pick being worth 200 TPE last season is an equivalent to a player being worth 400 TPE next season. Again, the difference being service time which was not an addressed argument.

I disagree that inheriting players from trades that served no long term reason is fair. A large, and arguably the most under rated, function of a trade is the amount of time a player serves their team. High value players purchased as rentals would be worth much less in terms of value, and it's unfair in favour of the teams that bought to be handed a championship contending team simply because of a situation like this. As stated previously, if there is a player you wanted you can just draft them. You won't get everyone you want but that's the point. Everyone gets someone they want and loses someone they want. That's the point of balance. It seems like GMs have their draft picks in mind and want to retain them though. Again, my problem with the idea of, for example, having a singular round where you can select one player drafted by you, is that it's unfair to the teams that sold their players for a rebuild. The inheriting system is HEAVILY skewed towards teams that made trades for players in a cup run. Punishes teams that wanted to rebuild, and more importantly will straight up give teams championship level rosters on the basis they ended the season with the player. Just because you ended your season with the player does not mean you were the lionshare owner of their development. It means you contributed, yes, but for most of these players (since most players are shifted around on deadline week) means for one playoff run and the tail end you aided their development. This argument also really only counts against 1st gen players, as recreating members are pretty self sufficient in their earning

The only info I have about the change is this thread and the announcement. Glad to see the conversation is still being evolved and I'm glad I can be part of it. My articles are always meant to start conversation and make people think about the VHL, not merely sit back and accept things for how they are

"In all likelihood" is a pretty convincing way to say that is both the direction that is being leaned towards and what the current favored option is.

The larger conversation here is that I don't think it would be a big deal if these players wouldn't turn into the top talent of the league. Almost every current top player for their respective team has now been replaced by someone else. This is a massive jump both in terms of TPE in the league and team layout for the immediate short term (like the next two seasons before most of these players graduate).

It's possible you have different numbers than me but I'm about to go back and do a count. It would be interesting to see the list of players beforehand. I still stand by the draft being a competitive balance for the reasons above, as opposed to teams just inheriting players.

If I forgot your team it means you probably would only inherit like one player instead of a bunch like Halifax. You'd be best to go with a draft in that case so you get more players.

I actually uh LMAO my points still stand

And to the point of redistributing ALL 200+ TPE players, I think it's different with players you traded for vs players you're getting for free.

So each player that's available and that would return to the VHLM is over 200 TPE. My argument would just be to pick the players you drafted if you wanted them in the draft. Besides, it wouldn't solve the balance issue which is the main problem with teams inheriting players. I could go through and find the list of players that this would affect but my best guess is it would be a handful and not worth stipulating for the level of tedium and complexity offered. Again, if you want a specific player, just draft them.