Challenge Questions/Feedback? Post Here!

Post by **Lidas** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:28 am

batdad wrote:Not sure how long it will take Lidas, so we may not put WHL in.

Manimal--When you did the OHL did you do the draft picks and assign them to their teams (not the actual draft--but did you give the rights to their teams, and do their numbers off sheet?)

It will take a couple of weeks for sure. I've just finished Germany, Slovakia, and Austria, and now its on to WHL. Ive also done a few updates to QMJHL based on the bits of research Ive recieved from Racicot

Post by **Manimal** » Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:06 pm

batdad wrote:Not sure how long it will take Lidas, so we may not put WHL in.

Manimal--When you did the OHL did you do the draft picks and assign them to their teams (not the actual draft--but did you give the rights to their teams, and do their numbers off sheet?)

No, I haven't included drafted but unsigned players. I focused on the players signed by the teams. I don't know how much space there is left to add new players in the db. Lidas could probably answer to this.
If there is space then I'll add the OHL and WHL unsigned prospects. In fact, I'll start to search for the info just in case

tksolway · Post by **tksolway** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:28 pm

I wouldn't mind seeing some edits to the oilers players in the DB. There are some glaring problems. For, instance Cogliano has i think 14 speed, he just won the fastest skater competition (and cole beat him in the oilers skills cometition, and he has a speed of 15 or something). Also, Shremp still has a huge potential, and high stats, when he is going to be a marginal player at best (he also has about 14 speed, when he should have about 9-10, as he is about as fast as a spit on a doornob in january.) Gilbert doesn't have proper stats either. He is on pace for a 42 point season, which is top end Off Defensemen stats (and this is the second season in a row he will be doing this, unlike Edler).

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:35 pm

There are a lot of younger NHL and AHL players who could use their attributes adjusted. I know there are a few on the Bruins that are in desperate need of adjusting. Krejci is terrible in the game right now but he's one of the top players in the NHL in real life. Wheeler and Hunwick could use some improving as well. Maybe at some point after Lidas has finished updating rosters and adding new players, somebody can go through and gather stats for all of the young NHL and AHL players that need adjusting. Then the Shadd-sheet could be used to adjust their PA and CA?

But this is getting off topic. Any more discussion of the rosters and adjustments should go to the Lidas rosters thread.

Post by **batdad** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:58 pm

No more on edits here thanks.

the db is not perfect, it never will be, cause every day someone does something noone expected when they did something last week.

This is about challenges.

I am asking now about the OHL. IMHO without the unsigned prospects being assigned to their correct teams, the OHL in the Lidas dbase we have right now is not ready to be used for a challenge. I think that we need to wait for these to be done to do an OHL challenge.

Anyway, please let me know your thoughts on this. I would like to get another challenge poll with teams started by the end of the weekl

tksolway · Post by **tksolway** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:28 am

That's good, Go NHL

Post by **Manimal** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:38 am

Another option could be the ECHL. I believe the Dayton Bombers is the only team without affiliation so that could be interesting.

jbsnadb · Post by **jbsnadb** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:35 pm

ECHL teams *with* affiliations can be a nightmare, especially if the AI is a bit wonky. I played EHM 05 as the Alaska Aces, and if a roster spot EVER opened up, the Blues would send me a new goalie. At one point, 5 of my 20 roster players were goalies.

Post by **batdad** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:56 pm

And that my friend...is half the fun of it. Gotta deal with whatcha get...

dayton does not interest me, but an ECHL or AHL team with affiliation does.

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:18 pm

I played the Worcester (San Jose affiliate) AHL team once after they hired me away from the Vancouver Giants of the WHL. It was definitely interesting! You'd have to really make sure you hired some filler players. You could never count on your young stars because your NHL affiliate could just decide to call them up. My guy on that team was Lukas Kaspar. I remember the Sharks taking him from me at the most inopportune time. Still, it keeps things interesting.

Post by **batdad** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:34 pm

Hi guys

So you all know..we are discussing 12 behind the scenes.

We are working on simplifying the rules for this challenge if we should choose an NHL team to go with. Those simplifications will be posted as a sticky once they are done. To tip the hat: We are deciding on what kind of trades to allow and when, as well as ditching the CORE players (but not homegrowns)
We are also working on discussing what kind of a farm team needs to be maintained by each participant in the challenge.

We still want to provide some flexibility, but not total. OTherwise someone will definitely end up with a Marleau type player on the 3rd line. We don't want that.

We will let you know the rule changes, solely for NHL teams in Challenge 12, once we get it done.

Thanks

Post by **Manimal** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:12 pm

batdad wrote: I am asking now about the OHL. IMHO without the unsigned prospects being assigned to their correct teams, the OHL in the Lidas dbase we have right now is not ready to be used for a challenge. I think that we need to wait for these to be done to do an OHL challenge.

Anyway, please let me know your thoughts on this. I would like to get another challenge poll with teams started by the end of the weekl

I think the OHL is still playable for a challenge. Sure, there will be a shortage of prospects to add but the best players from the past drafts are in the database and it would affect all teams equally

Then again, I think I'd rather play in the NHL. The new rules sounds interesting, as well
An affiliated minor league team could be fun, too. How would you choose what team? I'd prefer an ECHL-team because you have more options than with an AHL-team.

My choices of teams would be
NHL: Islanders or Predators
OHL: Kingston or Sault Ste. Marie

Post by **batdad** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:05 pm

Manimal--Not unplayable, just dont' like it for the challenge right now, because it is not totally reality based. too many younger kids out there that you can just go and pick up and use on any team. Would make each team too different from each other. What I mean is B72's team could be much different from mine. At least if the prospects get updated...then the teams would be more similar.

I think it best to leave the OHL and WHL for say...challenge 13 options.

Post by **Manimal** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:16 pm

Fair enough. By then I'll have all the prospects done.

I like the new NHL-rules. They seem very interesting to use
One thing,though. For trading draft picks, could it not have been ; one added and one traded away?

Now on to voting. I'm probably going with the big-league but I'm gonna think about it for a while

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:26 pm

I think limiting the trading of draft picks to just 1, in or out, makes you think carefully about what you're doing when you trade your picks. Do you want to beef up a trade offer or do you want the chance to get an extra prospect?

There may be a couple tweaks to those NHL rules I posted. Batdad and I are still working out a few of the details between us. But those should give everyone enough of an idea of how it will work so that they can make an informed decision when they vote.

Post by **batdad** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:41 pm

Yeah there will be tweaks. B72 is right, I was not...

thunderbug · Post by **thunderbug** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:27 pm

So did people not maintain their AHL affiliate in previous NHL challenges? I always found them extremely useful for turning out cheap young players.

Post by **batdad** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:48 pm

Yep...people

1. Did not maintain it.
2. Made it change every season. This way, you are going to have to make a decision on players to keep. Not just get rid of em all every season. You can only sign 2 guys for that team, be it as the NHL GM, or the AHL GM (if we play the NHL team)...so...you have to keep guys who have no hope of ever making your team around to fill in some slots on the AHL team.

3. Now before anyone complains about that...this is exactly what NHL teams do today. Do you really think Maxime Fortunas is going to play for Dallas? Ever?

tksolway · Post by **tksolway** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 4:44 am

Question about the NHL Rules. It says I cannot resign even my own UFAs till July 1st 2007. Does that mean that if I have a player on my roster (say Sullivan on the Preds) who's contract ends July 1st 2007, I can't offer him an extension?

thunderbug · Post by **thunderbug** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:02 am

I'd wait for Batdad or Bruins but as I read it that is correct. You can offer him a contract on July 1st and can be one of your 2 UFAs.

Post by **Manimal** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 5:20 am

I think you're wrong guys. It only says standard UFAs and that usually means UFA from another organization. Your own players can be signed at any time, I guess.

Post by **batdad** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 6:14 am

Guys...if you have a guy under contract...he is not UFA. He cannot be a free agent if you have him signed. So...how in the heck could he be a free agent. that is called signing your own player to an extension.

thunderbug · Post by **thunderbug** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:24 am

5.6.1 You cannot sign any free agents in your first season. The earliest date in the game in which you can attempt to sign a free agent is 1 July 2007. This also covers your own UFAs, which you may not attempt to resign until 1 July 2007. You may, however, attempt to resign your RFAs at any point during the year.

This gives the implication that all players in their last year of their contract that are not "RFAs" are to be considered "UFAs" for the entire year. Furthermore, under clause 5.6.3 the "UFAs" from your team would be included in the 2 offseason signings.

5.6.3 You may sign no more than two free agents per season. This does not include your own RFAs, which you may freely sign. It does, however, include UFAs that have left your team.

thunderbug · Post by **thunderbug** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:35 am

Sorry I didn't mean to hit submit on that one. If I am misreading something here let me know.

jbsnadb · Post by **jbsnadb** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:46 pm

I was going to ask the same question. The original wording makes it seem that you must let all potential Group III's go UFA, since you are prohibited from signing them to a new contract until 1 July.

Is this not really the case? It is a bit confusing

Could be why I voted for Utah