dear diary (round 5)

[fishy 1,755]

Dear diary,

 

I don’t know what to write about but I am too particular to claim welfare for a week so I’m here. It’s much more difficult to write point tasks when you don’t pay attention to the league.

 

Socks didn’t do shit at the awards for last season, and honestly, I’m not really surprised. I’m pretty unbothered - I’ve probably mentioned before that I could not care less about the Hall of Fame. I think it’s neat and fun, I’m sure that it’s fun and exciting to get a player into the Hall of Fame, but I have absolutely no interest in getting my panties in a twist about trying to get a player in. It’s one of those things that I have no control over, so I can’t bring myself to be competitive about it - with the amount of players in the league, there’s a larger pool of people who can be voted in. From what I understand, Hall of Fame entry is largely dependent on cup and award wins. Sure, I could cup hunt and go into free agency after every contract expires, but it really just… doesn’t feel worth it.

 

Awards are somewhat arbitrary, anyway. Yeah yeah yeah, I sound like an annoying “nuke the bog”er, but that’s not my intention. The awards presentations point out different aspects of a player in award wins, and I really just don’t know the stats that are considered in discussions about who wins. I’m not upset because the only thing awards are worth in my book is 1 TPE.

 

I also recognize that I probably sound like an annoying first gen with the whole “OOhHhH, well I have more competition than players did in /the old days/ of VHL.” That’s fine. I am an annoying first gen saying that I have more competition than players in earlier seasons because it’s true.

 

Anyway, congrats to the recent Hall of Fame inductees. I hope you are proud of the sim luck you had in conjunction with the blessing of BoG members (I think they vote on HoF?? I don’t know for sure but I don’t think I’m wrong). It’s also pretty neat to see Hatter get his first gen player inducted.

 

I miss podcasting. Writing sucks. I also feel like I could get by with saying shit that I didn’t have to worry about people picking apart because nobody was listening to the podcasts I was doing. It’s been neat to see more people take up the podcasting gig, and I give huge props to people who can do solo podcasts that don’t end up terrible. I don’t think I could do that, no self deprecation, I just feel like I would run out of things to say because I usually don’t have anything to say in the first place. Writing gives me a place to flesh out my thoughts, which means I can usually get more out of a single idea when I write it down; on the other hand, I have to write it down and that really is not the look.

 

Maybe I should learn how to actually do graphics. Another time

 

fishy

[Gustav 6,097]

6 hours ago, fishy said:

From what I understand, Hall of Fame entry is largely dependent on cup and award wins.

 

I'd say it's more stats-based than anything else, and how a player's career stacks up to other players who were around the league at the same time. There are actually a surprising number of Hall-of-Fame players who never won an individual award (something we'll probably see happening more often in the future with the amount of teams we have now).

 

Realistically--I think Socks ends up in the Hall of Very Good. You're consistently up there in SB and points, and I think you've at least been nominated for some award in many recent seasons. The point about awards being somewhat lacking does come into play here, but I'd think of that more as a sort of "was this player ever super dominant" than "did they win any awards" (though I'll admit there's a pretty good correlation). Socks is more someone I'll remember as consistently a good player than someone I'll ever remember as being on top of the game. 

 

...which is still great to me because it's a hell of a lot better than I ever did with Garcia.

 

EDIT: I think you do have a chance if your numbers stay at the same pace for your last few seasons, now that I'm taking a second look. I knew your point totals + SB were impressive but I think I underestimated them a bit.

Edited July 29, 2021 by GustavMattias

[CowboyinAmerica 2,708]

Review: 8/10

 

I think it's an interesting conversation how you adjust for different eras - it's not too different from trying to compare like Ovechkin and Rocket Richard. I think some adjustment certainly has to be made when it comes to comparing the two, but when it comes to the HOF specifically I think the way voting's done kind of does the work for you: You're comparing players who retired in the same timeframe one-to-one to see who's most worthy, rather than across time. It doesn't hold as well when you're doing cross-generation comparisons, but that's mainly the jurisdiction of VSN articles and the like anyway.

 

Anyway, I mean, it was a bit all over the place at times, but I think you knew what was up there given your opening sentence. Even with that said though, article was engagingly written, and flowed well. Wouldn't have minded something else to spruce up the presentation like a photo or headline, but that's a nitpick. Interesting stuff overall.

[rory 1,759]

hell yeah nuke the bog brother

[fishy 1,755]

why are people reading this article cut it out