Project jRuutu (Amount of Players per Team)

[Beaviss 4,958]

Hello Everyone,

 

We had a good discussion going on in discord about the amount of players per team. We discussed a lot of the pros and the cons regarding increasing the amount of players per team resulting in more lines per team. Currently the "Meta" in the VHL is 6F - 4D -1G and it has been that way since the very beginning. Alot of the older members are very passionate about the 2 Line system but since ive been around ive heard people talk about increasing it and i agreed with there arguments. Some of the Pros and Cons that we discussed on discord are....

 

PROS:

1. Bigger Lineups means more Locker Room activity.
2. Expansion needed less often (saving league funds)
3. Deeper teams results in depth players being moved more often meaning more trades in general.
4. Ability to use updated versions of STHS. (not proven only theory)
5. (Plays off above) Increased stats via updated STHS sim engine
6. Free Agency having more available players (Instead of the normal 1-2)
7. Increased drama with people wanting more ice time etc. (forced trades)
8. Later Draft picks would be worth more (Depth Players)

 

 

CONS:

1. Less ice time lowering point totals per player across the league.
2. Impacting players chances at beating records in the record books.
3. People leaving the site because of low ice time (If ice time causes them to leave they would leave anyways)
4. People breaking the system and running 2 forward lines anyways. (ways around that)

Well that's just some of the Pros and Cons we thought of If you can write one out ill add it to the list. Let me know what your thoughts on this. Why do you like each type? I'm personally a fan of increase the typical team to around 9F - 4D - 1/2G.

 

What are your thoughts?

 

@jRuutu Your the biggest fan of this so its named after you.

Edited April 5, 2019 by Beaviss

[Renomitsu 934]

I think it's possible to work around some of the cons while accommodating the (hopefully-sustained) larger draft classes. If we're able to maintain larger draft class sizes & have solid player retention, we could keep expanding - but who's to say we'd have a larger number of members who would want to take on GM roles? I love expansion, and suspect that it'll be required multiple times in the next five seasons, especially if the Recruitment Crew keeps doing what they do, but we should also have a contingency plan for teams if the interest in managing doesn't match the expansion in player base.

 

Provided the composition of this year's class, it's clear newer members (like old members) like making forwards. If we're to have a place for all of these new wingers and centers, it should be in a league system that can accommodate them instead of shoe-horning players either into (1) low-minute roles even if they're active or (2) playing a position they just don't want to. With 9/4/1, it's possible to have decent minutes as a forward with activity, and members who wanted to make defensemen in the first place can do so without worrying (as much) about playing time.

 

On the other hand, I think balancing 4 lines' worth of forwards may be a bit much. At that point, if we attach a minutes restriction for all four lines, it begins to eat pretty significantly into top players' ice time, which diminishes the effect of being a star - and achieving that high-minute, high-stat output is an important ideal to look up to as a newer player. Three lines is worth trialing at least, because otherwise we'll need multiple expansion teams OR recent draftees to take the L in minutes because there's just not enough roster space, which may not be good for player retention.

 

As far as record book effects, I think it would be worth discussing simply immortalizing pre-depth chart changes and establishing a new record book thereafter. That way, old players' records are still maintained, and new players still have a realistic chance of challenging new ones. Talking heads discuss greats from different 'eras,' and having more talking points isn't necessarily a bad thing. As far as ice time, we could impose similar restrictions on the regular season/playoffs as we do on the World Juniors.

[BOOM 8,809]

I'm not sure anything can save Locker Room Activity. 

[Beaviss 4,958]

6 minutes ago, BOOM™ said:

I'm not sure anything can save Locker Room Activity. 

 

Three + players could help.

[eaglesfan036 4,605]

I'm linking everyone to @flyersfan1453's article here where I agree with pretty much everything he says.

 

Seriously though, who thinks it would be fun to get 3rd or 4th line playing time? 

[eaglesfan036 4,605]

Another con of 3 or 4 line teams is that currently, league parity is very high since there are enough player to fill out most teams, meaning we won't be stuck with boring seasons with like 3 teams competing and everyone else tanking. Instead you see lots of teams with the talent to gun for the playoffs. 

[Beaviss 4,958]

Just now, eaglesfan036 said:

Another con of 3 or 4 line teams is that currently, league parity is very high since there are enough player to fill out most teams, meaning we won't be stuck with boring seasons with like 3 teams competing and everyone else tanking. Instead you see lots of teams with the talent to gun for the playoffs. 

 

What's wrong with getting 5 less mins a game? You would gain all the benefits that the OP has on it? I'm a top player in the VHL (Beau) and I won't care if I get less mins.

[hedgehog337 3,483]

I was thinking for having more than 6/4/1 for a while, but I don't want to risk and make my players unhappy due to lesser playing time. I think some S66 draftees wouldn't be happy with this as well. also,

 

4 hours ago, Beaviss said:

People breaking the system and running 2 forward lines anyways. (ways around that)

 

this. Winning with too much depth is pretty hard here. especially when others gonna leave as it is with 2F and 2D lines.

 

other than that, I'm neutral on this.

[GRZ 179]

idk I'm a S66 draftee and I think that getting more lines is a good idea, yeah the ice time will hinder for players, but tbh isn't that more realistic? like except top2 picks in the draft it's obvious that you wouldn't throw a rookie on the 1st/2nd line instantly, you'd put him on a 3rd/4th and let him develop slowly. Same with when u first get picked into a team, u don't get 1st line minutes, you start low and grind yourself up.

[hedgehog337 3,483]

another thing if we want to go with more depth. we will have to prolong player careers like @pennypenny was mentioning earlier. cause spending the whole entry contract period in lower lines and only having 4-5 seasons to catch it up isn't gonna be fun.

Edited April 5, 2019 by hedgehog337

[Beketov 9,095]

5 hours ago, BOOM™ said:

I'm not sure anything can save Locker Room Activity. 

Discord pretty much made sure of that. It has its uses but board activity isn’t one of them.

[jRuutu 2,474]

Voted for: Dont care as long as its bigger teams.

 

9F - 4D - 1 G is a great place to start and would bring a lot more excitement into the league. To teams getting around it, force everybody to put together 3 unique forward lines and 2 unique D pairs = problem solved?

 

If the change happens, active players will still play a lot, but medium earning players will play in the 2nd and 3rd lines more often than now - AS THEY SHOULD. 

 

The only players I see for example 941 setup having a effect on is the medium/semi-active players, fully active younger players will still be playing on fair roles when they start their careers, so going after records or some wild personal milestones is not out of the window. Lets also not forget that you could always go to a team that has bigger role available, no? Want to win still? Yea...

 

In general, not aimed to anyone, If one of the bigger things on the way of change is GM´s not wanting to risk their players becoming unhappy because of ice time, they should not be a GM - you are not as good on your job as you think you are, especially on the man management side. Surprisingly easy to keep people happy with close to 30 minutes of ice time, how about you try to explain why player B is going to play on the 2nd line and why Player C is on the third instead?

 

League should really think more than ever what are the real reasons preventing fairly minor change to 9-4-1 setup from happening. Old boys club standing on the way? Good plan to just keep adding teams?  Where you find the GM´s, you can´t really hand out expansion GM jobs to rookie GMs and expect things to go smoothly, if and when they don´t - the whole league is going to enjoy the results.

 

The smart way would be to move to 9-4-1 first and see how it goes, force every team to put together lines that has 3 unique F, 2 unique D lines and set 10% or whatever minimum ice time for the 3rd line to prevent ´cheating´.

 

 

 

 

[hedgehog337 3,483]

6 hours ago, Beaviss said:

Increased drama with people wanting more ice time etc. (forced trades)

 

Meh. Sometimes drama is fun, but what if this happens too often?

 

16 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

set 10% or whatever minimum ice time for the 3rd line to prevent ´cheating´.

 

 

10% isn't going to work. At least 15-17 imo. 

 

16 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

In general, not aimed to anyone, If one of the bigger things on the way of change is GM´s not wanting to risk their players becoming unhappy because of ice time, they should not be a GM - you are not as good on your job as you think you are, especially on the man management side. Surprisingly easy to keep people happy with close to 30 minutes of ice time, how about you try to explain why player B is going to play on the 2nd line and why Player C is on the third instead?

 

Another meh. sometimes a member won't give a shit about the explanation, no matter how good it is. idk, maybe I'm judging people based on myself (when I was a holdout in my rookie season in NSHL cause I didn't want to be a backup). But I still doubt everybody would be on board with this.

Edited April 5, 2019 by hedgehog337

[jRuutu 2,474]

11 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

Meh. Sometimes drama is fun, but what if this happens too often?

 

 

10% isn't going to work. At least 15-17 imo. 

 

 

Another meh. sometimes a member won't give a shit about the explanation, no matter how good it is. idk, maybe I'm judging people based on myself (when I was a holdout in my rookie season in NSHL cause I didn't want to be a backup). But I still doubt everybody would be on board with this.

Put 20 right away especially few seasons later when mostly semi-actives and actives will be there, I´d guess at first it will be mostly inactive players on the third lines.

 

In those cases you just have to ship them away.  Which brings more action around the league and you see who are the right players to draft now and in the future.

[Beketov 9,095]

3 hours ago, jRuutu said:

Old boys club standing on the way?

Contrary to popular belief not everything can be blamed on the “old boys club” as easily as you like to make it out. Even if that were the case it’s easy to say “just do it” when you don’t but have 12 years of seeing how the VHL operates.

 

Let’s consider your content or just forcing teams to ice 3 lines. First off, what kind of punishment do you suggest when they don’t because let’s face it, not every team will. Second, does it need to be every game? Just a certain number of games? A percentage? Third, what about goalies? Gonna run out of teams, we forcing teams to have backups? If so how many games do they need to play to be fair?

 

It just becomes a lot of micromanaging if the teams at best and even then it completely ignores the problem that it’s easy to SAY you want more realism and more lines but how many people would actually want to play barely any? Explain it all you want, you still have active guys wasting half their careers on lower lines doing next to nothing. Sure, you could extend careers to counter this a bit, but those top earners get extended too so you don’t really create any higher openings. All you end up doing is punishing those who have less time to dedicate by telling them they’ll never be a top 2 line player or have any real chance in the league.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t love the idea of having to expand every 2 seasons. I think realistically that’s not sustainable. However I also don’t think it’s sustainable to push players onto lower lines. Even if all the GM’s comply and have more lines (which multiple have already stated they won’t, they’ll just stack their team with more star power because that’s what wins) a lot of the younger players will inevitably get annoyed that their careers are wasted away.

 

In a sim where 2 lines can easily dominate over depth there is no real incentive to add that depth. This isn’t an old man yelling to get off his lawn or the “old boys club standing in the way” this is legitimately how the league is structured. The sim won’t change just because we say teams have room for 3 lines now. Those third line guys will just suffer and the best teams will continue to have 2 lines. Parity will decrease and members will be bored of watching their players rot.

[jRuutu 2,474]

1 hour ago, Beketov said:

Contrary to popular belief not everything can be blamed on the “old boys club” as easily as you like to make it out. Even if that were the case it’s easy to say “just do it” when you don’t but have 12 years of seeing how the VHL operates.

 

Let’s consider your content or just forcing teams to ice 3 lines. First off, what kind of punishment do you suggest when they don’t because let’s face it, not every team will. Second, does it need to be every game? Just a certain number of games? A percentage? Third, what about goalies? Gonna run out of teams, we forcing teams to have backups? If so how many games do they need to play to be fair?

 

It just becomes a lot of micromanaging if the teams at best and even then it completely ignores the problem that it’s easy to SAY you want more realism and more lines but how many people would actually want to play barely any? Explain it all you want, you still have active guys wasting half their careers on lower lines doing next to nothing. Sure, you could extend careers to counter this a bit, but those top earners get extended too so you don’t really create any higher openings. All you end up doing is punishing those who have less time to dedicate by telling them they’ll never be a top 2 line player or have any real chance in the league.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t love the idea of having to expand every 2 seasons. I think realistically that’s not sustainable. However I also don’t think it’s sustainable to push players onto lower lines. Even if all the GM’s comply and have more lines (which multiple have already stated they won’t, they’ll just stack their team with more star power because that’s what wins) a lot of the younger players will inevitably get annoyed that their careers are wasted away.

 

In a sim where 2 lines can easily dominate over depth there is no real incentive to add that depth. This isn’t an old man yelling to get off his lawn or the “old boys club standing in the way” this is legitimately how the league is structured. The sim won’t change just because we say teams have room for 3 lines now. Those third line guys will just suffer and the best teams will continue to have 2 lines. Parity will decrease and members will be bored of watching their players rot.

1. 3 unique F/ 2 unique D lines, every game - all the time. If a GM and a team refuses = GM gets fired right there on the spot. It´s that simple really, or if firing is too much, I´m sure you can find a way to make sure every team follows the rules, just like now. Remove the backup rule, but make teams have two goalies. Let GM´s decide which G plays and how much (More than likely end up getting decent games for the backups anyways if there is so many goalies that every team has two at least - otherwise you can just keep the rule at whatever it is at now) +  If there is like 25 goalies in the league already, surely you make sure the new players are aware of that when they are creating their players? = don´t create one now.

 

2. If you are active - you will find a big role. If you earn 5-7 tpe per week, you will be a 2nd or 3rd liner = like you should. 2nd line plays a lot, in the 20+ minute range, 3rd line more than likely will still play around 10-15 minutes per game. All 4 defenders will be over 20 mins. If that is not enough: A) See if some other team has bigger role for you or B) Add more TPE in.

 

Why is it so bad to be a 2nd line player? I´m willing to bet that if you are even on that 5-7 tpe per week category, you will be in the 2nd line. I´m having hard time believing we will see a day in VHL where top-6 and top-4 of every team is earning the max cap per week and making semi-actives be not wanted, even on the current system. If you are in a team that is like that - ask for a trade, it´s not really that hard if you want play in VHL purely for points, you move to weaker team that offers you a bigger role. If you want to win and be in a good team, your inactive/ semi-active ass in the top line is not going to get you to the top.

 

That is why you have a rulebook for users/GMs and teams who refuse to play by the rules you set for them, the rules include how you must have 3 unique forward lines, 2 unique defensive pairs and a backup if there truly is so many goalies out there. Then you add some kind of minimum playing time% for the third unique line, could be seen in testing what that number is, should be around 10-15 mins per game range in my opinion.

 

And once again, if you are not happy to be in a 2nd or 3rd line, A) Ask for a trade B) Add more tpe in. Does that mean your career is now good as over if you play in the 2nd or 3rd line as a medium TPE earning user, no - you are just not going to set any records, you are not going to take home any scoring titles, you know why? You don´t deserve them, there is a lot more users who put more work in, they earn more TPE, they have better players - there is only one thing you can do about it = put more TPE in.

 

 

Quote

Even if all the GM’s comply and have more lines (which multiple have already stated they won’t, they’ll just stack their team with more star power because that’s what wins) a lot of the younger players will inevitably get annoyed that their careers are wasted away.

 

So let me get this right, the reason why we can´t have 9-4-1/2 or deeper line setup is because that means players will have to play on the 2nd or 3rd lines - that is bad, but at the same time there are teams and players who are going to join stacked teams to play in the 2nd and 3rd lines? Stacked means: star level players playing in 2nd and 3rd lines when in quite few other teams they would be in the 1st?

 

I´m not sure why so many seem to be against it, if you are active player, you are going to be fine.

 

Edited April 5, 2019 by jRuutu

[Beaviss 4,958]

15 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

1. 3 unique F/ 2 unique D lines, every game - all the time. If a GM and a team refuses = GM gets fired right there on the spot. It´s that simple really, or if firing is too much, I´m sure you can find a way to make sure every team follows the rules, just like now. Remove the backup rule, but make teams have two goalies. Let GM´s decide which G plays and how much (More than likely end up getting decent games for the backups anyways if there is so many goalies that every team has two at least - otherwise you can just keep the rule at whatever it is at now) +  If there is like 25 goalies in the league already, surely you make sure the new players are aware of that when they are creating their players? = don´t create one now.

 

2. If you are active - you will find a big role. If you earn 5-7 tpe per week, you will be a 2nd or 3rd liner = like you should. 2nd line plays a lot, in the 20+ minute range, 3rd line more than likely will still play around 10-15 minutes per game. All 4 defenders will be over 20 mins. If that is not enough: A) See if some other team has bigger role for you or B) Add more TPE in.

 

Why is it so bad to be a 2nd line player? I´m willing to bet that if you are even on that 5-7 tpe per week category, you will be in the 2nd line. I´m having hard time believing we will see a day in VHL where top-6 and top-4 of every team is earning the max cap per week and making semi-actives be not wanted, even on the current system. If you are in a team that is like that - ask for a trade, it´s not really that hard if you want play in VHL purely for points, you move to weaker team that offers you a bigger role. If you want to win and be in a good team, your inactive/ semi-active ass in the top line is not going to get you to the top.

 

That is why you have a rulebook for users/GMs and teams who refuse to play by the rules you set for them, the rules include how you must have 3 unique forward lines, 2 unique defensive pairs and a backup if there truly is so many goalies out there. Then you add some kind of minimum playing time% for the third unique line, could be seen in testing what that number is, should be around 10-15 mins per game range in my opinion.

 

And once again, if you are not happy to be in a 2nd or 3rd line, A) Ask for a trade B) Add more tpe in. Does that mean your career is now good as over if you play in the 2nd or 3rd line as a medium TPE earning user, no - you are just not going to set any records, you are not going to take home any scoring titles, you know why? You don´t deserve them, there is a lot more users who put more work in, they earn more TPE, they have better players - there is only one thing you can do about it = put more TPE in.

 

 

 

So let me get this right, the reason why we can´t have 9-4-1/2 or deeper line setup is because that means players will have to play on the 2nd or 3rd lines - that is bad, but at the same time there are teams and players who are going to join stacked teams to play in the 2nd and 3rd lines? Stacked means: star level players playing in 2nd and 3rd lines when in quite few other teams they would be in the 1st?

 

I´m not sure why so many seem to be against it, if you are active player, you are going to be fine.

 

 

1. I don't agree with the firing but maybe a punishment similar to the backup rule?

 

2. Agree fully if anything it might promote people doing more point tasks to climb up the depth charts.

 

[DMaximus 1,046]

Being new to the league and sims in general, I have some basic questions.

 

With the current setup, what happens if there are more players than open slots on any team in the VHL? Say there's 20 open spots for players in the VHL this season. What happens if there's 25 players in the VHLM with over 200 TPE? 

 

How close is the league to reaching that point? It seems like a conservative estimate will have 20 VLHMers over 200 TPE at the end of this season. The expansion team creates 11 slots, how many other open slots are there in the VHL next season? What happens if there's another 20+ VHLMers over 200 TPE next season?

 

Is it possible some VHL teams are going to be forced to have 3 lines, just because of the sheer number of players?

 

 

[Beaviss 4,958]

16 minutes ago, DMaximus said:

Being new to the league and sims in general, I have some basic questions.

 

With the current setup, what happens if there are more players than open slots on any team in the VHL? Say there's 20 open spots for players in the VHL this season. What happens if there's 25 players in the VHLM with over 200 TPE? 

 

How close is the league to reaching that point? It seems like a conservative estimate will have 20 VLHMers over 200 TPE at the end of this season. The expansion team creates 11 slots, how many other open slots are there in the VHL next season? What happens if there's another 20+ VHLMers over 200 TPE next season?

 

Is it possible some VHL teams are going to be forced to have 3 lines, just because of the sheer number of players?

 

 

 

That's exactly why I brought this up. My likely amount of VHLM promotes are going to be around 30ish (conservative) In the current league make up that will be roughly 5 Full VHL Teams worth of prospects. We currently have room for 1......

 

Thats exactly my worry.

[hedgehog337 3,483]

7 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

 

That's exactly why I brought this up. My likely amount of VHLM promotes are going to be around 30ish (conservative) In the current league make up that will be roughly 5 Full VHL Teams worth of prospects. We currently have room for 1......

 

Thats exactly my worry.

 

Did you only count S66 draftees or S64-65'ers as well?

[Beaviss 4,958]

4 minutes ago, hedgehog337 said:

 

Did you only count S66 draftees or S64-65'ers as well?

 

All people coming up the bigs this season. (that are within 50ish tpe of hitting 200)

Edited April 5, 2019 by Beaviss

[Nykonax 1,566]

12 hours ago, eaglesfan036 said:

Seriously though, who thinks it would be fun to get 3rd or 4th line playing time? 

I would, thats one of the biggest things I like about SHL. You have to earn your minutes, and even then the GM's play with lines and have more room for that with 3 lines. 

 

 

7 hours ago, hedgehog337 said:

cause spending the whole entry contract period in lower lines and only having 4-5 seasons to catch it up isn't gonna be fun.

Speaking of which, entry contract should be a max of 3 seasons, not a required 3 seasons. If you sign 1 season you become an RFA, if you sign 2-3 you become a UFA.

 

7 hours ago, Beketov said:

Discord pretty much made sure of that. It has its uses but board activity isn’t one of them.

Discord LR's are pretty active, at least the ones im in (Ottawa and Davos)

6 hours ago, jRuutu said:

Good plan to just keep adding teams

Can't wait for S76 with 32 VHL teams and 46 VHLM teams.

18 minutes ago, DMaximus said:

With the current setup, what happens if there are more players than open slots on any team in the VHL? Say there's 20 open spots for players in the VHL this season. What happens if there's 25 players in the VHLM with over 200 TPE?

Expansion

18 minutes ago, DMaximus said:

How close is the league to reaching that point? It seems like a conservative estimate will have 20 VLHMers over 200 TPE at the end of this season. The expansion team creates 11 slots, how many other open slots are there in the VHL next season? What happens if there's another 20+ VHLMers over 200 TPE next season?

 

Very close again, won't be suprised if theres another expansion on the horizon.

 

Anyway, here's my ideal plan.

 

Personally I believe that the VHL system should be changed to add a college system. With that the VHLM would become similar to the AHL, and the VHL would stay the same. NCAA players would play 4 seasons with a 200 tpe cap, then "uncap" where they play a season where they can apply past 200 tpe. They then get drafted to the VHL where the VHL team decides if they want to send them down to the VHLM, or keep them in the VHL. NCAA would also have "fillers" who are second players that people would create if they want too, and could only earn up to 50 tpe a season on them, then retire them after their senior NCAA year.

 

Now obviously I don't see this happening next season, or even in the near future, but this could happen in 15ish seasons before the point of each the VHL and VHLM having 30 teams each. This system would also be delayed if the number of lines expands.

 

The benefits of this system are that players, especially new ones wouldn't complain about ice time, since they could be playing top minutes in the VHLM, whereas they'd be playing 3rd line minutes in the VHL. Also prevents the need for adding more teams every season. And theres probably a ton of other benefits that I just can't think of right now.

 

Cons are obviously more teams are needed. the problem of what happens if recruitment dies down, and what happens to VHL career lengths or what to do with that since people would waste years in the VHLM.

 

 

Overall I think that expanding the lines would bring a nice change of pace, and more diversity for strategies and lines in the VHL.

[Beaviss 4,958]

@hedgehog337

 

Theirs 23 here that's just this upcoming draft class.

 

Rank	Change	Player Name	TPE	Team	Nat.	Member
1		C - Hunter Hearst Helmsley	326	YUK	USA	Beaviss
2		LW - Shane Mars	295	MIN	USA	Spade18
3	Up 4	LW - Julius Freeman	233	HFX	USA	rjfryman
4	Down 1	C - Maximilian Kirbsson	225	HOU	SWE	Kirby
5		RW - Mikko Aaltonen	223	LVA	FIN	GRZ
6	Up 2	C - Jet Jaguar	212	HFX	UKR	gorlab
7	Down 1	LW - Dimitri Volosenkov	211	HFX	RUS	SirRupertBarnes
8	Down 4	LW - Kari Jurri	209	HOU	NED	hockeyis66
9	Up 1	RW - Arnor Sigurdsson	207	YUK	ISL	bluesfan55
10	Down 1	RW - Shawnomir Jagr	205	SSK	CZE	TheLastOlympian07
11	Down 1	LW - Bert Meyers	197	MIN	USA	RunnerBert11
12	Up 1	G - Owen May	191	HOU	SWI	FacebookFighter
13	Up 2	D - Charlie Paddywagon	186	LVA	USA	DMaximus
14	Up 6	LW - Kyle Sabertooth	185	LVA	USA	uphillmoss
15	Up 1	D - Jerry Garcia	182	HOU	USA	GustavMattias
16	Up 2	C - Ludvig Sederstrom	181	HOU	SWE	aleks
17	Down 5	D - Aron Nielsen	180	MIN	FAR	solas
18	Down 4	LW - Valeri Morozov	165	YUK	RUS	Dangles13
19	Down 1	RW - Nethila Dissanayake	164	SSK	SRI	nethi99
20	Down 3	D - Rhye Tyr	159	HFX	CAN	Plate
20	Up 6	LW - Hans Gruber	159	SSK	GER	TheFlash
22		RW - John Frostbeard	154	YUK	LAT	FrostBeard
23	Down 2	G - Wendy Kandee Cain	152	MIN	USA	SlashACM

[rjfryman 1,120]

How many players retire ever year, On average? 

 

Like DMaximus I am still new to this whole thing but I worry because Even being a good prospect maxing out every week I would have a hard time beating out existing players simply because they have been in the league longer with their player. There are a few teams where I would win a second line job but many that if they only play two lines I would ride the bench for a couple of weeks putting my shot at rookie of the year in jeopardy. I don't know what GM's care more about in a given time period. If I max out every week am I rewarded with more ice time even If I am not as good as someone else who is not as active? Granted some of those are per GM question but I would hate to see some people get discouraged with the league because they do well then because of space are not rewarded with ice time.

[hedgehog337 3,483]

9 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

@hedgehog337

 

Theirs 23 here that's just this upcoming draft class.

 

Rank	Change	Player Name	TPE	Team	Nat.	Member
1		C - Hunter Hearst Helmsley	326	YUK	USA	Beaviss
2		LW - Shane Mars	295	MIN	USA	Spade18
3	Up 4	LW - Julius Freeman	233	HFX	USA	rjfryman
4	Down 1	C - Maximilian Kirbsson	225	HOU	SWE	Kirby
5		RW - Mikko Aaltonen	223	LVA	FIN	GRZ
6	Up 2	C - Jet Jaguar	212	HFX	UKR	gorlab
7	Down 1	LW - Dimitri Volosenkov	211	HFX	RUS	SirRupertBarnes
8	Down 4	LW - Kari Jurri	209	HOU	NED	hockeyis66
9	Up 1	RW - Arnor Sigurdsson	207	YUK	ISL	bluesfan55
10	Down 1	RW - Shawnomir Jagr	205	SSK	CZE	TheLastOlympian07
11	Down 1	LW - Bert Meyers	197	MIN	USA	RunnerBert11
12	Up 1	G - Owen May	191	HOU	SWI	FacebookFighter
13	Up 2	D - Charlie Paddywagon	186	LVA	USA	DMaximus
14	Up 6	LW - Kyle Sabertooth	185	LVA	USA	uphillmoss
15	Up 1	D - Jerry Garcia	182	HOU	USA	GustavMattias
16	Up 2	C - Ludvig Sederstrom	181	HOU	SWE	aleks
17	Down 5	D - Aron Nielsen	180	MIN	FAR	solas
18	Down 4	LW - Valeri Morozov	165	YUK	RUS	Dangles13
19	Down 1	RW - Nethila Dissanayake	164	SSK	SRI	nethi99
20	Down 3	D - Rhye Tyr	159	HFX	CAN	Plate
20	Up 6	LW - Hans Gruber	159	SSK	GER	TheFlash
22		RW - John Frostbeard	154	YUK	LAT	FrostBeard
23	Down 2	G - Wendy Kandee Cain	152	MIN	USA	SlashACM

 

1. Not everyone from these 23 players are on pace for 200+ TPE before cutoff since they're not earning much TPE now. 

2. And I see some of them holding on 200 TPE to stay in minors and not fuck up their rookie season. 

 

With S64-65 send downs this number is obv higher. My team alone has 3 players that will be up in next season. Plus one more who could be at early 200's by the next season.

Edited April 5, 2019 by hedgehog337