A Brief History of the VHLE

[bigAL 2,176]

I've been meaning to do this post for a long time, and what better time to do it than theme week.

 

Now that I'm allegedly part of the elderly gentlemen's gang, I'm more than happy to provide insight to what happens behind closed doors.

 

You've heard it before, and you'll hear it again here: The Board of Governors doesn't do as much as you think. But, in this case, we did a shitload work. The VHLE was, for the most part, designed by the BoG. Any complaints you have regarding the rules, structure, or otherwise, can be forwarded to @GustavMattias.

 

We did some serious work. Also, rip beav.

 

The average member may not know, but there's been a major problem brewing behind the scenes for many seasons. On January 20, in the midst of S76, former commissioner Beaviss brought the "Roster Room Potential Issues" to the Board, admin, and staff.

 

Privately, GMs had been complaining about a flat salary cap and overstuffed rosters for a long time. That led to a massive expansion in S73 with four new teams added. But still, the issue persisted.

 

Calgary GM Jubis publicly lays out the roster issue problem, allowing members insight into the discussions happening at GM meetings.

 

The BoG discussion began in earnest when former Calgary Wranglers GM @Jubis shared his math on roster sizes for S76. Turns out, the rosters are very, very full. The ideal VHL team runs a 6-4-2 roster, with two full lines of forwards, two full pairings of defense, and two goalies. This is the optimal balance between ice time: any more players, and no one plays enough minutes; any less players and teams get accused of manipulating rosters to get their star players more ice time. Only one team in the VHL, even after expansion, had a 6-4-2 roster. That, my friends, is a problem.

 

Of course, this BoG thread started with Beaviss pitching expansion. The dude loves expansion more than egg salad and kranch sandwiches. By S76, Beavis and expansion was a meme, but the numbers presented by Jubis and Beav made the board seriously discuss another round of growth. In preliminary talks, more than a few members were even on board with a smaller, two team expansion. However, our wise old man (and future VHLE commissioner) @Victor dropped this nugget in the fourth post of 748 replies:

 

Victor: the radical

 

This truth bomb set the table for the months of discussion to come. The philosophy of the VHLE has been the same since the beginning: give the players who are too good for the VHLM but getting absolutely trounced in the VHL somewhere meaningful to play.

 

We're fortunate to have a collection of VHL/M GMs on the board. These experts on their respective teams were able to give context and insight into the numbers dropped by Beav and Jubis. Through the first few weeks, and again every month or so, the Governors were not entirely convinced that there was a roster room issue. Much was debated about who should be counted in those numbers, what the development timeline looks like for various types of prospects, and predicting sizes and quality of future draft classes. Before even considering expansion, we needed a clear picture on who was actually here in our league. 

 

The first group that was skewing our numbers were inactive players. There were inactive players taking up valuable and limited roster spots from low-earning active players. Like the VHLM did, the VHL needed to develop a way to cull inactives. That change was fleshed out over the course of months, and culminated in a rule change beginning S78. Now, teams are only allowed to carry ONE inactive player per season. With a finite number of VHL roster spots, we cannot afford our active members to be stuck behind inactive players, no matter how much better the IA player is.

 

See, we value you active members!

 

The other problem with the roster size numbers is that every player was treated equally. This is not true when we are discussing earning. Max earning players will reach the VHL faster and stay there longer. Non-max earners (for example, clickers) are still valued members of our community and cannot be discounted. We knew we had to deal with this roster size problem in a way that works and engages our max earners, mid earners, and clickers.

 

 Our number genius @rjfryman and his ruby programming skills provided us with weekly TPE chart detailing how many people were in each TPE bracket, sorted by age. This data allowed us to discuss whether there actually was a problem (there was) and assist in setting the VHLM/E TPE caps.

 

Less than 100 TPE Update: 17

100 to 199 TPE Update: 67

200 to 250 TPE Update: 32

250 to 299 TPE Update: 11

300 to 399 TPE Update: 46

400 to 499 TPE Update: 34

500 to 599 TPE Update: 30

600 to 699 TPE Update: 28

700 to 799 TPE Update: 20

800 to 899 TPE Update: 13

900 to 999 TPE Update: 9

Over 1000 TPE Update: 21

Lost in my math: 0

SEASON BREAK DOWN: {70=>3, 71=>15, 72=>26, 73=>30, 74=>43, 75=>62, 76=>48, 77=>57, 78=>44}

Not sure when this is from, but this is what RJ's updates look like.

 

Once we definitively identified a real problem, took measures to ease pressure by culling IAs, and collected updating data on player demographics, we could realistically start talking about creating a new league.

 

In order to create a third league, we had to discuss the philosophy of our two existing leagues. The VHL remains largely untouched, but the VHLE drastically alters the purpose and structure of the VHLM. We were cognizant of recreates wanting to get back to the VHL as soon as possible, and didn't want an extra league to slow those max-earning, experienced members down. The VHLM was reimagined as a 'landing pad' for first-gens, or a 'junior hockey' for recreates. Like the VHLM today, the new focus continues to be on development and retention. Success in the VHLM is graduating players to the VHLE. There were many pages of heated discussion about nuking the VHLM draft and moving to an all-waivers roster building mechanism. It was argued that this would reduce the ability for GMs to go for scorched-earth rebuilds like we see today, but we worried about VHLM GMs having little to no actual managing duties. Ultimately it was decided to keep all VHL/E/M drafts. 

 

If the VHLM is meant to be a training grounds, the VHLE was the first real battleground in a VHL career. The E League, as we lovingly referred to it before it was officially named, would be a competitive league with the goal of winning chips. We envisioned a KHL-style rival league, where pros would come over to the VHL when they were properly developed. There were some voices that wanted older, regressed players to be able to go play Season 7 or 8 in the VHLE, Jagr-style, but that didn't come to fruition.

 

It was important that the VHLE was independent from all other leagues. We settled on 6 teams, based on the demographic data from RJ, and that effectively ruled out AHL-style affiliation. Six teams with prospects of 16 VHL clubs was not going to work. We thought about prospect-sharing teams, like the Chicago Wolves, but the cons outweighed the pros of that system. Like the VHLM, considering the GM experience was important. We want VHLE GMs to have agency over their own team - we wouldn't want a contender to lose half their team to call-ups in the midst of a playoff push. The VHLE is fully independent from other leagues, with the only caveat that all players are also VHL-drafted.

 

Once concern that we absolutely wanted to avoid was the EFCA-style manipulation of the uncapping system. Under no circumstances did we ever want anyone to actively stop earning TPE. I know I got to the 199 cap in the EFL and then completely disengaged because it was disadvantageous for me and the team to earn a single point more. The soft/hard cap was discussed at length, and really, what we have in the VHLM is a pretty sweet system. Like the M, earners in the E will stop applying TPE at 399, but will continue to earn and bank for the rest of the season. Once you earn TPE # 400, you are automatically going up to the big leagues next season. A player could choose to stop at 399 and start earning in the offseason again, but we plugged that loophole. Like now, your career clock starts when you are VHL drafted. If you choose to manipulate the system to get an extra E season (why?!?!?), you will be penalized in the grand scheme of things by having a shorter career in the VHL. 

 

Speaking of career length, it was a pretty big change to add in a ninth season. For 99.99% of players, the VHL career will still be 8 seasons. If, by some absolute miracle, some player eclipses 399 TPE before their VHL draft (or the offseason cut off date, whatever), then they would skip the VHLE entirely and have a 9 season VHL career. We do not want that to be the expectation or the goal: if we let everyone skip the VHLE, why would we even bother with the hassle of creating it? Extending the career clock meant that everyone would have a fun, competitive season in the minors AND a regular ol' 8 season career. To further encourage participation in the VHLE, we made regression in Season 9 really, really mean. You can use a Jagr to protect one stat, but the 5% (?) overall regression can't be stopped. A 9-season career likely involves a weak rookie season (being a lower TPE than your peers who marinated in the VHLE for a season) and likely a weak ninth season, crippled by regression. It's possible to skip the VHLE, but you shouldn't do it and you shouldn't want to. Finally on this note: literally one person from the recent draft class was eligible for this. There are recent seasons where zero people would have met the criteria.

 

Recap: we know there's a problem, and we know how to fix it. We've thought of most loopholes, and came up with some neat creative solutions to plug them. Now, we need to package this idea together and turn it into something real.

 

We had been calling it the "E League" (it always made me think of the NBA's G-League) and that worked for the time, but wasn't going to be an official name. Branding is always a highly subjective exercise, and there was heated debate about what the league should be called. One unnamed board member was so incredibly deadset on calling it the Europe Victory League (EVL) that he created a poll to decide the name, lost, and created another poll to make sure no one wanted to change their vote and call it EVL. It would just be too hilariously fitting to have the Victator running the EVL. It'd make for excellent canon, with the rival league across the pond playing heel to the good guys VHL, but in practice it wasn't very realistic. We ended up keeping the branding consistent with the other leagues, and choosing VHLE over VEHL and EVL.

 

In the Best people here but socially distanced, we always have to consider the rainbow flavoured unicorns.

 

To continue the branding train: I don't think I ever noticed all the VHLM teams were in North America? With all our M teams on one side of the pond, it made perfect sense to put the new league on the other. As a bonus, the names and logos of all of the European VHLM teams that used to exist were available. Recycling names would be a fun exercise in nostalgia, while also reducing costs of commissioning new logos.

 

So, that's some insight into the going-ons of the Board of Governors. This was probably one of the biggest projects the BoG has worked on ever, and I'm really proud of what we've come up with. I joined the process in mid-March: it had been going on long before I got there, and continued long after. Six months, 30 pages, 748 posts later, the BoG actually did something!

 

holy heck that's 2000+ words, noice

 

 

Edited June 8, 2021 by bigAL
font too small for old man eyes

[bigAL 2,176]

Do I need a separate comment for theme week? I bet I need a separate comment for theme week. This is a separate comment for theme week.

[KaleebtheMighty 1,426]

Love this in depth look, this is the little bit of transparency that lets everyone know these decisions are not just spur of the moment “what the heck why not” type of ordeals. This was thought out, scrutinized, and implemented with a structure that makes sense.

 

And more VHLE hype is good

[Gustav 6,130]

23 minutes ago, bigAL said:

Any complaints you have regarding the rules, structure, or otherwise, can be forwarded to @GustavMattias.

 

What did I ever do to you?

[Beketov 8,647]

27 minutes ago, bigAL said:

Do I need a separate comment for theme week? I bet I need a separate comment for theme week. This is a separate comment for theme week.

You don’t really. You could just link to the main theme week post. The updaters need to check your PT no matter what. In any case it’s fine.

 

16 minutes ago, KaleebtheMighty said:

Love this in depth look, this is the little bit of transparency that lets everyone know these decisions are not just spur of the moment “what the heck why not” type of ordeals. This was thought out, scrutinized, and implemented with a structure that makes sense.

 

And more VHLE hype is good

Most things are pretty thought out and scrutinized, often to the point of being vastly over-scrutinized really. I think the general mindset seems to be that the BOG, or just the blue team most times, just does whatever we feel like on any given day without any thought. That is entirely not how it goes down. Often you guys will see a single announcement but, like the VHLE, it will take pages upon pages of discussion for us to nail it down fully.

[Victor 10,550]

7 hours ago, bigAL said:

Victor: the radical

What a visionary 

 

I forgot what I had even said originally other than it was like halfway similar to what we ended up doing. I assume I started saying KHL a lot by page 2.

[bigAL 2,176]

Claim 2, wow

[scoop 3,255]

On 6/7/2021 at 7:43 PM, bigAL said:

In order to create a third league, we had to discuss the philosophy of our two existing leagues. The VHL remains largely untouched, but the VHLE drastically alters the purpose and structure of the VHLM. We were cognizant of recreates wanting to get back to the VHL as soon as possible, and didn't want an extra league to slow those max-earning, experienced members down. The VHLM was reimagined as a 'landing pad' for first-gens, or a 'junior hockey' for recreates. Like the VHLM today, the new focus continues to be on development and retention. Success in the VHLM is graduating players to the VHLE. There were many pages of heated discussion about nuking the VHLM draft and moving to an all-waivers roster building mechanism. It was argued that this would reduce the ability for GMs to go for scorched-earth rebuilds like we see today, but we worried about VHLM GMs having little to no actual managing duties. Ultimately it was decided to keep all VHL/E/M drafts. 

 

 

If the VHLM is meant to be a training grounds, the VHLE was the first real battleground in a VHL career. The E League, as we lovingly referred to it before it was officially named, would be a competitive league with the goal of winning chips. We envisioned a KHL-style rival league, where pros would come over to the VHL when they were properly developed. There were some voices that wanted older, regressed players to be able to go play Season 7 or 8 in the VHLE, Jagr-style, but that didn't come to fruition.

Players who reach a certain TPE threshold by the trade deadline should be "called up" from the VHLM to the VHLE. Consequently, a player's VHLE draft should line up with their VHLM draft rather than VHL draft so that they actually have a team to which they can be called up.

 

 

If the only change to the VHLM is that the VHLE now exists, then what does it really mean when people say that it can now be the developmental league that it is meant to be? Get the newer guys more ice time to keep them more invested, right? Okay, then let players like myself and others who are eclipsing 200 TPE by the trade deadline move up to the VHLE where our games can actually matter. Where we are actually allowed to care about winning because we don't have to be concerned with our fresh meat teammates getting playing time. Even if this is the only league-to-league transaction that can take place mid-season, I think it is essential.

 

Also get rid of the VHLM playoffs. It's not a competitive league, right? Just extend the season. Don't make some players stop playing for a couple extra weeks. Let them continue to get games in. At the very least, let every team into the playoffs. The top players should already have been moved up to the VHLE anyway, so it'll be likely that a lot of players who earned those wins for those VHLM teams aren't there anymore anyway.

[bigAL 2,176]

17 minutes ago, scoop said:

Players who reach a certain TPE threshold by the trade deadline should be "called up" from the VHLM to the VHLE. Consequently, a player's VHLE draft should line up with their VHLM draft rather than VHL draft so that they actually have a team to which they can be called up.

Neat points. The thinking behind “no mid season call ups” was that it really takes away some agency from the VHLM/E GMs. They plan for a season and then just near the end, a GM from a league above (that has no actual affiliation with the lower league team) poaches their best player. I get the point though. Fortunately there’s only a few short weeks between the TDL and the offseason. 

[scoop 3,255]

3 hours ago, bigAL said:

Neat points. The thinking behind “no mid season call ups” was that it really takes away some agency from the VHLM/E GMs. They plan for a season and then just near the end, a GM from a league above (that has no actual affiliation with the lower league team) poaches their best player. I get the point though. Fortunately there’s only a few short weeks between the TDL and the offseason. 

It really should not matter, in any way, if a VHLE GM takes a player from a VHLM team. In fact, that is what they should strive for, no? The VHLM is a developmental league. They should want to see their players get the call up to the VHLE quickly. It also opens up more ice time for the newer players.

[Xflexz 158]

Amazing article. The VHLE is going to be a massive success and I wish I was able to play there for a season instead of playing backup goalie for my first season. I love reading on the VHLE when I can and this was jam packed with great information and some other things that were discussed behind closed doors. Use of visual aids made this article a 10/10

[bigAL 2,176]

Claim 3. Theme week: the gift that keeps on giving.

[fishy 1,756]

big text >

[bigAL 2,176]

18 minutes ago, fishy said:

big text >

RIGHT?? Accessibility for all, especially boomers with glasses.