+- Simulation Hockey League (https://simulationhockey.com)
+-- Forum: League Media (https://simulationhockey.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=610)
+--- Forum: SHL Media (https://simulationhockey.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=46)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (https://simulationhockey.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=545)
+---- Thread: Are True Rookies Going Extinct? (/showthread.php?tid=52848)
- RomanesEuntDomus - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by Josh@Jul 8 2015, 09:31 PM
Thats the point. Expansion teams in teh NHL got veterans on their last legs or long term projects.
Just liek the SHL. I shouldn't have to give up say Walter White so expansion teams have a chance in their first season. They are expansion teams and thus should suffer just like the chiefs and panthers did at the start.
Obviously teams shouldn't be forced to give up any core pieces but with how much quality there is around the league right now and the amount of 1000+ TPE-players on almost every team I think the expansion teams need to be a little more competitive than in the scenario that you suggested or else they won't be competitive for a very long time. Right now the worst teams in the league still have 4-5 1000 TPE players, it would take expansion teams years to even be able to compete with them.
- Muerto - 07-08-2015
You could have an initial draft where each team could protect 6 forwards, 4 defense, and a goalie, then in the second round they get to protect 3 more players, or, try to steal one from another team
- Blues - 07-08-2015
I'm 110% for expansion, I just don't have any ideas to make it happen :lol:
- BasedMinkus - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by KezKincaid@Jul 8 2015, 12:36 PM
You could have an initial draft where each team could protect 6 forwards, 4 defense, and a goalie, then in the second round they get to protect 3 more players, or, try to steal one from another team
This is just going to cripple good teams. Good teams should be punished for creating a good team because "Oh noes lower level guys not getting a chance"
- Merica - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by Mac@Jul 8 2015, 03:15 PM
Yes.
And to offset it, I proposed.
90-95 goes from 8 to 16 (80 instead 40, cost 40 more)
95 - 99 goes from 8 - 32 (128 instead of 32, cost 96 more)
And keeping to a rigid TPE handout cap.
136 more needed, 100 more to start, increases the scale by 36 TPE and gets rid of the disparity between new creates and send downs, because currently new creates at best can get within 50 points of a send down, with the increase they would would be comparable in stats come playoff time.
It would also get rid of the boring assed maxed out clones.
Mac, the whole POINT of being a new player is that you are a rookie, and you are behind the curve, as all rookies are. Send downs have been in the league longer and therefore have earned more TPE. You can't just eliminate that advantage that they worked for.
- BasedMinkus - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by RomanesEuntDomus@Jul 8 2015, 12:34 PM
Obviously teams shouldn't be forced to give up any core pieces but with how much quality there is around the league right now and the amount of 1000+ TPE-players on almost every team I think the expansion teams need to be a little more competitive than in the scenario that you suggested or else they won't be competitive for a very long time. Right now the worst teams in the league still have 4-5 1000 TPE players, it would take expansion teams years to even be able to compete with them.
Then each team has to give up a 650+ tpe player who isn't going into regression anytime soon.
That way they have a chance to compete.
- GCool - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by Merica@Jul 8 2015, 02:39 PM
Mac, the whole POINT of being a new player is that you are a rookie, and you are behind the curve, as all rookies are. Send downs have been in the league longer and therefore have earned more TPE. You can't just eliminate that advantage that they worked for.
I agree here. What's wrong with that disparity? Especially if the juniors were expanded, you're going to have guys in the 155-200 TPE range playing quality minutes - against each other, mind you - and still producing results. The fact that they (myself included) have to work up to be at all relevant in the biggest league is one of the biggest goals.
- Nike - 07-08-2015
There's a happy medium somewhere between JT's and Winter's suggestions.
I'm definitely against the "everybody gets a trophy" idea, but new GMs can't just be gifted a roster either. MIN, MAN, WPG are proof that with patience and some solid GMing, a franchise can get to respectable level competiton with nearly no valuable assets to start with.
- BasedMinkus - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by Nike@Jul 8 2015, 12:49 PM
There's a happy medium somewhere between JT's and Winter's suggestions.
I'm definitely against the "everybody gets a trophy" idea, but new GMs can't just be gifted a roster either. MIN, MAN, WPG are proof that with patience and some solid GMing, a franchise can get to respectable level competiton with nearly no valuable assets to start with.
Thats why I think if we all have to give up a 600+ tpe guy from within the last 5 to 6 seasons, then those expansion teams will end up with more than what i had to work with.
I don't thnk expansion teams should be afforded a luxury that you or I were not given.
- xDParK - 07-08-2015
Good discussion, league management is watching closely :ph34r:
- RomanesEuntDomus - 07-08-2015
Nice job constructing that strawman, I never once suggested that we should just gift a bunch of good players to the expansion teams, just give them more than inactives and C-level rookies :lol:
If a team with as much depth as ours only has to give up their backup and two inactives then the system doesn't work as it should.
- BasedMinkus - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by RomanesEuntDomus@Jul 8 2015, 01:05 PM
Nice job constructing that strawman, I never once suggested that we should just gift a bunch of good players to the expansion teams, just give them more than inactives and C-level rookies :lol:
If a team with as much depth as ours only has to give up their backup and two inactives then the system doesn't work as it should.
You said you didn't think that was good enough talent even though there were 500+ tpe guys including a 792 tpe player.
WHat more do you want?
- ArGarBarGar - 07-08-2015
I am for expansion as long as Minnesota is allowed to protect all their players.
It's only fair.
- wikiplaysgames - 07-08-2015
Interesting article actually.
I suppose like I think a few people here said it's just a depth thing; lots of very good players even on the third and fourth lines of the SHL teams leaves not a lot of room for a 350 TPE rookie.
- Birks - 07-08-2015
Quote:Originally posted by Josh@Jul 8 2015, 10:20 PM
If you keep a total of 15 players on your roster (including goalie), you still lose 1-3 assets.
Like hypothetically I could lose Sullivan, Reinhart and Winters. A team that gets those players is receiving two 700+ tpe guys and an effficient back up goalie.
You can look at this with all teams:
Hamilton: Krumins, Mars III, Grimm or a prospect (3)
Minny: Sullivan, Reinhart, Winters/Jaskaitis (3)
Rage: Holtby, Bartenberry, White (3)
New England: McDonald, Vysock, Sparks Lightning (3)
Toronto: Swerin, Luther, Noah Jackson (3)
WKP: Pajari, Cezar Jr, Ask (3)
Cal: Verminski, Czonka, Kladno (3)
EDM: Ponsen, Paurs, Smirnov (3)
LAP: Shelter, Sexbang, Modano (3)
SEA: Miller, Osgoode, Parker (3)
TEX: Granger, Gauthier, Gibbon (3)
WPG: Bullis, Hackert, Clark (3)
it is entirely possible with the numbers I suggested.
Not too bad, but no way TEX is giving away Wade & Gibby
)