Dusty Wilson Deserved Better

[Doomsday 4,043]

 

SEATTLE - Puzzling news came out of Seattle on Wednesday at quarter to 1 PM EST when the Bears publicly announced that they had declined the team option of starting goaltender and Season 86 Scotty Campbell Trophy winner Dusty Wilson, suddenly ending his four season tenure with the team. Nine hours later, an absolute bombshell was dropped on the VHL when the Bears acquired veteran goaltender Xavier Booberry in a trade with the HC Davos Dynamo.

 

Wilson seemed to have options in free agency, with several teams likely looking to free agency for a goaltender, but those teams will not have the option of Dusty Wilson, who nearly a day later announced his retirement and became the first player to hang up their skates in Season 88. A career with such promise had been wiped out for seemingly no real reason at all.

 

"Hopefully can find a home!" Seattle General Manager Blake Campbell stated at the press conference announcing his release. "Great player and better person. Any team would be lucky."

 

However, if that was the case, why was Wilson not good enough for Seattle? It's not like their series defeat to the eventual champion Calgary Wranglers was on him, especially not after his strongest postseason to date with a .930 save percentage. Wilson has shown himself capable of dragging the Bears kicking and screaming into the playoffs, and has shown himself to be a loyal teammate capable of elite performances. However, that didn't stop him from being cast aside by Campbell as if he was garbage.

 

Dusty Wilson deserved better.

 

Jethro Novacek is a writer for the MSFL Times, the premium purveyor of simulation sports news. He enjoys the buzz in the air the VHL Draft season brings, freshly baked pizza, and being a valued member of his team.

[CowboyinAmerica 2,731]

I mean, I'd also argue that I deserved better from Davos which had a ripple effect here. There seems to be a culture of optimization over fun among current VHL GMs that I'm not the biggest fan of, which makes being cutthroat a necessity just to keep up.

[JeffD 648]

2 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

I mean, I'd also argue that I deserved better from Davos which had a ripple effect here. There seems to be a culture of optimization over fun among current VHL GMs that I'm not the biggest fan of, which makes being cutthroat a necessity just to keep up.

 

100%

[v.2 1,267]

 

[Spartan 4,006]

Haha imagine trading away your best players couldn't be me ‍

[Gustav 6,139]

14 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

I mean, I'd also argue that I deserved better from Davos which had a ripple effect here. There seems to be a culture of optimization over fun among current VHL GMs that I'm not the biggest fan of, which makes being cutthroat a necessity just to keep up.

 

I'm curious what you mean here more specifically regarding your situation because I'm not familiar with it. I think it does suck for anyone's player to be a piece of property that can be moved into/out of different groups by someone who never created that player...but it's also next to impossible to "optimize" your team if you're only doing what everyone wants all the time (not that that's even possible). I'm fine with GMs and players at least reaching a mutual understanding before a big move, but I do lose some level of respect when that has not at least been met. I'd imagine that basically anything that isn't "hi, I'm not feeling it anymore and you can look for someone else" in this case would fall under the category of Wilson + Seattle having different ideas and one party having the power to act on theirs.

 

In any case, the league needs more hard-hitting journalism and I definitely appreciate this thread. Always hoping those who need a team they like can find one.

[CowboyinAmerica 2,731]

31 minutes ago, Gustav said:

 

I'm curious what you mean here more specifically regarding your situation because I'm not familiar with it. I think it does suck for anyone's player to be a piece of property that can be moved into/out of different groups by someone who never created that player...but it's also next to impossible to "optimize" your team if you're only doing what everyone wants all the time (not that that's even possible). I'm fine with GMs and players at least reaching a mutual understanding before a big move, but I do lose some level of respect when that has not at least been met. I'd imagine that basically anything that isn't "hi, I'm not feeling it anymore and you can look for someone else" in this case would fall under the category of Wilson + Seattle having different ideas and one party having the power to act on theirs.

 

In any case, the league needs more hard-hitting journalism and I definitely appreciate this thread. Always hoping those who need a team they like can find one.

 

There's a balance between letting GMs make moves but still allowing players to have fun, and I think it's too far to one side. Generally, I've seen a lot of players moved because their builds aren't exactly in line what the GM wants. Players are getting cast off in search of whatever the meta is at the time (right now 6 F, 3 D, more TPE in forwards with zero variation) without a second glance. And partially in mine and Dusty's case but I've seen it in others (including not goalies), players spending a large portion of their careers with one franchise only to get abruptly cast aside for cap reasons right as they're reaching the end of their career.

 

That all works fine if you're playing a GM simulator, and I think many GMs approach moves like they're playing OOTP or something. But here you're dealing with people - and people who are only here for fun at that, not a paycheck like professional leagues. At least in my opinion, player sims should have more of a communal element baked in, and part of that means letting individual players have fun in the way they want. If you want specifics, to me that means a more forgiving salary structure that allows more players to stay on teams if they wish (even if you don't want to raise the cap, think NBA's Bird Rights), less of a focus on the STHS meta and optimal player builds, and rosters/lines that encourage players to play as much as possible no matter where they are in their careers (with this many goalies, I wouldn't be against the backup limit being raised to 16 or 20).

 

But above all else, really I just wish people focused more on what's fun than what's "best" or most "balanced". I've said all along that I'd rather be on a team that's a lot of fun and a 5% chance of winning instead of a team that's cutthroat for a 20% chance of winning. I think the league would be better off if more people thought that way too. That's not the prevailing mindset though.

[hedgehog337 3,480]

[twists 276]

34 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

 

There's a balance between letting GMs make moves but still allowing players to have fun, and I think it's too far to one side. Generally, I've seen a lot of players moved because their builds aren't exactly in line what the GM wants. Players are getting cast off in search of whatever the meta is at the time (right now 6 F, 3 D, more TPE in forwards with zero variation) without a second glance. And partially in mine and Dusty's case but I've seen it in others (including not goalies), players spending a large portion of their careers with one franchise only to get abruptly cast aside for cap reasons right as they're reaching the end of their career.

 

That all works fine if you're playing a GM simulator, and I think many GMs approach moves like they're playing OOTP or something. But here you're dealing with people - and people who are only here for fun at that, not a paycheck like professional leagues. At least in my opinion, player sims should have more of a communal element baked in, and part of that means letting individual players have fun in the way they want. If you want specifics, to me that means a more forgiving salary structure that allows more players to stay on teams if they wish (even if you don't want to raise the cap, think NBA's Bird Rights), less of a focus on the STHS meta and optimal player builds, and rosters/lines that encourage players to play as much as possible no matter where they are in their careers (with this many goalies, I wouldn't be against the backup limit being raised to 16 or 20).

 

But above all else, really I just wish people focused more on what's fun than what's "best" or most "balanced". I've said all along that I'd rather be on a team that's a lot of fun and a 5% chance of winning instead of a team that's cutthroat for a 20% chance of winning. I think the league would be better off if more people thought that way too. That's not the prevailing mindset though.

 

We definitely have some Vegas Golden Knights GM energy in the VHL

[Gustav 6,139]

18 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

 

There's a balance between letting GMs make moves but still allowing players to have fun, and I think it's too far to one side. Generally, I've seen a lot of players moved because their builds aren't exactly in line what the GM wants. Players are getting cast off in search of whatever the meta is at the time (right now 6 F, 3 D, more TPE in forwards with zero variation) without a second glance. And partially in mine and Dusty's case but I've seen it in others (including not goalies), players spending a large portion of their careers with one franchise only to get abruptly cast aside for cap reasons right as they're reaching the end of their career.

 

That all works fine if you're playing a GM simulator, and I think many GMs approach moves like they're playing OOTP or something. But here you're dealing with people - and people who are only here for fun at that, not a paycheck like professional leagues. At least in my opinion, player sims should have more of a communal element baked in, and part of that means letting individual players have fun in the way they want. If you want specifics, to me that means a more forgiving salary structure that allows more players to stay on teams if they wish (even if you don't want to raise the cap, think NBA's Bird Rights), less of a focus on the STHS meta and optimal player builds, and rosters/lines that encourage players to play as much as possible no matter where they are in their careers (with this many goalies, I wouldn't be against the backup limit being raised to 16 or 20).

 

But above all else, really I just wish people focused more on what's fun than what's "best" or most "balanced". I've said all along that I'd rather be on a team that's a lot of fun and a 5% chance of winning instead of a team that's cutthroat for a 20% chance of winning. I think the league would be better off if more people thought that way too. That's not the prevailing mindset though.

 

I agree with you and I do think we'd be a better place if people were just less competitive. I've never personally understood the mindset of going to FA/asking for trades specifically to chase cups and I've always hated watching people tell other people they have to build in hyper-specific ways. 

 

I don't know how possible it is to change that culture, though--I've always advocated against it but we'll always have people who want to build an all-time great (player or team) and will stop at nothing to accomplish that. And when that happens, it almost becomes necessary to do some of the same stuff if you're in a group that I'd suspect includes lots of people in the league: "I'm mostly just here to have fun but I also want to keep up."

 

I think it was a good thing that my first player was absolute dogshit because that probably made me more able to put what I was actually enjoying in perspective. It certainly wasn't player performance, and I'm OK with thinking it shouldn't be.

[FrostBeard 1,975]

There are always situations when the best decision for the team might hurt some players and I can understand that approach. 

However I think it is vital for GMs to understand that we are not dealing with assets - we are dealing with players and people that are here to have the best possible experience. It gives the team correct vibe and also promotes the idea that GMing is not a job to achieve something for yourself but work to give an experience for everyone on the team. 

[Frank 4,804]

54 minutes ago, FrostBeard said:

There are always situations when the best decision for the team might hurt some players and I can understand that approach. 

However I think it is vital for GMs to understand that we are not dealing with assets - we are dealing with players and people that are here to have the best possible experience. It gives the team correct vibe and also promotes the idea that GMing is not a job to achieve something for yourself but work to give an experience for everyone on the team. 

Has to be a mix of both or else you promise your players team/individual success and can't deliver since everyone is a step a head of you.  

[Daniel Janser 1,983]

18 minutes ago, Frank said:

Has to be a mix of both or else you promise your players team/individual success and can't deliver since everyone is a step a head of you.  

to be frank (pun not intended) I think it is foolish to promise success, especially if same is dependent on RNJesus being in your favour. I mean, I get it that a GM also has to look at the future/interest of the franchise. But as was mentioned in this thread before, we deal with players and not some AI. If I see how some players are traded and used as bargaining chips, with apparently no intention to really play them I struggle to believe that this helps with retention. BrutalBoost and Dusty retired their players (and while I have no empirical evidence that they retired their players because of the trades/contract situation, the timing at least suggests that this might have been the straw which broke the camel's back). Bob Vladovechsenkchushkin is an other player who looks like a traveler/hot potato at the moment. They were traded to Vancouver for the second time within the span of a season. In S87 they were traded from CGY to DAV who flipped them to VAN just to end up in MAL. This season they were traded from MAL to HSK and then passed on to VAN.

Edited March 25, 2023 by Daniel Janser

[Spartan 4,006]

22 minutes ago, Daniel Janser said:

BrutalBoost and Dusty retired their players (and while I have no empirical evidence that they retired their players because of the trades/contract situation, the timing at least suggests that this might have been the straw which broke the camel's back)

Dusty genuinely didn't know that there were other teams who needed a goalie. In this specific case, the user clearly wasn't made aware from anyone that teams like CHI and WAR would need a starter. He only found out after he retired.

 

But yeah generally for the thoughts in this trade, I'm a bit confused why we're pushing against the fact that the VHL is a competitive league and that we need to have measures to prevent overly stacked teams. GM's can easily consult the players that they decide to trade and find out places they would want to play. It's not like some of the players getting traded are going to shitty places either, they're clearly wanted wherever they are. If a GM chooses not to do so, that's specifically on that GM, it's not an indictment on the entire GM group.

[Gustav 6,139]

19 minutes ago, Spartan said:

But yeah generally for the thoughts in this trade, I'm a bit confused why we're pushing against the fact that the VHL is a competitive league and that we need to have measures to prevent overly stacked teams.

 

I'm not 100% sure where this sentence comes from because I don't know what in here disagrees with it. There's a difference between "GMs should talk with their players and if they have to be moved it should at least be communicated well" and "I don't want the VHL to be competitive."

 

I'll also point out that I agree with this:

21 minutes ago, Spartan said:

If a GM chooses not to do so, that's specifically on that GM, it's not an indictment on the entire GM group.

 

...and I don't think that anyone here is saying that players being traded is inherently bad. I do think it's fair to point out that there are likely cases where due respect isn't fully given to a player, and it isn't a good look to just dump your reasonably developed former MVP without giving him much direction (at least, that's what it looks like from the outside). I remember back when Vancouver some team or another would let some people know they'd been traded by just trading them and waiting for them to notice the forum notification...it was mildly funny to watch sometimes but I wouldn't have considered it that had I been the player being traded.

 

 

On the flip side of the whole "GMs should work to create a community of fun people who support each other" thing (which I think is entirely valid), I'll also point out that there are many more people in the league than the average person thinks who will get frustrated if a GM isn't doing enough to win--and what do you do to accommodate those players and people? I had players in my time as a GM getting pissed off at me because we weren't winning enough or I wasn't buying enough or I bought player A and player B doesn't like player A. It's really, really hard to make everyone on your team happy about what you're doing all the time. I think on the player end, you should look at the fact that you have 16 different teams to choose from and you have the opportunity to pick up and move at some point if you don't like where you are. It is primarily on your GM to give you the best experience, but if you aren't finding it there...go to a fun team if you want fun. Go to a winning team if you want to win. That part also isn't complicated and it's something the player can do to take a little bit of that power back.

[Daniel Janser 1,983]

36 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Dusty genuinely didn't know that there were other teams who needed a goalie. In this specific case, the user clearly wasn't made aware from anyone that teams like CHI and WAR would need a starter. He only found out after he retired.

 

But yeah generally for the thoughts in this trade, I'm a bit confused why we're pushing against the fact that the VHL is a competitive league and that we need to have measures to prevent overly stacked teams. GM's can easily consult the players that they decide to trade and find out places they would want to play. It's not like some of the players getting traded are going to shitty places either, they're clearly wanted wherever they are. If a GM chooses not to do so, that's specifically on that GM, it's not an indictment on the entire GM group.

And I never meant to 'criticize' any GM, let alone the 'GM-ship' as a whole.

 

I merely shared my thoughts on that and observations I have made during the last two seasons specifically.

 

Having said that, I would expect a GM to get in touch with the player in question and make them aware what options there are. I for example always talked to players before I traded them, because to me it was important that the players have a good experience in the VHL. 

 

If a player is traded 6-7 times in the span of two seasons, I have a hard time to believe that they are really wanted by the franchises who traded them away before they played a single game for said organisation.  

[Spartan 4,006]

2 minutes ago, Gustav said:

I'm not 100% sure where this sentence comes from because I don't know what in here disagrees with it.

Yours and Twists' comment regarding competitiveness, CIA's about allowing players to remain on teams. At least that's how I interpreted it, could have taken more seriously than it was intended. I know I still find the VHL interesting primarily because of my competitiveness as both a player and a GM. It's a simulation league with no prize to me for success, but it's nice to win a cup or get an award as a small serotonin boost. I happily cup chased for the majority of Nico's career, at this point after 7 seasons I'm definitely bummed out at the lack of success, but I enjoyed the teams I got to be a part of.

 

And then the general idea (that seemed to get a lot of positive agreement) about allowing teams to get cap exceptions to retain more players for longer periods of time was the second half of my statement. We would have the same couple teams dominating for many seasons. We can see the SBA's history and the amount of frustration that stemmed from those days to know that it simply wouldn't be a good idea, even if we prioritize the community and having a good time with each other in our various servers.

[Arce 742]

[twists 276]

47 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Yours and Twists' comment regarding competitiveness, CIA's about allowing players to remain on teams. At least that's how I interpreted it, could have taken more seriously than it was intended. I know I still find the VHL interesting primarily because of my competitiveness as both a player and a GM. It's a simulation league with no prize to me for success, but it's nice to win a cup or get an award as a small serotonin boost. I happily cup chased for the majority of Nico's career, at this point after 7 seasons I'm definitely bummed out at the lack of success, but I enjoyed the teams I got to be a part of.

 

And then the general idea (that seemed to get a lot of positive agreement) about allowing teams to get cap exceptions to retain more players for longer periods of time was the second half of my statement. We would have the same couple teams dominating for many seasons. We can see the SBA's history and the amount of frustration that stemmed from those days to know that it simply wouldn't be a good idea, even if we prioritize the community and having a good time with each other in our various servers.

 

hey why am I being brought into this. I was just saying we have GM's who definitely treat players as assets and nothing more

[Banackock 7,707]

It was a tough move for sure. Every current/past GM have made trades to improve the team, upgrade a player, their depth, gain draft picks, save cap etc.. that’s part of the role.  I remember a lot of tough trades where I’ve had such great relationships that I’ve actually gotten very emotional when moving these players and it took a long time to click the “accept” button. The VHL is a player sim league but also offers the GM role too. I enjoy that aspect more. 
 

My first player was a goalie. Started with Stockholm, left there to go to New York in FA. We won a cup and I got an Aidan Shaw but despite that, they let me go to FA unsigned. No good teams left so I signed with a VERY bad Calgary team and retired after that poor season. 

 

I’ve had tons of great conversations with Dusty - about the VHL and life in general. Over 40 seasons I’ve had all kinds of talks with members - from happy ones to helping one another through tougher days/times etc.  I talk to all of my players like that behind closed doors and around. I think most GM’s are awesome at this when I’ve been part of their teams or LR. It’s a family and community vibe. I’m usually fast to answer too (being in australia now makes it tougher). We always have amazing members in there that have a lot of fun. Winning is also fun so we do a mix of it. 
 

I do remember Dusty on a few occasions stating if not for his GM/Seattle, he wouldn’t be here now and would likely be inactive. Also mentioned not recreating! Glad he never when IA and we spoke and he came back happily recreating   We also traded a young player recently just to better their experience instead of being the 7th forward with much lower minutes! 

 

Good read as always.

 

[dustywilson22 133]

 

[Alex 2,879]

Just to provide some context with how the Booberry trade was handled, after the playoffs ended, Booberry was informed that he would be traded due to salary cap purposes. Every time I spoke to another GM, Booberry was informed  and asked if he would waive his NTC to go there. Booberry was kept up to date every step of the way through negotiations, the entire purpose of the trade was to ensure that Booberry would have a team to play for this season, where he will break the all-time TPE record, the only other alternative for Davos was to let Booberry go to FA, where he potentially would go unsigned due to his cap hit. The trade was done with Booberry's best interests in mind, and I genuinely do wish him the best of luck this season in Seattle.

[Otis Boudreaux Jr 214]

I am new to the league, even though this is my 2nd time, my first go-around wasnt very long, but I have been an owner and or gm in a couple of other sim leagues. 

I recently told a plyer that as the owner, I dont feel I have the right to just treat the players as I would in a traditional sports sim league. As was stated earlier, this is not OOTP, there are real people behind these players. So I think that is where the "management" side of things becomes even more important. 

 

I feel a way to possibly alleviate some issues is to have constant and open communication and conversations with the team as a whole and the players individually. Over my tenure in these various offices I have been forced to trade a player I wanted to keep and not-resign someone who was really an asset to the team. Part of the responsibility of being in one of these positions as an owner, GM, Asst GM, or any other front office staff, is to keep the members of the team in the clear about what decisions are being made. With that said, I am not saying that all possible roster moves be discussed in the LR. However, there should be on-going conversations with the players. As much as possible reaching out to them, checking in, and keeping them in the loop as the season evolves about possible moves.

One thing I found that worked really well when I was looking at the possibility of not being able to keep someone is to discuss it with them and suggest possible options for them and after they expressed their interest in any of the teams, I would reach out to the GM/Owner of that organization. I would gauge their interest and let them know the player was interested. At that point, I would step back and let things happen. Sometimes the player would have a new home found before FA even opened. Sometimes they didnt, but I felt it was my obligation as the Owner/GM to try to give them the best experience possible. 

The limit with doing things that way were making sure to not violate any tampering or other rules or limitations. Even if there could not be any conversations, I would at least let the player know of possible locations for them to reach out to once they became a Free Agent.

In the years I have done this, I have yet to find the Magic Sweet Spot where I was able to manage the real person's experience while trying to manage the organization to become a champion. But I found that by communicating with everyone as much as possible, it lessens any blow from what the organization just had to do.

Just my 2 cents...or maybe a nickel...this one is kinda long...