Halifax is a joke and it's not even their fault. (Part 2)

[Plate 386]

 

Spoiler

If you haven't read the first part, go to this link. 

 

Welcome to part 2 of Halifax is a joke and it's not even their fault. This media spot should wrap everything up with a conclusion and hopefully some discussion. Click the link above in the spoiler if you haven't read the first part. Let's get into it.

 

Season 77

 

Halifax was busy working the phones this season. On top of this being the deepest playoff run Halifax would have in our ten-year scope. Can they keep up the success of their previous trades, or will management trip over their own feet? 

 

 

Right off the bat, Halifax wins this trade. Not to get into it too much, Halifax gets an Alexander Chershenko Trophy winner in Baldur Poulsen, who was part of the monstrous regular season Halifax had in S78. 

 

Vegas did well in getting the pick that would be Sven Reikkinen as a return. In all fairness, though, he was less than a point per game than Poulsen, who was above two points per game in his final season with Halifax. The other pieces had a negligible impact in comparison to those two pieces. 

 

 

Welcome to a one-for-one trade. That’s the most effortless draw I’ve ever seen. Emilie would play a nearly entire season with Halifax before being moved later. Miami would move on from this pick also.

 

It seems redundant to go over this trade. It’s a draw. Neither player develops into anything noteworthy. 

 

 

This is another easy draw. Germano Henchoz and Donne Taliferro had similar contributions to their respective teams, and neither Houston nor Halifax made it particularly deep in the playoffs this season.
 

 

Halifax pulled an undo button on their trade when they gave away the pick that would become The Great. And give up essentially two-thirds for him, as Emile was selected earlier that season by Halifax in the draft in the third round. While The Great did help Halifax in the playoffs with a point-per-game performance, much better than Emile Clouet, it’s still not enough to warrant a win. Consider this trade a draw.

 

 

There’s no way to put this besides Halifax ends this season with a total loss. We talk about a franchise player being dealt in a trade involving Halifax for the third time. Patric Twist leads Las Vegas for points and assists and is tied for most games played. On the other hand, Cube Whale never played a game in a Halifax sweater.

 

Season 78 

 

This season, Halifax would have a historic performance from all their players, win countless individual trophies, and put up multiple 2 PPG players to ultimately fall short in the first round to Houston. Speaking of Houston…

 

 

Now this trade is hilarious for one reason and one reason alone. Dale Tomarov is my most recent recreate (Besides Jordan Bennett), and I completely forgot about it until this moment. And Halifax lost this trade.

On top of the bust that happened to be Tomarov (which we’ll talk about later), Masami Iwasawa wouldn’t turn into the prolific player they sought after with the 2nd overall selection of the draft. On the other end, Houston would select player Milk Jugs, who was a near PPG player and was a pivotal piece to their playoff run in S78.

It would be enough to declare a lost trade on Halifax’s behalf with that alone. But these teams faced off in the playoffs, where Houston won in game 7. Iawasawa was not part of that contention, and Milk Jugs was. 

 

 

Once again, we find a trade that Halifax manages to lose. Don’t get me wrong, Jlloyoid Blloyoiderson and Kirby Pandora both manage to be excellent pieces. However, there exists a tier above the elite. And once you start earning Trophies, you become the step above. You become a franchise talent. While Halifax got two elite players, they gave up the picks that would be generational talents in Finn Davis and Bradley Buzzer.

 

Finn Davis scored 154 points and earned the Vladimir Boomchenko Trophy in his singular season in Ottawa. Bradley Buzzer won the Matt Bentz Trophy and offered his services as an elite member of the Ottawa Lynx for two seasons. Dale Tomarov existed. 

 

Season 79

 

As we approach a more modern version of the Halifax in S79, we remember that this was either a season to retool their organization after losing their most elite players last season or attempting to push past mediocrity with a couple of moves. Let’s see what they decide to do. 

 

 

Delisle is a story for another day. I tried to get some insider information on what happened, but as far as anyone can tell, he was traded to give another life and keep the activity going. They didn’t come back, were released, and then resigned with Philly, only to be traded again to Minnesota throughout two seasons.

Either way, Miroslav Tsarov would have a 100-point season with Philadelphia. And Halifax wouldn’t get any service from any players, so Philly got a player for basically free. They also made the playoffs that season, so this is a loss for Halifax.

 

 

We finally see a win for Halifax again as Zach Kisslinger II becomes a franchise player for the 21st, winning the Vladimir Boomchenko Trophy, 89 assists for Halifax in S79. Joe Mama would turn into an elite-level player but never take any hardware, so this trade goes to Hali. 

 

 

Long story short, this trade is a draw. Neither Ottawa nor Halifax gets anything special for their efforts. 

 

 

After acquiring Jlloyoid Blloyoiderson from Ottawa the season prior, Halifax decides to jump ship on a retool and acquire a 1st and 3rd for one of their best players. Unfortunately for them, Blloyoiderson would turn into a Matt Bentz trophy winner for Miami and lead them to a Founder’s Cup victory in S79. 

Hulk Hogan 2, on the other hand? I would never play a game for Halifax. And Harry Hagel would put up a solid 133 points in 144 games but wouldn’t come close to any hardware, and Yukon would defeat Halifax in game 6 of the S80 playoffs. 

 

Once again, Halifax loses a trade.

 

Season 80

 

Halifax uses the tools from the previous seasons and the players picked from their trades to push themselves into the playoffs, where they get swept in the second round. Yukon is the one responsible for that. What did Halifax do in terms of trades this season? Not much.

 

 

This trade is Jorgen Von Strangle for Seymour Butts. As ridiculous as that sounds, none of the other players would play a single game for either of these franchises. 

 

Jorden Von Strangle is 10th all-time for points in Halifax with 196 points. And, among those top ten players, has the least number of games played with only two seasons worth of production. Seymour Butts doesn’t come close in comparison, with a mere 50 points. This is a win for Halifax.

 

Season 81

 

Season 81 is what happens when Halifax gets a call saying they’re going to appear on the critically acclaimed reality tv show Hoarders, available on Apple TV. The sheer number of moves that happens and picks that get hoarded this season is the crux of why I wrote this thesis in the first place. Enjoy your stay.

 

 

So Halifax trades for a player in a season that they miss the playoffs. In exchange for a pick, that becomes Siyan Yasilievich.  Yasilievich becomes an essential piece of back to back 2nd round playoff appearances for Philly. And even put up numbers in one of them. This is a loss for Halifax.

 

 

Back-to-back loss for Halifax as Houston gets the 1st overall selection in S82. Scotty Sundin crushes it in S82 with a 129-point performance and playoff final appearance in S82 for Houston, scoring 31 points in 19 games. 

 

Halifax, on the return, acquired the pick that would become Nagy Al, who played half a season and would be traded later on this season. 

 

 

This is a pretty nothing trade that ends in a draw. Ottawa gets a starting goalie that isn’t particularly outstanding. Halifax doesn’t get anything in return.

 

 

Saskatoon mopped the floor with Philly and Halifax in this trade, but even then, Halifax gets the tail end of the stick. It’s another loss seeming as though both players they pick through this trade end up being one-year rentals without any significant amount of point production. 

 

Saskatoon gets two 90+ point players and loses in a game 7 in the Founder’s Cup final that season. Both pieces are vital contributors to their regular and postseason success.

 

 

Yeah, this trade is a draw. No piece here really makes it to the VHLM level, and these picks are all throwaways. Darts that missed the draft board.

 

 

Yet again, we see a draw. Nothing more to say than these players are comparable in what they did for both teams, but they have a slight edge over Las Vegas since Bobby Rockwell progressed a bit more in terms of skill than John Your Door did.

 

 

Though there are more pieces in this trade, it’s a draw. Both sides get comparable goaltending and throw-ins that don’t amount to much. 

 

 

Now I’m going to go with my gut on this one and call it a draw. I don’t think either team won. Weekuk Warrior would only get 6 points in 24 games with Saskatoon, and Halifax would use the 9th overall pick to select a guy that got 28 points in 70 games. 

 

 

We find ourselves in another draw. To cut it short, Drew Essen and Mo Probert are the essential assets Halifax obtained in this trade. Malum Maellard wouldn’t play a single game for Halifax, and Alexandre Forgues you haven’t heard about for a good reason. 

On the other side of the coin, Alexei Volchenko and familiar face Nagy AL make their way to Philly. Nagy AL would be a decent piece for a couple of playoff rounds, but nothing more would come. 

 

 

There’s no natural way to put this besides both teams messed up on this one. Two 1sts is way too much of an overpayment for Marcel Janser and Nic McMuffin, but Mississauga is saved because both of those picks were busts for Halifax. 

 

Doug Matchett and Svatopluk Puk won’t combine for an entire season worth of service for Halifax. The only player to ever finish an entire season with a team in this trade is Halifax legend David Cobberson. Yeah, I have no idea what either team was doing here.

This may turn into a win next season, as Svatopluk Puk is still listed on the Halifax roster, but it's a draw unless he plays an entire season. 

 

 

We’re going to ignore the fact that Halifax downgraded a 1st to a 2nd here in exchange for a 7th. Funnily enough, this trade is a draw. Philly would draft malum Maellard but never play a game for them. And the same fate goes for Manny Wilson and Connor Aguirre. 

 

 

No trade could have happened here, and nothing would have changed for either organization. The biggest draw I’ve ever seen.

 

Season 82

 

To sum up S82, it’s the season before the upswing. Like the strike, you take on a batter to feel his pitches. This is when Halifax finishes retooling. Some of these trades are hard to call winners and losers because some players are still in motion, and picks haven’t been made, but we’ll do our best. 
 

 

This is one of those trades that’s hard to call because San Diego still hasn’t received the majority value for their end, but I can comfortably say Halifax lost this trade. 

 

San Diego is poised to be the strongest team in the East; Joachim Bryngelson is a big part. Deciding to stay down in the minors this season and have a chance at the Founder’s Cup, Bryngelson will have a more significant impact than Cooper Skambranks and his 59-point season last year.

And that’s assuming the 2nd rounder Halifax gave up doesn’t amount to anything.

 

 

After some consideration, I’m willing to call this a draw. Goalies tend to fall a bit lower in the draft, and I can easily see a comparable goaltender being selected by Philadelphia using this pick. Considering the values of goalies are low and that Joshua Bolton V probably won’t contribute much at a VHLM level, this is a draw. 

 

 

Considering the number of 5th-round picks that don’t make the VHLM and that Hunter Blaisdell hasn’t and won’t play for Miami, this is a draw. Nothing for nothing. 

 

 

In this trade-in, I’m not going to comment on a winner, loser, or a draw, but I wanted to mention it in the article and make a minor prediction about who I think wins it.

 

Las Vegas will be a decent team and will most likely make the playoffs this season, so the 1st acquired by Halifax won’t be a lottery selection. Zack Martinez was moved this season to San Diego, so it isn’t worth anything for this trade.

Houston gets Doug Matchett, an essential part of a deep playoff run, only falling short in the finals in game 7 to Saskatoon. It was a critical piece worth the 1st and other assets they gave up in this trade.

Las Vegas gets Velociraptor Greg. Who will be one of the premier defensemen this upcoming season? Scouts report great offensive zone ability, responsible defensive play, and a solid two-way option that will make waves in the minors.

Ultimately the winner will come down to whoever wins a Founder’s Cup or gets hardware from a player. Otherwise, I consider Houston, the winner of this trade.

Conclusion

Over 48 trades, Halifax gets a record of 9-14-25. That’s nine wins, 14 loses, and 25 draws. Which is an aggressively mediocre record considering they haven’t made it past the 2nd round over the past ten years.

So what can we learn from this trade history? If you’ll notice, The lion's share of losses and wins Halifax took were from the 3rd to 5th round selections that stayed in the minors and panned out to lead franchise records for their respective organizations. Getting multiple years of service from a player when the league is so cyclical seems to be the way to get consistent value out of players.

The 1st and 2nd round picks were the most volatile ones, as the players typically picked early on start out capped and are guaranteed to leave the season after they’ve been selected. This kind of system isn’t good for new players, as the VHLM is designed to retain and introduce to the league or people coming back into the league.

There are possible solutions to this. 

• Make the VHLM exclusive to new members. As in, recreates can not participate in the VHLM and must forgo the M to play in the European league. 
• Introduce a baseball system of trading where picks are immovable. 
• Implement an actual salary cap to limit the number of capped players on a team. 

If anyone else has possible suggestions, thinks that this is an issue, or elsewhere, please leave a suggestion below. I also don’t ask people to like my posts, but I put quite a lot of work into this, and one button press would be appreciated. I can’t wait for all the comments saying I will turn out after this.

[jacobcarson877 2,567]

I have always thought this was an issue, but hopefully the commissioners and board of governors continue to help recreates intent on skipping to the E to allow them to do that. Hopefully this past draft helped them figure out the plan on that. Either let the VHLM be for first gens and truly make it a learning platform like the JST, or give GMs some ability to build decent teams. Just my 2 cents since someone asked lmao

[samx 1,175]

Alot of the trades here from my perspective make way more sense within a context of the season. The first philly one... we don't talk about. But most of them actually turned out quite well for me. maybe we didn't win but a lot of my focus as a gm is yes winning but also building a strong locker room which some of the trades that you say we lost maybe we did in technical on ice value but in value to the locker room and community were wonderful trades. 

[Shindigs 1,771]

Interesting article but you missed on quite a few of the S81 trades by treating them as if their draft pick had happened one season too soon. You called several trades busts because the picks that were made in this seasons draft (S83) hadn't played any games for the team. Despite it literally being impossible for them to have played any games for the team yet. It's also not very reasonable to assess if a 2nd year player like Davidson will be a good pick based on his S82 statline (though I'm thinking maybe that was due to mixing up draft years too?). Since what he was able to do with 60-120 TPE isn't really comparable to what he will do this season with 200 TPE.

[Plate 386]

Much of the context for trades was missing because I couldn't trade tree every trade. So, for example, a ton of trades happened where someone acquired a pick and would trade the pick away and get "nothing" from the trade I referenced. Sitting there and figuring out where every pick went and what happened would be a ton of extra work, so I decided to take every trade at face value. It went for both sides, so I considered it fair treatment. 

I provided some context for each season. If you trade a player for a cup run and lose in the first round, and the other team gets a player they use for three seasons, and that player contributes to a cup run later on, that's a bad trade. And I would miss some ulterior contexts for trades which is regrettable. 

The highlight for this series wasn't that Halifax made bad trades or that management messed up. There's a problem with lower picks being more valuable for the VHLM than higher ones. 

[Plate 386]

12 hours ago, samx said:

Alot of the trades here from my perspective make way more sense within a context of the season. The first philly one... we don't talk about. But most of them actually turned out quite well for me. maybe we didn't win but a lot of my focus as a gm is yes winning but also building a strong locker room which some of the trades that you say we lost maybe we did in technical on ice value but in value to the locker room and community were wonderful trades. 

For sure, and I understand there's more to trade than just the physical element of the ice and stats. However, it seems like right now; the VHLM can't decide if it's a place for new players or a place for teams to win. The three-year cycle has been around for almost as long as I can remember, and I don't know if anything has been changed to remedy that. 

It would be nice to have an official stance on the VHLM. Is it for new players? Or is it for teams to contend? The articles were discussion pieces. 

[Spartan 4,531]

56 minutes ago, Plate said:

For sure, and I understand there's more to trade than just the physical element of the ice and stats. However, it seems like right now; the VHLM can't decide if it's a place for new players or a place for teams to win. The three-year cycle has been around for almost as long as I can remember, and I don't know if anything has been changed to remedy that. 

It would be nice to have an official stance on the VHLM. Is it for new players? Or is it for teams to contend? The articles were discussion pieces. 

It is a development league first and foremost, but obviously winning helps players stay engaged. But also every player gets engaged in different ways, some folks prefer to be playing top minutes even if they lose, others want to win even in depth roles. Regardless though, having 2-3 actives on a team is frowned upon and that's what recent changes have been trying to avoid.

[samx 1,175]

1 hour ago, Plate said:

For sure, and I understand there's more to trade than just the physical element of the ice and stats. However, it seems like right now; the VHLM can't decide if it's a place for new players or a place for teams to win. The three-year cycle has been around for almost as long as I can remember, and I don't know if anything has been changed to remedy that. 

It would be nice to have an official stance on the VHLM. Is it for new players? Or is it for teams to contend? The articles were discussion pieces. 

It's supposed to be for new players yes. Contending usually does help that. There's also a known boom/bust cycle in the M. I do think the new attributes could fix that to some extent as a 200 tpe player won't be that much better than a. 100 tpe player so there's less reason to trade your future away to compete now if that makes sense.

[N0HBDY 1,133]

I'm here for trophies not friendships

[Shindigs 1,771]

3 minutes ago, N0HBDY said:

I'm here for trophies not friendships

That explains a lot

[jacobcarson877 2,567]

I'm here to make friends with as many trophies as I can

[Spartan 4,531]

25 minutes ago, Shindigs said:

That explains a lot

I'm here for no trophies and no friends.

[Shindigs 1,771]

Just now, Spartan said:

I'm here for no trophies and no friends.

No, you're here to take all our jerbs!

[frescoelmo 1,282]

1 hour ago, Spartan said:

It is a development league first and foremost

 

So why are general managers allowed to make trades at all?

[Spartan 4,531]

Just now, Shindigs said:

No, you're here to take all our jerbs!

Helps with the friends part.

[Spartan 4,531]

Just now, frescoelmo said:

 

So why are general managers allowed to make trades at all?

The part right after that mentioned that winning is a way to keep engaging people. I'm fine with trades in limitation, as long as one franchise isn't completely crippling themselves to compete in a single season. If I traded a younger player as LVA GM for a capped player, that signaled to the players on the roster that I was committed to furthering the collective experience by pushing towards a championship. The younger player would get to spend another season with their new franchise, and become a core player for the future and likely get more minutes as well.

[diacope 1,696]

Notice how all my trades are a draw?

[frescoelmo 1,282]

10 minutes ago, Spartan said:

The part right after that mentioned that winning is a way to keep engaging people. I'm fine with trades in limitation, as long as one franchise isn't completely crippling themselves to compete in a single season. If I traded a younger player as LVA GM for a capped player, that signaled to the players on the roster that I was committed to furthering the collective experience by pushing towards a championship. The younger player would get to spend another season with their new franchise, and become a core player for the future and likely get more minutes as well.

 

As the OP noted, most of these trades were net losses and the team's success hasn't really been all that great, so it doesn't really seem like this method of volume trading benefitted Halifax over the last 10 seasons.  Limitation is also subjective.... but 48 trades?  What would be too many?  Is the engagement repeatedly trading players capped to 200TPE?  By the end of the season aren't most players near or at the cap anyways?  Seems like instead you would want to promote GM's to mentor players, assist them in building their players and helping them get the most TPE/best experience.  I guess I understand why teams would trade player for player in the rare occurrence that an individual was looking for something else (although aren't most players only in the VHLM for 1 season?), but I don't really (and never have) understand having the option to trade draft picks in a development-first league.

[Spartan 4,531]

45 minutes ago, frescoelmo said:

 

As the OP noted, most of these trades were net losses and the team's success hasn't really been all that great, so it doesn't really seem like this method of volume trading benefitted Halifax over the last 10 seasons.  Limitation is also subjective.... but 48 trades?  What would be too many?  Is the engagement repeatedly trading players capped to 200TPE?  By the end of the season aren't most players near or at the cap anyways?  Seems like instead you would want to promote GM's to mentor players, assist them in building their players and helping them get the most TPE/best experience.  I guess I understand why teams would trade player for player in the rare occurrence that an individual was looking for something else (although aren't most players only in the VHLM for 1 season?), but I don't really (and never have) understand having the option to trade draft picks in a development-first league.

But what is this piece really assessing? Obviously the trades have gone to show that Halifax has not enjoyed success when it comes to the playoffs, nor have their management ended up on the favorable side of trades when you look at what the end pieces accomplished. But for all the players that put up "franchise leading numbers" for their teams, that means that they were career VHLMers. That's not development. Sure there have been stints where management didn't develop and sold the farm to try and compete and failed horrendously, but that's just shitty GM'ing and a perfect reason why the M shouldn't be an entry level position.

 

Also I made plenty of trades as LVA GM, and we didn't win any championships. I probably made trades that I "lost" as well when it comes to who won playoff series. But LVA had a good locker room and we sent plenty of first gens into the VHL. The trades didn't work out in the sense that we didn't win championships or playoff series consistently, but that doesn't mean I wasn't still mentoring players, helping with builds and making sure they moved on in the league and earning the best they can.

 

Edit/Addition: I made 23 trades in about 4 seasons (since I was hired at S72 TDL, I'm not counting S72 as a 5th season), so a rate of 5.75 trades per season. 48/10 for 4.8 isn't really excessive "volume" trading either.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Spartan

[jacobcarson877 2,567]

definitely some important things mentioned in this conversation and obviously we've been having some version of this conversation for... forever really but heres a few things I have to note:

 

- i really really believe now that regular returning players have absolutely no reason to not just skip to the VHLE. They don't need development or learning opportunities they need a competitive environment that they can work hard and earn in. There's no reason they should be stuck capping out in the M, to then cap out in the E. I'd rather a 100TPE returning player in the E than a 200TPE vet in the M before the season has even started. first gens are competing against each other and its purely a learning environment for them. That sounds exactly like the mission of the M, and we've already seen players skip the M draft, we just need a solid rules update to support that.

- the JST is incredible. I think that's a huge reason why I agree with fresco that picks shouldn't be traded. Start every VHLM season with a fantasy draft of the remaining non capped first gens and new members. Each team is pretty well balanced and everyone gets to experience the VHLM as both a competitive player and a role member on a team. Waivers still join teams like normal and GMs can improve their team by pitching well to waivers and building a good reputation. The competitive window is open for every team every season so long as the Gm makes semi-intelligent moves. And, if they suck, guess what they can try again next season without worry of the draft damage they've done.

 

- this also makes the VHL and VHLE drafts far more important, because you can truly see who among the first gens is earning well and making a name for themselves, and returning players make a name for themselves on waivers with VHLE teams.

 

- This also gets more active players on VHLE teams, instead of being a resting place for clickers who got pushed out of VHL spots. The VHLE becomes a competitive environment instead of just another roadblock to the VHL. We know people want to skip up to the E anyways.

[frescoelmo 1,282]

3 hours ago, Spartan said:

But what is this piece really assessing? Obviously the trades have gone to show that Halifax has not enjoyed success when it comes to the playoffs, nor have their management ended up on the favorable side of trades when you look at what the end pieces accomplished. But for all the players that put up "franchise leading numbers" for their teams, that means that they were career VHLMers. That's not development. Sure there have been stints where management didn't develop and sold the farm to try and compete and failed horrendously, but that's just shitty GM'ing and a perfect reason why the M shouldn't be an entry level position.

 

Also I made plenty of trades as LVA GM, and we didn't win any championships. I probably made trades that I "lost" as well when it comes to who won playoff series. But LVA had a good locker room and we sent plenty of first gens into the VHL. The trades didn't work out in the sense that we didn't win championships or playoff series consistently, but that doesn't mean I wasn't still mentoring players, helping with builds and making sure they moved on in the league and earning the best they can.

 

Edit/Addition: I made 23 trades in about 4 seasons (since I was hired at S72 TDL, I'm not counting S72 as a 5th season), so a rate of 5.75 trades per season. 48/10 for 4.8 isn't really excessive "volume" trading either.

 

Is your first question rhetorical?  lol.  But I think you're missing the point.  You just admitted that as a VHLM GM, you did the same thing Halifax did and it largely wasn't successful.  Agreed, you can have an active locker room and mentor players without trading draft picks, so why does it matter if you weren't able to use them?  If anything, being a VHLM GM should be more of an entry level position and focused more exclusively on helping players develop and creating continuity, not repeatedly gutting the future for players with ultimately not much variance between one another.

[Plate 386]

3 hours ago, Spartan said:

But what is this piece really assessing? Obviously the trades have gone to show that Halifax has not enjoyed success when it comes to the playoffs, nor have their management ended up on the favorable side of trades when you look at what the end pieces accomplished. But for all the players that put up "franchise leading numbers" for their teams, that means that they were career VHLMers. That's not development. Sure there have been stints where management didn't develop and sold the farm to try and compete and failed horrendously, but that's just shitty GM'ing and a perfect reason why the M shouldn't be an entry level position.

 

Also I made plenty of trades as LVA GM, and we didn't win any championships. I probably made trades that I "lost" as well when it comes to who won playoff series. But LVA had a good locker room and we sent plenty of first gens into the VHL. The trades didn't work out in the sense that we didn't win championships or playoff series consistently, but that doesn't mean I wasn't still mentoring players, helping with builds and making sure they moved on in the league and earning the best they can.

 

Edit/Addition: I made 23 trades in about 4 seasons (since I was hired at S72 TDL, I'm not counting S72 as a 5th season), so a rate of 5.75 trades per season. 48/10 for 4.8 isn't really excessive "volume" trading either.

The article assesses three separate points. 

- Players that are worth a 1st or 2nd round pick don't end up in the VHLM after the season they're picked, so teams that want to win are incentivized to stock up on 3rd and 5th rounders as it's no secret that career VHLMers are better for franchisees in the VHLM.

- If the VHLM is dedicated to a player development league first and foremost, why is it treated with the same mechanics and systems as the VHL and VHLE?

- The cyclical nature of the VHLM means that it gives a giant cushion to mismanagement of teams since you can just try again after a couple of seasons. 

[Spartan 4,531]

9 minutes ago, frescoelmo said:

 

Is your first question rhetorical?  lol.  But I think you're missing the point.  You just admitted that as a VHLM GM, you did the same thing Halifax did and it largely wasn't successful.  Agreed, you can have an active locker room and mentor players without trading draft picks, so why does it matter if you weren't able to use them?  If anything, being a VHLM GM should be more of an entry level position and focused more exclusively on helping players develop and creating continuity, not repeatedly gutting the future for players with ultimately not much variance between one another.

No, it wasn't, was just trying to point out that this piece is showing trades while identifying how much of an impact the players involved had on Halifax or some other organization from a statistical point, without actually factoring in any of the community or interactive portions. It's not really a fully accurate depiction of what is mainly considered successful in the M, which is user happiness, retention and development. Trades not leading to wins doesn't mean that users aren't getting developed, nor that a lack of championships means that an M team isn't doing what it's meant to do.

 

I also strongly disagree with solely putting newer members at the forefront of the new user experience. It's pretty time intensive, between waivers and checking on players and providing assistance, and you'd hope that someone who is teaching new members is familiar with the league and all of its mechanics. I like having the mix of veterans and "fresh" users that we have now, even though the fresh users are ones who are some of the most active in the league as well and can clearly do the job.

 

Regarding the last point of gutting the future and @Plate's point of the cyclical nature of the M, I agree that it's pretty stupid to see the insane highs and lows. With the changes now, 100 TPE and 200 TPE players really don't have an insane difference, you're right. When we realized that in the BoG, it wasn't much of a concern because it 1. meant that users would want to get out of the M so they could apply more TPE, and 2. teams wouldn't have the urge to sell their future for capped players since they're no longer significantly better, compared to back in the old system when you compared a 250 TPE player to a 100 TPE player. I still think that having trades can give GM's the freedom to make roster moves as they please, if they want to swap out builds, or shift peaked assets for future assets, or even swap players of different positions.

 

A lot of the changes over the past 2-3 seasons has gone towards reducing the extreme cyclical nature of the M and frequency of barren M rosters, but when you start in S72/S73, you're going to get a lot of the data under the old systems and rules. 

[frescoelmo 1,282]

22 hours ago, Spartan said:

 Trades not leading to wins doesn't mean that users aren't getting developed, nor that a lack of championships means that an M team isn't doing what it's meant to do. 

 

I also strongly disagree with solely putting newer members at the forefront of the new user experience. It's pretty time intensive, between waivers and checking on players and providing assistance, and you'd hope that someone who is teaching new members is familiar with the league and all of its mechanics. I like having the mix of veterans and "fresh" users that we have now, even though the fresh users are ones who are some of the most active in the league as well and can clearly do the job.

 

Regarding the last point of gutting the future and @Plate's point of the cyclical nature of the M, I agree that it's pretty stupid to see the insane highs and lows. With the changes now, 100 TPE and 200 TPE players really don't have an insane difference, you're right. When we realized that in the BoG, it wasn't much of a concern because it 1. meant that users would want to get out of the M so they could apply more TPE, and 2. teams wouldn't have the urge to sell their future for capped players since they're no longer significantly better, compared to back in the old system when you compared a 250 TPE player to a 100 TPE player. I still think that having trades can give GM's the freedom to make roster moves as they please, if they want to swap out builds, or shift peaked assets for future assets, or even swap players of different positions.

 

 

IDK it seems like 'newer' is relative, I'm not saying you HAVE to be a first gen but this position seems to be a good stepping stone for someone who wants move up in the league's team management (in my opinion).  If the fresh users are some of the most active members in the league, is it safe to say they can handle something time intensive?  Just seems like, of all the responsibilities a VHLM GM has, the ability to mortgage the future (with regards to draft picks) really seems like something they could be without if there are too many responsibilities.  I guess what is the ideal resume of a VHLM GM?  Veteran?  Ex-VHL GM?  I'm not sure what that answer is.

 

Is it fair to say that nearly everyone is near or at 200TPE by the end of a given season?  Would roster moves specific to players only give VHLM GM's enough freedom to do as they please? Given the new TPE allocation structure it seems as though builds are not nearly as volatile by the time you get to 200 (just guessing based on how my build have gone so far but I'm also an idiot), but I'm not sure what your(or the BOG)'s experience has been on this...  more out of curiosity  

 

[Plate 386]

I think with how the new hybrid system is, a change back to the 250 TPA cap wouldn't be unreasonable and might still be even a touch low. 

With the current system, every point in the hybrid attributes (Up to 70) earns about 0.50 STHS Attributes. This means that players with 200 TPA are playing at roughly the same level as players with 100 TPA in the S72/S73 seasons, as mentioned in the draft.

I love the hybrid build system in place now. I think it solves many problems the VHL was having before, and it seems as though with scoring lowered goalies are now putting up .940 SV%s for the first time in a long time. And there are even goalies with a below 2.5 GAA. So huge nod in that respect. In that same vein, you still have those few players that are leagues ahead of their similar counterparts. Much like McDavid and Drisaitl in the NHL is akin to the Miklavz, Johnston, and Sandstrom of the VHL.

I might be crazy, but a tinfoil hat idea that I had was allowing players in the VHLM to sign with a VHLE team if they wanted as a free agent if they didn't have existing VHLE rights. And that players could apply TPA to their player past 200 (or whatever their cap is) and be a part of the VHLE team they signed with. There would have to be a specific date for this cutoff, probably something like the same day as the trade deadline or something, but at least that way, I could sign with a VHLM team, get TPE, and then bypass the M and go straight into the E. 

Above is just a rough draft suggestion but interested to hear your thoughts on it. 

Edited April 24, 2022 by Plate