Should Recreates Have a Choice?

[Grape 547]

The trade deadline has come and passed, and so too has the wave of recreates. This surge of “new” players breathes life into the VHLM and bolsters both rosters and locker rooms. While this is overall a good thing, as more activity in the VHLM leads to a greater experience for first gens, it also impacts the league in a pretty negative way in my opinion. As of writing this, if my counting is right, there are 14 returning members that have signed with a team. All but one team has gotten a returning member, with Saskatoon being the lone team to not bring in any returning member (you could also include Ottawa since their returning member is a pure VHLM lifer and basically recreates every season now).. While that in itself is fine, one must look at the distribution of the other five returning members. Those five members went to two teams, San Diego and Miami. Another fun fact: ALL of Miami’s waiver players are returning members, and ALL but ONE of San Diego’s are also returners. Think about that. San Diego, the top team in the VHLM, has four returning members who have all pretty much broken the 100 TPE mark and continue to boost this team in the standings. Miami, while not as good as San Diego, is also feeling the influx of production from their wave of returners. Returning members coming to a team and making them better is not a new revelation. What team is not going to benefit from getting a player with some extra TPE in their pocket at the start? But the real question is, is it fair? Is it fair that returning members turn a stacked team into an even more stacked team, taking away playing time from new creates who have been having themselves a good season, only to get shafted? Is it fair for the struggling teams with new players to not get that extra veteran experience? Is it fair for returning members to basically cup chase right out of the gate? I understand going to a team because you have a personal relationship with the GM or something like that. I’ve done that before, albeit when I did that team was kinda in the shitter, but, especially in San Diego’s case, this just seems like blatant cup chasing. The only way for this league to survive is to bring in new members, give them a positive experience, and retain them. Stacking a single team or two while pretty much ignoring every other team does not help facilitate it. Obviously, returning members likely would not want to go to the bottom teams in the league and basically play for a week or two max and dip out, but there’s no need for a big chunk of them to go and make the best team in the league even better. Spread the wealth around, actually make the race to first look competitive. At the very least, implement a system in which roughly an even distribution of returning members, in which a team cannot get three until every other team gets two, or something along those lines. It just seems extremely unfair to GMs and players alike that returning members can just come in and choose to cup chase right out of the gate.

(553 words)

[badcolethetitan 824]

I went to Las Vegas due to the LR and also playing time. I also didn't want to join a team that was already stacked, because what's the point. I want to see my player help contribute to the team and be the underdog. I could've joined someone like SDM and just rode out the fourth line into a cup, but it's pretty boring if you ask me.

[Gaikoku-hito 1,735]

[Banackock 7,759]

I didn’t read it all but I think I got the point of it within the first couple sentences. I agree 50%.

[OrbitingDeath 2,951]

Almost everyone that has multiple players will choose cup over play time. So to make people happy: yes give them a choice,  for league parity:  no, dont give them a choice.

[Gaikoku-hito 1,735]

1 hour ago, OrbitingDeath said:

Almost everyone that has multiple players will choose cup over play time. So to make people happy: yes give them a choice,  for league parity:  no, dont give them a choice.

[AJW 1,837]

Yes

[Triller 1,420]

I'm still contemplating when I recreate if I even bother signing with an M team.  Earn till I hit the E and skip the M all together.  If I do go with an M team it will be with whoever is dead last.

[jacobcarson877 2,117]

If I can't play for the Marlins I quit.

[Doomsday 4,055]

[rory 1,775]

what 0 recreates does to a mfer

[Spartan 4,091]

Few thoughts here:

 

1. I'm honestly unsure if TDL recreates are a significant advantage to competitive teams. This does go in two directions. First, a team adding a lot of TDL+ players is going to be playing their capped/high TPE stars a lot less since they can't be double shifted. I've seen this tank teams before, including teams I've managed in the M. So that's something to consider - that if we remove recreate flexibility at the deadline, we could just be letting juggernaut M teams remain full of high TPE players.

 

2. Does it really matter where recreates go for a week or two? If a TDL create joined a team outside playoff contention, their season would be over tomorrow or so. If they want minimum exposure to the M or just want max minutes for like 12-14 games, sure the last place teams can get a boost. But I don't think anyone gains value by forcing players to teams they don't want to play for with so little of the season remaining.

 

If there's a place to impose restrictions, it's maybe before season start? With the amount of recreates you can carry? But it'd be very difficult to implement and would become a larger headache when you consider draft pick restrictions. But if there's simple ideas, we can chat about them.

[Gaikoku-hito 1,735]

5 hours ago, Spartan said:

Few thoughts here:

 

1. I'm honestly unsure if TDL recreates are a significant advantage to competitive teams. This does go in two directions. First, a team adding a lot of TDL+ players is going to be playing their capped/high TPE stars a lot less since they can't be double shifted. I've seen this tank teams before, including teams I've managed in the M. So that's something to consider - that if we remove recreate flexibility at the deadline, we could just be letting juggernaut M teams remain full of high TPE players.

 

2. Does it really matter where recreates go for a week or two? If a TDL create joined a team outside playoff contention, their season would be over tomorrow or so. If they want minimum exposure to the M or just want max minutes for like 12-14 games, sure the last place teams can get a boost. But I don't think anyone gains value by forcing players to teams they don't want to play for with so little of the season remaining.

 

If there's a place to impose restrictions, it's maybe before season start? With the amount of recreates you can carry? But it'd be very difficult to implement and would become a larger headache when you consider draft pick restrictions. But if there's simple ideas, we can chat about them.

I wrote something similar but decide a short answer was better because in the end I think recreates should have a say where they play and I agree they don`t make that big of an impact.

 

That being said a waver system could be used if you want to restrict how many recreates end up on a single team.

[McLovin 407]

Personally as someone who has dealt with this exact problem for two seasons now, I don't necessarily think that the recreates should not be given a choice, but i certainly think the waiver limit for teams should be reduced greatly as to prevent juggernaut teams like San Diego from essentially taking everybody available. This is very easily done just by averaging the number of waivers every team signs in a season and capping it at whatever the median is.

 

This season, Las Vegas has signed 4 referral waivers who are all close friends and family of mine who showed interest in the league, plus a recreate and a first gen. 6 players and we're a very competitive team, so if the limit was like 5 or so per season or something, with free agents still being at the limit they are now, it would allow other teams to be able to get some players to build with and give their best shot at competing for a cup with. The fact is that San Diego has had 9 claims this season alone, with the next highest number being 5 from us (we dropped one of our waiver players for IA.) Past that, the rest of the league is lucky to get three waiver claims this season, while there's even a few teams who only have one or two to show for the entire season.

 

I think the current waiver limit is set waaaay too high and allows teams to, as Grape worded perfectly, cup chase with elite recreate players other teams had no chance of ever signing because they aren't first place in the league.
 

tldr; lower the waiver limit by about 80% so other teams have more fair opportunities to build competitive seasons, and to prevent waiver monopolies from forming at the TDL.

[Daniel Janser 2,004]

10 hours ago, McLovin said:

tldr; lower the waiver limit by about 80% so other teams have more fair opportunities to build competitive seasons, and to prevent waiver monopolies from forming at the TDL.

Well, I see your point. However if we recall the S82 'Rob Talks Hockey' recruitment success where over a hundred new members joined in a very short time span, the teams would not be able to sign hopeful new members. That would be quite the handicap for retention I dare say. I am aware that this was an outlier, just wanted to bring up the other side of the coin as not only recreates will end up in the waiver system, but also genuine first gens. The latter being the focus of the VHLM if I recall correctly, as they need mentoring the most.