Does It Make Sense To Play Nine Seasons?

[frescoelmo 1,276]

Does It make Sense To Play For Nine Seasons?

 

At the time of this writing, the VHL Portal show the following free agents available (listed by the season they were created by their player-agent, which at this point I would consider a veteran):

Season 85           1

Season 84           4

Season 83           6

Season 82           10

Season 81            13

 

That amounts to 34 players currently available to be signed by any of the 16 VHL franchises, all of which are above the VHLE threshold and thus required to play in the VHL (all of them have over 400 TPE, and six of them have over 600 TPE).  A few different ways to split this pie; there are enough free agents available for every VHL franchise to pick up two of them (and have some left over).  Additionally, in the average draft class this would amount to just over two rounds of players, which is about as long as general managers are willing to stay interested anyways (why do we have 4^th round picks again?).

 

At the same time of this writing, out of the 34 players above that are available, 3 of them have a single offer from a VHL team: Nic McMuffin (CHI), Freddy Freeze (CHI), and Hasbulla Magomedov (MAL).  Only one other player (Season 89’s Magnus Carlsen) has any offers from VHL teams, albeit carrying a paltry 86 TPE.  With teams seemingly exhausted with their salary cap availability prior to free agency even opening, only 27 players were picked up (Zaza Colors was removed as he is again available).

 

This seems like a lot of useless number crunching to appease Spartan, but a few issues stick out…  Namely, teams don’t have enough money to sign players, and teams are being “pushed” (encouraged) to sign actives over players with more TPE to allocate.  If we are moving forward with the idea, or rather purpose, of prioritizing member activity and retention (ie., getting actives on rosters over having better players that may or may not be active) over strictly assembling the best roster, does it make sense to play for nine seasons?

 

To start, I can only imagine very few reasons that you would stick around.  Most of the reasons are closely related to player accolades.  If you have enough TPE to fight off the inevitable depreciation, that is another reason to stick around.  Or… I guess you are just lazy and want to stick it out for the duration of your time because you don’t want to start from scratch (I probably fall into this category).  But as general managers have found, eventually aging veterans serve better as trade fodder to re-tool and get younger…  if you’re lucky to find a naïve individual willing to do so.

 

Using Season 88 as a reference, four teams (at this time I counted Calgary, New York, DC and Los Angeles) have less than four defensemen (3) on their roster.  Using the portal as it currently stands (for Season 89) for a similar reference, the following teams have less than the 6 and 4 players rostered, for forwards and defensemen (respectively):

 

Chicago (1 forward, 1 defenseman; $14,250,000 available)

Helsinki (1 defenseman $5,000,000 available)

London (1 defenseman; $1,500,000 available)

Moscow (1 defenseman; -$2,000,000 available)

New York (1 forward, 1 defenseman; $8,750,000 available)

Riga (2 defensemen; $0 available)

Seattle (1 defenseman; -$2,000,000 available)

Vancouver (1 defenseman; $0 available)

Warsaw (1 forward; $4,750,000 available)

 

You can look at this in a few different ways.  To begin, I am assuming 6 forwards and 4 defensemen is the model for a VHL roster; meaning there are 12 rostered spots available for what I believe are 34 acceptable players.  However, the financial implications of the salary cap will ultimately allow what I would predict is in the range of 4-6 players that will ultimately be able to sign with VHL franchises (this somewhat resonates previously noting that only three ‘qualified’ players have offers currently).

 

Is the new ‘meta’ to carry a lesser roster of 6 forward and 3 defensemen to avoid having to spend money on poorly built veterans or bad young players, while maintaining a competitive team?  Is this somewhat dictated by the VHLE holding players back from their parent rosters?  This direction, although with minimal research, seems to be picking up steam.  At the same time last season (88), four teams had three defensemen.  This season (89) it could be as many as eight teams, which is half of the league.  What is the main reason behind this; lack of cap space, player availability, teams realizing they do not need as many defensemen, or something we haven't even discussed?

 

To me it seems that we are quickly approaching a crossroads.  If you are not a ‘maximum earner’, the odds of you staying rostered on a VHL team seems like it could become more and more difficult for you in the coming seasons as you enter your veteran (depreciating) seasons.  This is loosely highlighted by the fact that there are now more ways than ever to get your twelve TPE per week.  Particularly if you are a defenseman.  Honestly, it seems like your best odds of hanging around in the VHL if you are not a maximum earner is as a backup goalie, because your player exemption allows teams to carry you instead of an AI backup.  Even if you are a maximum earner, there is the very realistic possibility of the only teams being able to roster you in your 8^th and 9^th seasons being non-contenders, or ones that can absorb your obnoxious contract.

 

It's a weird time to have a player in the VHL.  Teams are shrinking their rosters, no one wants your old, crappy player, and the league wants your team to sign a lesser player over you.  How long will your player stick around?

[frescoelmo 1,276]

For record, this is purely speculative and my own opinion, with having no foresight or insight as to any future plans the league has.

[Spartan 4,408]

Gonna thoroughly reply to this later, but is your counting of FA's inclusive of active status?

 

Sure, competitiveness is great, and I love competing. But this is a sim league, not a real business with tangible awards. I don't really see any correlation between how many seasons you play in the VHL and whether you get left in FA or not. Seems like it's just whether you stay active enough to find a home no? Dunno why anyone would want Nico's corpse if I went IA like 4 seasons in and depreciated into hell

[frescoelmo 1,276]

Goal achieved...  distracting Spartan

[jacobcarson877 2,541]

To add to Spartan, there are 5 active F in FA, 1 active D and 1 active G, with 2 active prospects.

IF I remember correctly from SEASONS ago, the lone active D is forum-only and hasn't been on the forum in about 10 days, so any interest from teams likely hasn't been read yet.

The forwards SHOULD get signed by someone, assuming they respond.

The goaltender absolutely will get scooped up by someone when they respond.

But yes, one should earn at a rate according to the role that they want on a team, and with the amount of min-maxing done to stay competitive, D and G, the positions with the least amount of roster spots feel it the most.

[Spartan 4,408]

4 minutes ago, frescoelmo said:

Goal achieved...  distracting Spartan

I'm at the point of this conference where a nap would be needed. This wall of text didn't help. Also that your title had minimal relation to your content smh. Thanks for the bedtime reading later at least.

[jacobcarson877 2,541]

1 minute ago, Spartan said:

Also that your title had minimal relation to your content smh

Delete the E?

[KaleebtheMighty 1,509]

Why not just turn the hard cap of the VHLE into a soft cap and allow those lower TPE FAs in the 400s to be able to still play in the VHLE? If we are treating this like a sim league, should a player be able to play on a team where they will excel and not just ride the 4th line the entire time?

[Viper 530]

delete the E

[frescoelmo 1,276]

20 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Also that your title had minimal relation to your content smh.

 

Late to the game, none of my titles do

[Daniel Janser 2,184]

[BOOM 8,758]

Imagine not retiring after your 1st regression!

[KRZY 416]

11 hours ago, KaleebtheMighty said:

Why not just turn the hard cap of the VHLE into a soft cap and allow those lower TPE FAs in the 400s to be able to still play in the VHLE? If we are treating this like a sim league, should a player be able to play on a team where they will excel and not just ride the 4th line the entire time?

Definitely makes the E more then just a one or two season pit stop if this was put in place 

[frescoelmo 1,276]

5 hours ago, BOOM said:

Imagine not retiring after your 1st regression!

 

That is nine seasons for trifecta

[Doomsday 4,130]

19 hours ago, frescoelmo said:

Is this somewhat dictated by the VHLE holding players back from their parent rosters?

 

It doesn’t? If the VHL team wants the player, they get the player. If a player is staying in the E, it's because they didn't earn enough to top 400 and/or the parent club is not choosing to call them up. The VHLE cannot actively prevent a player from moving up. 

[frescoelmo 1,276]

14 minutes ago, Doomsday said:

 

It doesn’t? If the VHL team wants the player, they get the player. If a player is staying in the E, it's because they didn't earn enough to top 400 and/or the parent club is not choosing to call them up. The VHLE cannot actively prevent a player from moving up. 

 

Right but there are instances when players are close to, but do not meet the threshold, however they will be way above it by season's end.

[Doomsday 4,130]

1 hour ago, frescoelmo said:

 

Right but there are instances when players are close to, but do not meet the threshold, however they will be way above it by season's end.

 

Again, that isn't on the VHLE. The parent club could still call them up. Not the VHLE's fault that they don't.