My Thoughts on Anderson, the VHLM

[Higgins 3,618]

Let's be honest, 99.9% of people are not going to retire after the draft and recreate a new player to join a different team. 

[Gudnason 607]

35 minutes ago, Higgins said:

Let's be honest, 99.9% of people are not going to retire after the draft and recreate a new player to join a different team. 

There were quite a lot of inactives in this draft and even more people who aren't inactive but I would not call active either. Sure, that won't retire and recreate to join Vegas, but they might just not come back to the VHL if they are getting shit on by Vegas game in and game out.

[Gudnason 607]

@JardyB10 Today was a pretty big shit pill for me to swallow as a VHLM GM.

 

I would like to once again publicly apologize first and foremost to Jardy for not considering the consequences of my decisions, and to the other players and teams in the VHLM whose selfish decision of mine has impacted. I want to once again stress that I am fully willing to cooperate and rectify this problem to the best of my ability.

[Gudnason 607]

@JardyB10 This was quite unfortunate for my Ottawa Lynx, as he was my first round draft pick, and I had him pegged to start this season and next, with him being ~2nd best goalie (and best active goalie) in the league by playoffs this season, and the best goalie across the board by next season. It would have been two solid competing seasons.

 

To be honest, whether it was Fong the LW, Fong the goalie, or even now with Rudi Ying, I am undecided on my future. Ever since I heard of Sokolov's attempt at three Founder's Cups, I wanted to achieve that. Since Brampton didn't win last season, none of the above players would have had a shot at three. So I was still debating on recreating once again at the S54 trade deadline for a shot at three. Plus TPE whores love to recreate at the deadline. Or I could have gone the other route of purposely exceeding the 200 TPE cap in the S54 offseason to force myself up to the VHL and take the big leagues by storm as a rookie like Terence Fong did with the Avangard Havoc. So, the point is you were never guaranteed two seasons of Fong the goalie.

[Gudnason 607]

@JardyB10 I had a full plan for competing this season, but he never gave me a chance to share it, or even to communicate at all. Even if he didn't like the direction of the team, we maybe could have worked something out, whether it was a trade or me using my Rigging powers to turn him back into a forward or something. And if not, then he could have retired, and at least I tried. But I never got that chance, so that's particularly frustrating.

 

Once again, I was not aware of your intentions of competing this season. I know I asked you in the locker room but I guess your perfectly acceptable delayed non-response was taken by me as your silent admission that you would not be able to seriously defend your championship this season. Once again, I was not aware you are busy at a new job, and from my observations of you in the past while you seemed to be not very active, or not as active as you were before, since your impression for me is a hardcore dedicated member who is always active.

[frescoelmo 1,276]

6 hours ago, Devise said:

 

This is what I thought would happen as we shrunk teams. People think it somehow increases parity, but I'll argue more often than not it'll be a 2 team show. Sure it can be that way sometimes in the VHL too, a 2-4 team show with the other playoff teams being noncompetitive, but players don't get called up from the VHL. Franchises that make good moves while they rebuild have the possibility to compete for multiple seasons in a row. New York won a cup a year removed from winning 1st overall. Stockholm just made the finals a year after rebuild. Look at Helsinki. Quebec is on the rise. The format of the VHL allows franchises to more readily work through their issues, and I think the fact that the only way to make the VHLM "fun" is to keep reducing team numbers should be a sign that the league simply isn't structured to work.

 

I will keep advocating for this, but we need to just create two new VHL teams and merge the two leagues together. Obviously come up with some sort of a waiver system, and increase the amount of TPE we give first gens and increase carry over numbers to match. But it just makes no sense to put people through a junior experience. Plus with all the talk of adding a couple seasons to career lengths, as well as the potential to speed up both the regular season and playoffs I think all these things combine for an overall better user experience for newer members than what the VHLM offers. 

 

Bitch at least quote the right person when you're hatin

[STZ 5,360]

Why don't we just restrict trading in the VHLM and have waivers based on priority, and no free agents..

 

VHLM GM's don't get a weekly pay, instead a lump sum at the end of the year depending on how many players they graduated to the VHL..

 

Treat the league the way it should be - a developmental league..

[scoop 3,432]

21 minutes ago, STZ said:

Why don't we just restrict trading in the VHLM and have waivers based on priority, and no free agents..

 

VHLM GM's don't get a weekly pay, instead a lump sum at the end of the year depending on how many players they graduated to the VHL..

 

Treat the league the way it should be - a developmental league..

I don't know about that pay structure. Are you suggesting we get rid of the VHLM draft as well? Otherwise claiming a player on waivers doesn't matter, because they're most likely not going to graduate to the VHL from your team. They'll go into the VHLM draft.

 

I do very much like the idea of restricting trades. Are you thinking no trades at all? No trading draft picks?

[scoop 3,432]

Also @BobertZ no one is blaming you. It's just a consequence of the VHLM being reduced to five teams.

 

Honestly, I don't really know what all the rosters are looking like, so I don't know if it's going to just be a one-team show. But that certainly isn't what the VHLM should be. And reducing the VHLM to five teams is going to have to come with some other change. If things operate as they have in the past, the cycle of stocking up to compete for a couple seasons followed by a couple seasons of futility, it will end up being worse than before.

[STZ 5,360]

24 minutes ago, Street x Lite said:

I don't know about that pay structure. Are you suggesting we get rid of the VHLM draft as well? Otherwise claiming a player on waivers doesn't matter, because they're most likely not going to graduate to the VHL from your team. They'll go into the VHLM draft.

 

I do very much like the idea of restricting trades. Are you thinking no trades at all? No trading draft picks?

 

In that scenario, keep the draft.. my making the pay structure that way there is an incentive not to tank, and to develop your players, rather than doing whatever it takes to win (even if that includes bombing for seasons before)

 

A VHLM GM should not get paid if he's tanking and doesn't develop any players..

[Baozi 1,658]

20 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

In that scenario, keep the draft.. my making the pay structure that way there is an incentive not to tank, and to develop your players, rather than doing whatever it takes to win (even if that includes bombing for seasons before)

 

A VHLM GM should not get paid if he's tanking and doesn't develop any players..

 

While the idea is really raw and unrefined I think that is very interesting and serves a purpose.

 

@punkhippie 

Quote

To be honest, whether it was Fong the LW, Fong the goalie, or even now with Rudi Ying, I am undecided on my future. Ever since I heard of Sokolov's attempt at three Founder's Cups, I wanted to achieve that. Since Brampton didn't win last season, none of the above players would have had a shot at three. So I was still debating on recreating once again at the S54 trade deadline for a shot at three. Plus TPE whores love to recreate at the deadline. Or I could have gone the other route of purposely exceeding the 200 TPE cap in the S54 offseason to force myself up to the VHL and take the big leagues by storm as a rookie like Terence Fong did with the Avangard Havoc. So, the point is you were never guaranteed two seasons of Fong the goalie.

 

Actually I'm pretty sure Terence Fong was like 130 TPE when he entered the VHL lol. I was no where near cap and there wasn't even a cap back then yet. Also it was a very poor decision on Nibbz part to bring me up so soon I might add.

Edited April 6, 2017 by tfong

[Higgins 3,618]

It's a work in progress. The first change should be the removal of inactive free agents they serve no purpose. Players should only be allowed to stay in the VHLM for a maximum of 3 seasons after their VHL Draft date, allowing them to play out their 3 season entry level contract in the VHLM and then they are removed.

 

I have not seen a VHLM GM hype their team and create so many statuses, media articles, talk to players, and promote team activity as much as @BobertZ has and the season is just starting. He is doing a fantastic job so far and I hope he continues with the primary goal of developing these players on his team and keeping them active. The most active team usually wins as the TPE advantage growth through out the season is important.

[scoop 3,432]

25 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

In that scenario, keep the draft.. my making the pay structure that way there is an incentive not to tank, and to develop your players, rather than doing whatever it takes to win (even if that includes bombing for seasons before)

 

A VHLM GM should not get paid if he's tanking and doesn't develop any players..

I definitely like the thought, but I also think there are obvious reasons that strictly paying GMs each season based on how many players they graduate to the VHL would not work.

[STZ 5,360]

39 minutes ago, Street x Lite said:

I definitely like the thought, but I also think there are obvious reasons that strictly paying GMs each season based on how many players they graduate to the VHL would not work.

 

What would those obvious reasons be? Because the VHLM functioned just as good without pay.

[scoop 3,432]

31 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

What would those obvious reasons be? Because the VHLM functioned just as good without pay.

Because GMs who want to focus on helping out first gens will be punished for trying to earn harder pay. If we disallow teams from trading draft picks, that will already take away some of the incentive to tank, because you can't tank by trading your players and stocking up on picks. And really, I doubt GMs are going to tank just to get a pick that's a few spots higher.

 

I definitely do see some merit to the idea, though. As it is, for a GM who wants to win, the ideal player is going to be someone who ends up going inactive and never makes it out of the VHLM. That's not saying that GM's actually want that, but inactive 100+ TPE players who have multiple seasons left are valuable assets.

 

Honestly, I don't think there's all too much wrong with taking away the VHLM GM pay. I would be on board with that. Though I actually have a different idea in a podcast that'll be up shortly so look forward to that

 

Edited April 6, 2017 by Street x Lite

[STZ 5,360]

7 minutes ago, Street x Lite said:

Because GMs who want to focus on helping out first gens will be punished for trying to earn harder pay. If we disallow teams from trading draft picks, that will already take away some of the incentive to tank, because you can't tank by trading your players and stocking up on picks. And really, I doubt GMs are going to tank just to get a pick that's a few spots higher.

 

I definitely do see some merit to the idea, though. As it is, for a GM who wants to win, the ideal player is going to be someone who ends up going inactive and never makes it out of the VHLM. That's not saying that GM's actually want that, but inactive 100+ TPE players who have multiple seasons left are valuable assets.

 

Honestly, I don't think there's all too much wrong with taking away the VHLM GM pay. I would be on board with that. Though I actually have a different idea in a podcast that'll be up shortly so look forward to that

 

 

The issue is the role of a VHLM GM should be to develop players and winning is secondary. If there was more parity to the league by restricting trades and FA then you could see more first gens realize a greater impact early on.

[scoop 3,432]

1 minute ago, STZ said:

 

The issue is the role of a VHLM GM should be to develop players and winning is secondary. If there was more parity to the league by restricting trades and FA then you could see more first gens realize a greater impact early on.

I agree with restricting trades. I'm all for that. And that's part of the reason I don't necessarily think we need to adjust pay to become based on how many players graduate to the VHL.

[STZ 5,360]

4 minutes ago, Street x Lite said:

I agree with restricting trades. I'm all for that. And that's part of the reason I don't necessarily think we need to adjust pay to become based on how many players graduate to the VHL.

 

Well the pay could stay at 1TPE per week and then a bonus for graduates. The idea is to reward GMs for getting players to the VHL.

 

in the current system we are actually rewarding GMs to get their players to 175 and then go inactive...

[scoop 3,432]

2 minutes ago, STZ said:

in the current system we are actually rewarding GMs to get their players to 175 and then go inactive...

How are we rewarding them? Because it gives them a better chance at winning? Personally, I don't consider that a reward. Sure, winning would be nice for my players, but I don't measure my success as a VHLM GM on how much my team wins.

Edited April 6, 2017 by Street x Lite

[STZ 5,360]

Just now, Street x Lite said:

How are we rewarding them? Because it gives them a better chance at winning? Personally, I don't consider that a reward. Sure, winning would be nice for my players, but I don't measure my success as a VHLM GM on how much my team wins.

 

It is a reward and a huge advantage to have a player at 175 TPE..

 

If there is incentive to get those players into the VHL how many GMs do you think will go the extra mile to get that player to do another PT?

 

The system is broken because there are too many GMs focused on winning and there needs to be complete focus on development. Hell @tfong means well, but he admitted that he was focusing on a playoff streak. A good GM should be losing all of his quality players to the VHL every year.

[scoop 3,432]

3 minutes ago, STZ said:

A good GM should be losing all of his quality players to the VHL every year.

That's not true though. A good GM should be losing quality players to the VHLM draft as well.

[Baozi 1,658]

13 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

It is a reward and a huge advantage to have a player at 175 TPE..

 

If there is incentive to get those players into the VHL how many GMs do you think will go the extra mile to get that player to do another PT?

 

The system is broken because there are too many GMs focused on winning and there needs to be complete focus on development. Hell @tfong means well, but he admitted that he was focusing on a playoff streak. A good GM should be losing all of his quality players to the VHL every year.

 

Well my idea was that as a developmental team, it is much better to foster a winning franchise where players get to have good personal stats. Keeps them active and helps max their achievement trackers to help them move onto the VHL faster. Sure it meant I couldn't tank my team during my reign but players that were active in brampton during that time like JPL et le al became inactive like 2 years removed in the VHL. So I think i did my job at the VHLM level.

[STZ 5,360]

9 minutes ago, Street x Lite said:

That's not true though. A good GM should be losing quality players to the VHLM draft as well.

 

Right.. the point is sustained success is difficult if you're doing your job right. 

 

The days where we used the VHLM to develop GMs is gone, it should be for developing players.

[STZ 5,360]

Just now, tfong said:

 

Well my idea was that as a developmental team, it is much better to foster a winning franchise where players get to have good personal stats. Keeps them active and helps max their achievement trackers to help them move onto the VHL faster. Sure it meant I couldn't tank my team during my reign but players that were active in brampton during that time like JPL et le al became inactive like 2 years removed in the VHL. So I think i did my job at the VHLM level.

 

Legitimate argument with the current system in place. I wasn't calling you out, I was more making a point that winning is a focus for GMs - and more often than not, maybe not in your case, it is for the accolades rather than the players you are developing.

[scoop 3,432]

2 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

Right.. the point is sustained success is difficult if you're doing your job right. 

 

The days where we used the VHLM to develop GMs is gone, it should be for developing players.

So then why have GMs at all?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

seriouspostactuallythisisarealsuggestion