VHL GM 2nd Player (STZ Sug 5)

[STZ 5,280]

This is a suggestion I brought up in the past but wasn’t really fleshed out or fully realized. I bring it up again because I think that it is worth re-looking at.

 

I’ll preface by saying I don’t mind the 2nd Player Initiative. I think it was done at a time where we were looking for a way to spark the league, and at the very least it has done that. I believe the system can work but with any system, revisions need to be made. Since coming out, we have improved the system but have neglected to elephant that has been in the room since the beginning and that is VHL GM 2nd Players.

 

In theory, it would be nice to see a GM be able to enjoy the site in different levels - both as a GM and an individual player. However, it’s just not the way it is. GMs are always GMs first and will use any opportunity to gain the competitive advantage. That’s how it is, and that’s how it should be - I wouldn’t want to play for a GM who wasn’t doing that.

 

With that in mind, and history as an example, GMs should just automatically get their second player. We have been trying to make this system work with complicated rules, but it would be much easier if we just made both of the GM players assets of their respective Franchises. It’s an equal playing field for all teams, and eliminates any drama. I think having two automatic franchise players on each team is good for the league and the competitiveness of the franchises.

 

If a GM is worried about being able to keep two actives, maybe they aren’t the right person for the job..

[hedgehog337 3,480]

Idk about this. This might lessen 2nd player count and VHL GM's will ride with only one player. But maybe this is better for the VHL though. And having two players in your GM team isn't always fun, this is not only about not being able to do claim much TPE for both players. It's more fun to have more LR perms tbh, but that's up to each GM here.

[STZ 5,280]

24 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

Idk about this. This might lessen 2nd player count and VHL GM's will ride with only one player. But maybe this is better for the VHL though. And having two players in your GM team isn't always fun, this is not only about not being able to do claim much TPE for both players. It's more fun to have more LR perms tbh, but that's up to each GM here.

 

Why would it reduce Player Count?

 

Why would a GM elect to have one player instead of two?

 

Why is it more fun to have additional LR perms?

 

 

[hedgehog337 3,480]

Just now, STZ said:

Why would it reduce Player Count?

 

Well, VHL GM's might not create second players anymore? Idk, it's each up to a GM anyway.

 

2 minutes ago, STZ said:

Why would a GM elect to have one player instead of two?

 

might as well go to your third question as you already know my answer

 

2 minutes ago, STZ said:

Why is it more fun to have additional LR perms?

 

Well, I'm speaking from my view - I like having more LR perms. And also, it makes the VHL GM job easier, idk if it's better or worse thing.

[STZ 5,280]

1 minute ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

Well, VHL GM's might not create second players anymore? Idk, it's each up to a GM anyway.

 

 

might as well go to your third question as you already know my answer

 

 

Well, I'm speaking from my view - I like having more LR perms. And also, it makes the VHL GM job easier, idk if it's better or worse thing.

 

1/2. It would not reduce Player Count as GMs would be better off to have two assets instead of one.

 

3. Why do you need LR perms? Create discussion in the public forum, where its productive? I personally used to love it when locker rooms were tight knit and didn’t have any other GMs in it. 

[hedgehog337 3,480]

1 minute ago, STZ said:

3. Why do you need LR perms? Create discussion in the public forum, where its productive? I personally used to love it when locker rooms were tight knit and didn’t have any other GMs in it. 

 

Well, just like I said I like reading shits on other LR and that doesn't means I would use an important information for my own goods (does even a single GM posts that thing in LR anyway?). Also, it can cause a complete death of a goalie market imo, as the GM might create 1G 1 player for his team. At least I'd do it if this rule gets implemented.

[STZ 5,280]

2 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

Well, just like I said I like reading shits on other LR and that doesn't means I would use an important information for my own goods (does even a single GM posts that thing in LR anyway?). Also, it can cause a complete death of a goalie market imo, as the GM might create 1G 1 player for his team. At least I'd do it if this rule gets implemented.

 

Coming from a member who has put 900+ TPE into a goalie on a rebuilding team - the fucking precious goalie market is dead already.

[hedgehog337 3,480]

1 minute ago, STZ said:

 

Coming from a member who has put 900+ TPE into a goalie on a rebuilding team - the fucking precious goalie market is dead already.

 

It's still on life support as Seattle still needs a good goalie and Davos is gonna compete following this season as well. And some goalies are about to retire soon and your goalie is included on that list, so it might not be that bad after a couple of seasons.

[Quik 4,113]

4 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

Well, just like I said I like reading shits on other LR and that doesn't means I would use an important information for my own goods (does even a single GM posts that thing in LR anyway?). Also, it can cause a complete death of a goalie market imo, as the GM might create 1G 1 player for his team. At least I'd do it if this rule gets implemented.

 

I don't like the idea of GMs in other teams LRs, personally. I know when I used to be a GM, I'd use the LR to get discussion among the team on what they thought of certain moves. If other teams aren't posting that kind of stuff in their LRs, then I think it's a bit of a shame, because getting team discussion was always a way to keep members active. I guess with P2s, you never really know if a player will let his other team know what your team is planning, but it's a lot less likely that a regular player would spy than a GM, considering they still have to be a part of that team.

[hedgehog337 3,480]

6 minutes ago, Quik said:

 

I don't like the idea of GMs in other teams LRs, personally. I know when I used to be a GM, I'd use the LR to get discussion among the team on what they thought of certain moves. If other teams aren't posting that kind of stuff in their LRs, then I think it's a bit of a shame, because getting team discussion was always a way to keep members active. I guess with P2s, you never really know if a player will let his other team know what your team is planning, but it's a lot less likely that a regular player would spy than a GM, considering they still have to be a part of that team.

 

Mass PM to team members still exists.

[Quik 4,113]

Just now, hedgehog337 said:

 

Mass PM to team members still exists.

Sure, but then what's the point of the LR? Sure there's some things that work through PM, but the whole point of the LR is to hold team discussions. If

[STZ 5,280]

10 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

It's still on life support as Seattle still needs a good goalie and Davos is gonna compete following this season as well. And some goalies are about to retire soon and your goalie is included on that list, so it might not be that bad after a couple of seasons.

 

It’s ben bad for a while. Look at Holik situation before that.. it’s not new.

 

[hedgehog337 3,480]

2 minutes ago, Quik said:

Sure, but then what's the point of the LR? Sure there's some things that work through PM, but the whole point of the LR is to hold team discussions. If

 

Come on, not only for team discussions. LR's would be semi-active at most if we would strictly discuss only team discussions. It's obvious we're talking another/RL things too there.

 

Just now, STZ said:

 

It’s ben bad for a while. Look at Holik situation before that.. it’s not new.

 

 

Idk about the Holik situation. It's like when he signed with NY?

[STZ 5,280]

Just now, hedgehog337 said:

 

Come on, not only for team discussions. LR's would be semi-active at most if we would strictly discuss only team discussions. It's obvious we're talking another/RL things too there.

 

 

Idk about the Holik situation. It's like when he signed with NY?

 

That was @Devise doing @Beketov a favour, and sacrificed MT Powers career so that Holik wouldn’t get the current DeGrath situation.

 

I’ll never be a GM without being their goalie. So for me having a 2nd GM Player means I get to make a forward

[hedgehog337 3,480]

Just now, STZ said:

That was @Devise doing @Beketov a favour, and sacrificed MT Powers career so that Holik wouldn’t get the current DeGrath situation.

 

He still had Riga btw

[STZ 5,280]

2 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

He still had Riga btw

 

Barf..

[hedgehog337 3,480]

2 minutes ago, STZ said:

 

Barf..

 

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

@hedgehog337 GM's would be more inclined to make 2 players. Think about it, they get 2 active players to their roster. That's a win-win.

[Quik 4,113]

7 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

Come on, not only for team discussions. LR's would be semi-active at most if we would strictly discuss only team discussions. It's obvious we're talking another/RL things too there.

I'm not saying strictly league discussion. I'm just saying that a LR is supposed to be a place for the team to talk. What about, who cares, but there shouldn't be a need to talk through PM because there's a GM from another team in there. Just seems stupid, and has been my biggest contention with P2s since I came back.

[hedgehog337 3,480]

9 minutes ago, Quik said:

I'm not saying strictly league discussion. I'm just saying that a LR is supposed to be a place for the team to talk. What about, who cares, but there shouldn't be a need to talk through PM because there's a GM from another team in there. Just seems stupid, and has been my biggest contention with P2s since I came back.

 

I'm really curious, was there a GM who exploited this for his team's good since the PP2 was implemented?

 

Idk, this thing might seem dumb, but I don't think I've ever had much problems with it.

Edited November 20, 2017 by hedgehog337

[Quik 4,113]

Just now, hedgehog337 said:

 

I'm really curious, was there a GM who exploited this for his team's good since the PP2 was implemented?

 

Idk, this might seem dumb, but I don't think I've ever had much problems with it.

Dunno, but why take the chance? To me it's just seemed kind of dumb, letting the fox in the hen house so to speak.

 

If you want conversation, take it to the main forums, which are dead and could use the spark. The idea of each team having a pair of guaranteed players they can rely on is only a good thing.

[STZ 5,280]

3 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

Im really curious, was there a GM who exploited this for his team's good since the PP2 was implemented?

 

Idk, this thing might seem dumb, but I don't think I've ever had much problems with it.

 

Since PP2 I’ve been in 4 LRs and there’s no talks of confidential specifics in there at all. Mind you, I don’t think there was much before, but I remember back in the day @Higgins would share draft targets and upcoming trades before they were public in the HEL LR.

 

LR confidentiality was a known sacrifice when PP2 was implemented - LRs are just not that important, we should be focused on how to make the public forums more enjoyable, not hidden ones.

[hedgehog337 3,480]

I also want to clarify: this means no one from both players can be traded to other teams even for a season when the team stops to compete? @STZ

 

2 minutes ago, Quik said:

Dunno, but why take the chance? To me it's just seemed kind of dumb, letting the fox in the hen house so to speak.

 

If you want conversation, take it to the main forums, which are dead and could use the spark. The idea of each team having a pair of guaranteed players they can rely on is only a good thing.

 

I mean if you aren't happy with other GM being on your team's LR, take the perms off then.

[STZ 5,280]

4 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

I also want to clarify: this means no one from both players can be traded to other teams even for a season when the team stops to compete?

 

 

Correct. Logically a GM would probably recreate if they were competing anyways so they would basically be getting two high end prospects in exchange for their retiring GM players.

[Quik 4,113]

@STZ Do you have a course of action set up for when a GM steps down? That's the biggest flaw I see in this. Right now, if a team has a GM player, they can still trade for another player outside the organization to replace them, who can then trade the former GM player.

 

In this system, what would happen when a GM wants to step down, but doesn't want to retire their players? If you can't trade a GM player, would the GM player just be released and become UFA? What about acquiring a new GM from outside the organization? If you need to spend assets to acquire the GM, while a somewhat common occurrence now, would that not be hindering the team in the future? Would teams have to trade their old GM players for the new GMs player(s)? Especially if that new GM has 2 players on separate teams, would you send the old GM players to each team, and how would that be decided? Would the new GM basically be forced to retire at least one of their players?

 

Not trying to pick holes, like I said, I do like the idea of 2 GM Players per team, but these are the type of things that would need to be ironed out.