Spartan

12th

10 entries for me, numbers: 8, 14, 17, 58, 59, 71, 87, 88, 90, 101 @Moon to pick 5, @Esso2264 to pick 10

Happy to donate for another year to Best Friends Animal Society, a no-kill animal rescue and welfare organization. Amount is in USD. (2 screenshots since there was a whole lot of personal info in between the amount and the confirmation ID, so it ended up on multiple different pages) $20 - covers my 10 entries to Tfong's League skin raffle $20 - covers @Esso2264 's 10 entries to Tfong's League skin raffle $10 - covers @Moon's 5 entries to Tfong's League skin raffle and allows him to claim the free week/2 uncapped

On there a lot for just 1140 TPA

What all is being taught here @Squidward

Usually you need to actually post something interesting for people to care....

the

TIL winning an MVP and a goal leader trophy isn't high level enough. Jokes aside, it's impossible to just say "high TPE = awards." Plenty of high profile high TPE players in history have had little to no individual awards, just look at one Ryan Kastelic for a great example. Max earners can fall flat in any system we implement. I'm just trying to point out that you can be just as effective and successful at a lower TPA (1000-1200) as someone at a higher TPA (1200+). Beyond like 900 TPA, it's really just marginal gains with like a 2-4 point spread per attribute.

Josh loves naming his players after the HC Davos DAVI(S)

I'm fairly sure it'd be occurring before that season, unless I'm misunderstanding the wording. S88 depreciation is S87 into S88.

It definitely doesn't invalidate it, and it shouldn't. We don't want to be forcing every player to bypass the E by suddenly removing any tradeoff between 8 and 9 seasons. Personally, playing like shit in your rookie season is more of a decision driver than the 9th season regression, because as I've demonstrated using my own build as an example and my earning, it's definitely possible to end up with an overall successful player from a stats and individual award perspective. That's why going into the draft, I was fairly clear about what I wanted as a player and made the finals as a rookie. I figured I wouldn't be eligible for a rookie award due to my TPA in comparison to the S80 8 season players. This regression change is moreso for the late career phase of players, has nothing to do with early season TPE/TPA. An extra season of earning + a plethora of weekly and seasonal uncapped TPE are allowing players to earn nearly 300+ more TPE in their careers. Even recent 8 season retirees are finishing in the top 5 of all time TPE, I really don't think TPE availability is an issue at all.

Frankly, it'd just be "do as you please." I have two reasons of saying so. First is the selfish one - I am more than happy to be one of few 9 season career players. I know my own earning capability (which quite a few others in the league can also match or exceed) and I am confident in my ability to plan for success with a 9 season career. I willingly sacrificed a higher peak TPA even before hybrid was a thing, or this new depreciation system was a thing, for the absolute safest peak build that would perform at a fairly high level while also being able to handle any extreme regression changes. There was a chance for a few people who earned well enough to get to play an extra 72 games, I wanted to do so. One more season to (not) win the Continental Cup. Second, which sort of ties into the selfish one but is more from a GM perspective, I know I can give my players and prospects a proper guide on how to handle their career as a 8 season player or a 9 season player. Even if they're less - as a 7 or less season player. As a GM, I am responsible for helping my prospects determine what career length is best, and if someone is thinking about doing a 9 season career, I have personal experience with Nico on how to handle it. If someone wants to do 9 seasons, I will do my best to help them do so. Too many players around the league don't properly prepare for regression now, and I attribute that to the lack of pressure that resulted from the hybrid change. Before the hybrid, everyone banked a full season in advance to prepare for depreciation. Now there just isn't that rush to bank since regression was so light. So yeah if people want to stay down, fine with me. 9 season careers weren't for the figurative "faint of heart" anyways. I don't think anyone was happy with 7% when builds often had 4-5 99 attributes. The math behind the current numbers was designed (and other BoG members can confirm if they'd like) to mimic that sort of pre-hybrid hit but after factoring in TPE inflation with 9 season careers and the spread of hybrid attributes. There really isn't a massive difference here especially when you factor in that Jagr in the final season and when you actually plan your build and regression in advance. If you don't want to put in the planning or effort in advance, that's not a valid reason for the league to drop the 9th season regression percentage.

FISTED ANALLY BY A CIRCUS MONKEY

Forgot to tag @N0HBDY and @Moon @MexicanCow123 as well so you don't process it.

Well you see....there's something called the salary cap. Wumbo makes 3.5, Lindbergh makes 5.5. Warsaw only has 500k in cap space. After factoring in the 50% of each player, Warsaw ends up 500k in the red. Trade is vetoed.

Real reason is that the M Commissioners have demanded a full-time salary and the funding had to come from somewhere. Thank you for my beer allowance buddy.

I have been informed there is no way to currently figure out new depreciation since the depreciation tool on the portal isn't updated yet. So I updated the old hybrid Google Sheet with a tab for depreciation calculations. Go nuts. Link: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oyj6T5O-bTH-CumYQR-Fe4oFz6cALWjWaRrGNBxNnrQ/edit?usp=sharing Example of my own build in the tool: For the worried aspiring 9-season players, I already have 200 TPE banked for the upcoming regression. Which is already 30 TPE above what depreciation *would* be, and this is without any Jagrs factored in. A Jagr in my 9th season at would save me 67 TPE, so the post regression hit would really just be 285. So 171, 171, 271, 285. Considering you'd be overbanking for each of the first 2 hits, the last 2 are much more manageable. It's really just about making sure your build is 1. efficient and 2. not absurd in spending. Let me know if there are any questions!

Maybe this is my mindset and my overly-cautious approach to building Nico from the get-go knowing that depreciation was simply too easy to go untouched for a full career, but regardless of 7% or 12% - I know I would have gone up to get 9 seasons vs 8. I definitely could not peak at like 1.5k TPA like some of the 8 season folks, but clearly my 1.15k TPA build was good enough to win a Campbell and a Brooks. In terms of Stolzy sacrifice though, I don't think regression changed anything. Not a single 9 season "straight to VHL" player has won the Stolzy since the hybrid attribute change. But that is something I think was fairly known even before hybrid changes. 9 season careers were designed to allow max earners to play an extra season if they can attain it in pre-draft earning, which is a very small portion of players. Now obviously it's a little more flexible since the cap is 300, but the goal was always for it to be for a smaller portion of members who could truly handle the at the time, 7% regression. It's just changed from 7% in pre-hybrid to 12% in post-hybrid, essentially finding the equivalent percentage under the new system. Perhaps people who aren't willing to tentatively map out a build plan/regression plan will choose to stay down. Or even folks who aren't confident in their ability to maintain their earning for a full career. But having seen your earn rate on Idaho and how its continued on with Frenchman, I really don't think you're going to be in a position where this change is going to screw you over. If you'd like, I can show you some projections to give you some assurance.

On

We've done some projections using current max earners' earn rates and builds to figure out what depreciation levels would be more significant than the %'s we had in place before while also the least excessively punishing to 9-season players. Keep in mind that the 9-season career change and the addition of a 7% depreciation in the 9th season was done under the pre-hybrid system, where players having 4-5 99's in their attributes was common. 7% was considered "harsh" then as well, and the decision to play a 9th season meant having to give up a higher peak TPA build in exchange for a build that would last for all 9 seasons. At the same time, people figured out TPA builds that would still allow them to be quite effective and be considered a top player in the league. This change just adjusts the % values to make more sense in a post-hybrid environment since we didn't change them during the attribute swap. At most, the 9 season players will just have to be a bit more mindful about not spending their TPE pre-first regression as loosely as an 8-season player. I guarantee you though, you'll still be able to have a peak build over 1.1k TPA.

@lidz Come back

I've realized for a bit that I really don't talk about my player....at all. So I'll make the effort to cover Nico in this VHL.com since this has been a bit of an eventful season for him. The hype and expectations for Nico over the offseason was fairly obvious with Nico going off the board in the first round in pretty much every VHFL draft, and then also being listed for various awards on predictions ballots. Vancouver also had high expectations for the team, with youngsters like Svatopluk Puk, Henry Eagles and Dogwood Maple entering their sophomore seasons alongside stars Alexandre Leduc, Biggie Cheese and Brandt Fuhr. On paper, this was one of the most dangerous teams and most considered them to be a playoffs lock - or even a top 2 team in the entire league. Through about the midway point of the season the performance on the ice was extremely shaky. Nico averaged about a point per game and was the top scorer on the Wolves, but a point per game doesn't really lead a team to wins in this era of the VHL. Even though @Frank tried every line combination possible, the results just never came. Vancouver was at a point where missing the playoffs entirely was a possibility. At some point around game 29-30, I reached out to Frank to discuss a player swap, as Moscow was in a similar position where the team wasn't performing to expectations and the first line was invisible most nights. It was a very unique situation in the VHL, as I don't feel we swap identical TPA players at the same position and from the same draft class very often. But due to the similarities in player age and TPA, both teams were willing to try out a simple change of scenery. Quite interestingly, the trade seems to done exactly what both teams hoped. Preobrazhensky: Pearce: Both players went from point per game on their old teams to around 1.22 PPG and have sent both teams into stronger positions in their respective conferences. Vancouver is now solidly in 4th place in the NA with 6 points between them and Seattle in 5th. Moscow is in a race with Warsaw and Davos for the 1st seed in the EU, with all three teams holding the 1st place spot for various periods of time over the past few sims. Personally, I am just glad Nico is playing a bit more like what you'd expect from a 1.1k TPA player. Even other superstars on Moscow such as Tomas Sogaard and Hammar Voss have found their games as well since Nico's acquisition. Now both franchises will wait and see if their new superstars can take them on a deep playoff run.