VHLM Waiver Discussion

[Da Trifecta 1,902]

Victor, Davey Jones isn't a first Gen for the record haha

 

The player is directly. I however, am not.

[RomanesEuntDomus 442]

Yeah maybe 2 days.

This means once a player joins there's 24 hours to claim him using priority, then 24 hours to claim him for free, and then he gets assigned to a team.

 

Oh and incentive for VHLM GMs will also be implemented retroactive to the start of the season (this is 1 TPE for each new member who gets to 50 TPE) unless someone makes a good counterargument for that.

 

Two good ideas imho

[Guest]

I definitely think that there could be some sort of system for training and getting new VHLM GMs acquainted with how things work. It can be overwhelming and if I hadn't sought help, I would not have gotten help. Perhaps we could have some guys who have done it before or are longtime VHLM GMs teach the new ones the ropes? The more trained and knowledges the GMs are, the better they will be and the more activity they can inspire.

My only suggestion for this would buddy system? Which could be a challenge. The only thing that would make sense is if a new VHLM GM talked to a previously tenured one? I know when DA was in Cologne he never shied away from asking some VHLM GM questions. Maybe just more communication.

[Seth 92]

Maybe in 2014, yes.

So technically I am correct! (:

[Guest]

The player is directly. I however, am not.

You created under another member name? Thus you are still not a first gen.

[Corco 1,265]

I was thinking of proposing this awhile ago and old site, but forget about it in all the commotion and confusion when we switched. Anyway, what I was going to propose was that, after 4 seasons in the VHLM, a player cannot become a VHLM free agent/play in the VHLM if he has more than 125 TPE. This way, we have less teams loaded with old, high TPE players taking the spot of young, active players.

[Da Trifecta 1,902]

My only suggestion for this would buddy system? Which could be a challenge. The only thing that would make sense is if a new VHLM GM talked to a previously tenured one? I know when DA was in Cologne he never shied away from asking some VHLM GM questions. Maybe just more communication.

 

Exactly. I was trying to learn all I could for this day.

[Corco 1,265]

This will be implemented with immediate effect unless someone makes a reasonable counterargument.

I don't like the idea of giving them to teams at the bottom of the priority list though.

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

My only suggestion for this would buddy system? Which could be a challenge. The only thing that would make sense is if a new VHLM GM talked to a previously tenured one? I know when DA was in Cologne he never shied away from asking some VHLM GM questions. Maybe just more communication.

 

 

Assistant GMs could work here. I know before I got the Ottawa GM job Jericho gave me some pointers, then when I got the job eaglesfan became my assistant GM. I never really needed him to do much, but I told him some stuff. Although being brothers helped.

[Doomsday 4,143]

They should be given to a team where that player is most likely to see the ice. As in, a LW going to a team with 1 LW instead of one with 2.

[Victor 11,021]

I don't like the idea of giving them to teams at the bottom of the priority list though.

Expand.

For the time being, the rules are in the first post here: http://vhlsim.invisionzone.com/index.php?/topic/3451-s36-waiver-thread/

The last point about which way players are assigned is up for debate.

I'll also post it in the VHLM GM forum.

[Corco 1,265]

Assistant GMs could work here. I know before I got the Ottawa GM job Jericho gave me some pointers, then when I got the job eaglesfan became my assistant GM. I never really needed him to do much, but I told him some stuff. Although being brothers helped.

Assistant GMs are allowed, I know kesler is assistant for Turku and boubabi was one for Bratislava (although I'm not sure if he still is).

[Da Trifecta 1,902]

They should be given to a team where that player is most likely to see the ice. As in, a LW going to a team with 1 LW instead of one with 2.

 

I second this. Hence why I went and claimed a center to make my #2 guy.

[Victor 11,021]

They should be given to a team where that player is most likely to see the ice. As in, a LW going to a team with 1 LW instead of one with 2.

Possibly the best idea. But if two teams are tied with the least LWs, bottom up priority or top down?

I think it should go bottom up because the top priority teams already missed their chance to claim the player.

[Guest]

They should be given to a team where that player is most likely to see the ice. As in, a LW going to a team with 1 LW instead of one with 2.

This. Corco it wouldn't be to the bottom of priority per say, it would be to a team thats needs it. For example, everyone go look at Turku and Bramptons roster and tell then tell me they don't need players.

[Squinty 116]

I was thinking of proposing this awhile ago and old site, but forget about it in all the commotion and confusion when we switched. Anyway, what I was going to propose was that, after 4 seasons in the VHLM, a player cannot become a VHLM free agent/play in the VHLM if he has more than 125 TPE. This way, we have less teams loaded with old, high TPE players taking the spot of young, active players.

 

I don't really think that's a good idea. What if that member comes back and sees that his player hasn't played for an entire season, gets discouraged and leaves again? Plus, we already have a shortage of players for the VHLM, there's too much harm in taking out even more players

[sterling 2,000]

That's what I did back when I simmed games. I just assigned new creates to whatever team needed them most when they weren't getting claimed.

[Victor 11,021]

Maybe inactives should be limited to 3rd line ice time only, or at least 2nd, kind of like in the Super Cup.

[Squinty 116]

Maybe inactives should be limited to 3rd line ice time only, or at least 2nd, kind of like in the Super Cup.

 

Either way, wouldn't have mattered for Jeevan Samuelsson

#VHLMGOAT

[Corco 1,265]

I don't really think that's a good idea. What if that member comes back and sees that his player hasn't played for an entire season, gets discouraged and leaves again? Plus, we already have a shortage of players for the VHLM, there's too much harm in taking out even more players

I would much rather have a guy be discouraged that his player is old and not playing rather than a new member being discouraged because he isn't getting much playing time and he leaves.

[Corco 1,265]

Or, we could just lower the TPE max to something like 135 or 150.

[Squinty 116]

I would much rather have a guy be discouraged that his player is old and not playing rather than a new member being discouraged because he isn't getting much playing time and he leaves.

 

GMs give active players first or second line duty anyways though.

And if they don't, then they should be fired

[Seth 92]

GMs give active players first or second line duty anyways though.

And if they don't, then they should be fired

I remember when I was in Brampton our GM didn't start us because she was angry at us. 

Edited January 5, 2014 by Seth

[Corco 1,265]

I remember when I was in Brampton our GM didn't start us because she was angry at us. 

Had I known this, I wouldn't have let meg (assuming that is who you're talking about) become a GM a few seasons ago, regardless if she is inactive now.

[Seth 92]

Had I known this, I wouldn't have let meg (assuming that is who you're talking about) become a GM a few seasons ago, regardless if she is inactive now.

You actually gave her a second chance? I commend you good sir!