A Sincere Suggestion to Increase Realism and Improve League Affairs, Dated March 15th, 2017

[Gudnason 607]

So this just suddenly came up this morning. Not totally sure on the league climate now as I don't have the time to dig deeper (because your collective experience is valuable and saves me time), but it seems like the gap between contending teams and rebuilding teams is great, and there is no incentive for players to join rebuilding teams, creating a team/conference stack.

 

In real life, when players are traded between VHL teams(exclude VHLM and VHLM-to-VHL drafts/call-ups/send-downs/etc), sign with a new VHL team through free-agency, or move between VHL teams in any way similar to, but not limited to, what has been described above, possibly through any new mechanisms suddenly introduced by @Higgins on a whim, players need time to adjust to their new teams and develop chemistry with their new linemates.

 

I propose a depreciation-like TPE loss for players who switch teams, to specifically counter players who may play on a different team each season, and to encourage sticking it out with a certain team for an extended period of time. The BoG could then like @Jericho said create charts and what not to see which group of specific players this new rule hit and what not and see how big the TPE loss should be.

[Beketov 9,025]

There was a lot of almost legal sound mumbo jumbo in the middle there so let me make sure I understand your suggestion: You're proposing a depreciation like effect (I assume much smaller scale) to players that move teams each season?

 

If I'm reading that right I have a few initial worries with it. First off, you include trades in there which isn't necessarily fair. Often times players don't ask to be traded, they are simply included in deals. Should they be punished by having their stats take a hit because their GM decided to go a different direction? Same with stuff like call-ups that really aren't up to the player at all. The only way this works, IMO, is Free Agency.

 

The second main issue I have is that it could actively punish teams in a way. Yes, you would want players sticking it out to not get their attributes dinged but that also makes it MUCH harder to rebuild at all. The VHL is naturally in a constant cycle of teams competing and then rebuilding. If you limit their ability to sell off players for assets (by incentivizing their players to want to stay) then you effectively make those rebuilds last even longer while having the teams with the top players keep them.

 

I think a better way to fix this problem would be to offer the players more incentive to go to rebuilding teams rather than stay on the teams they occupy; whether they are rebuilding or not.

[STZ 5,360]

Players usually stick with the same team anyways.. no reason to reduce player movement even more..

[Gudnason 607]

2 minutes ago, STZ said:

Players usually stick with the same team anyways.. no reason to reduce player movement even more..

True. I actually have no idea why people would want to move to a rebuildling team if they had to endure a TPE loss.

[Beketov 9,025]

2 minutes ago, punkhippie said:

True. I actually have no idea why people would want to move to a rebuildling team if they had to endure a TPE loss.

Precisely. If we wanted to get people moving to rebuilding teams we would actually want the opposite, a minor boost to TPE or attributes for going to a rebuilding franchise. It becomes complicated at that point though to define what a rebuilding franchise actually means. Plus it could just be a way for people to get a quick boost and then be traded to a competing team. Opens up a lot of possible loopholes.

[sterling 1,997]

I think you could mitigate this somewhat with signing bonuses (which I've harped on for a long time). So any bad team could use the previous season's cap space on pitching signing bonuses to free agents.

[Devise 4,475]

1 hour ago, sterling said:

I think you could mitigate this somewhat with signing bonuses (which I've harped on for a long time). So any bad team could use the previous season's cap space on pitching signing bonuses to free agents.

 

This. Really the only incentive we can give to people for joining rebuilding clubs is cash money. While the Player Store may not be the best, it's still better than giving people nothing as the odd member would probably consider doing it more. 

[sterling 1,997]

It would make free agency more exciting, coupled with a few new player store items and we could really cause a shift in people's decision making