Quick Question - Actually much longer to answer....

BluesGM · Guru

Quick Question - Actually much longer to answer....

DallasStarsGM · Senior Member

Quick Question

chimoty · Senior Member

Not a fan of teams with "reasonable chance at the minors cup." We had a dispersal draft this year, and only had about 30 rounds of drafting players. Were these teams to know to trade their good NHL players just so they have a "reasonable chance" at something not listed in the payouts page.

PhoenixGM · Guru

Considering that teams built good minors rosters specifically considering the potential payouts (which are documented in the payouts page), it only seems fair to split the minors $ amongst those teams who clearly built a reasonably competitive minors team. I know that is subjective, but it is the only fair way to do it.

Picking out teams that have at least:
15 skaters including at least 4 D
1 goalie

Boston
Calgary
Carolina
Dallas
Minnesota
Phoenix

One problem is that for some teams (myself included) who had initially made an effort to build a strong minor roster, as the season wore on and it because evident that there was not going to be a minors season these teams may have traded away some of their "minors" talent.

If possible, we should consider rosters now and at the start of the season, and look at which teams had reasonably competitive minors rosters, on average, for these two times of the year.

Steve

MinniGM · Senior Member

I like the idea of the playoff loser of the first round teams getting an increase to 1% as you really can't predict how the SIM would have determined the winner of the minors. Plus there should be more of a payout for a team making the playoffs anyway. My two cents...

BluesGM · Guru

Obviously teams in the playoff spots would be for increasing payouts to 1st round exits while non-playoff teams (like Steve in Phoenix) would be interested in payouts to strong minors....

My concern about payouts to "strong" minor rosters is weighting.... yes Boston has plenty of farm players, but two goalies who rate at 58OV, while some like Carolina, Chicago, Dallas, NYR, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, St Louis, San Jose and Washington have goalies rated 70OV or over...

Boston (64OV - 17 players), Chicago (68OV - 4 players), Dallas (66OV - 19 players), New York Rangers (63OV - 13 players), Philliy (64OV - 13 players), St Louis (68OV - 8 players) have the highest overall OV team average...

How do we know that these teams wouldn't defeat teams that are filled with a bunch of lower rated players?

PhoenixGM · Guru

The minors money has to somehow go to teams that had the best chance of winning it. That is what is fair.

How we determine who had the best chance of winning the money is for sure a challenge, but we have to find something.

Maybe look at all teams, build them a roster of 20 players by inserting 50OV guys in the empty spots (thus giving advantage to those who actually build a minor team) and look at the average OV. Problem is, OV means nothing... but at least in this case it gives an indication of how many "rated" players are on each teams 20 man minor roster.

I also think that if possible we should average each teams minor OV between the roster they currently have and the roster they had at the start of the season.

HOTLANTA · Guru

In regards to this i think the thrashers should be considered.. JDD got a 48ov rerate after a wicked season in the AHL ive asked to have him rated properly before but its never been done..

also the thing with minors is teams with good depth to their prospects can create guys aswell, chorney, falk, Mcardle, Sesisto, Osala could all be created to join my minors team to help out if my team had simmed well enough to be in the playoff race,
Hanzal-Macarthur-Okposo-Chipchura-Stasny-Bourque-Santorelli-Grossman-JDD is ok base, when adding other prospects it makes everything very subjective..

my personal opinion would be to increase the prospect payouts as it would still help teams with rebuilding situation's,,

Panthers · Senior Member

We could just add the money to next year's prize pool or give every team $2.00 back this season.

PhoenixGM · Guru

Perhaps we should take all the prize money that the playoff teams would get and divide that equally amongst everyone.

BluesGM · Guru

It sucks that we didn't have a minors season this year, I'm sure Bryce wasn't expecting a baby to take up so much time.... but I didn't know that last year the minors money went to "strong" minors teams gms.... if i knew then, I would have been against it there as well as I would have made an attempt to make my minors roster strong....

i think rich's idea of just giving every gm $2 back would be a good idea... but what do eric and bryce think is a fair decision?

Pittsburgh GM · Senior Member

I like the ideal of just holding the extra cash until next season, and maybe add it to either the winner or to the finalist in the minors for that season. And for goodness sakes lets get a minor system happening. It is a big part of the sim. Any Sim.

-- Edited by Pittsburgh GM on Tuesday 24th of March 2009 02:05:12 PM

-- Edited by Pittsburgh GM on Tuesday 24th of March 2009 02:05:42 PM

PhoenixGM · Guru

BluesGM wrote:

I didn't know that last year the minors money went to "strong" minors teams gms.... if i knew then... I would have made an attempt to make my minors roster strong....

I don't understand the logic here:

Everyone knew at the start of the season that money would be given for achievements in the minors.

To me that means that the minors money will go to "strong" minors teams.

Now the intention was to define a "strong" minors team by simming a season, but since that isn't happening we just need to find another way to define a "strong" minors team.

THERE IS NO WAY THIS MONEY SHOULD GO ANYWHERE BUT TO "STRONG" MINORS TEAMS. WE HAVE BEEN PLAYING THIS WHOLE SEASON ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT "STRONG" MINORS TEAMS WOULD GET THIS MONEY. YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT NOW.

This discussion - "we should save it for next year" - or whatever, is like me suggesting that we don't pay playoff teams any money this year, and instead we save that money for next year and reward next years playoff teams double!

Honestly... Just think about it for a minute.

BluesGM · Guru

Last year we didn't have a minors season, because of the huge delay of getting a minors season started I basically thought that we weren't going to have a minors season this year so I was more willing to lose farm players off my roster throughout the season....

The difference between your suggestion of not paying playoff teams for this year and not playing minors teams is that we actually have been simming a regular pro season, just not a minors....

If someone wanted to quickly sim an entire minors season in a day I would not object to it, but if we're not simming a minors season then that money should either be held over for a season, given back to the gms or to go elsewhere....

Maybe a suggestion for next season is that the Cup champions next season get 21.5% and the 3.5% off that doubles the minors bonuses if 1st round playoff teams get the double this season....

But I'm against awarding the minors incentives that are based with "on paper" decisions.... we all know that the sim does crazy things and often some teams on paper don't pan out.... If the decision to award minors teams the bonuses, then there should be a quick sim of a season there....

Panthers · Senior Member

PhoenixGM wrote:

BluesGM wrote:

I didn't know that last year the minors money went to "strong" minors teams gms.... if i knew then... I would have made an attempt to make my minors roster strong....
I don't understand the logic here:

Everyone knew at the start of the season that money would be given for achievements in the minors.

To me that means that the minors money will go to "strong" minors teams.

Now the intention was to define a "strong" minors team by simming a season, but since that isn't happening we just need to find another way to define a "strong" minors team.

THERE IS NO WAY THIS MONEY SHOULD GO ANYWHERE BUT TO "STRONG" MINORS TEAMS. WE HAVE BEEN PLAYING THIS WHOLE SEASON ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT "STRONG" MINORS TEAMS WOULD GET THIS MONEY. YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT NOW.

This discussion - "we should save it for next year" - or whatever, is like me suggesting that we don't pay playoff teams any money this year, and instead we save that money for next year and reward next years playoff teams double!

Honestly... Just think about it for a minute.

Ok, I'll think about it for a minute.....ok, done.

No, it is not similar at all. On the one hand, we actually played a pro season, so those GMs earned something.

On the other hand, we didn't play a minor league season, so nobody earned anything.

See, what you are asking for is more like looking at the teams in the beginning of the season and deciding that we would pay the 16 teams that looked like the strongest teams. But worse, because only 3 teams would normally get anything for the minor league awards.

My biggest problem is that your scenario is inconsistent. You say the money should go to the teams with the best chance of winning it. Why? Why not just vote on the best team and give all of the money to that person? If not, how many teams do we choose from...5? 10? Basically, we are randomly deciding to give some teams some money that they haven't earned, because nobody has earned it. The best teams don't always win, look at Columbus going to the finals last season.

Ultimately, we are talking about $60 total. To be honest, I don't really care what we do. Basically I only suggested adding it to next year or dividing it equally to take the randomness out, so that we aren't putting Bryce and Eric in the position of deciding who they want to give money to and dealing with the inevitable "hey, my team had just as much chance to win as that team".