Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

CDCGML 2011-12 Season


canuck2xtreme

Recommended Posts

Just a quick hit, as I'm likely to be on the way to work fairly shortly...

Teams can set their budget once a year, at any point after the playoffs. Some teams have already adjusted theirs, others have not.

But you don't have to set it all at once. For example, if you want some money placed into Legal for the summers free agency period, you can do that. But you don't have to spend the whole $35 million all at once. You can leave other areas like Medical or Player Development open until later on in the summer. You wouldn't be able to take money out of one program once it's been invested, but this gives you the chance to be a little more flexible.

Feel free to discuss, debate, suggest and so on. I'll speak more to it when I get back from work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You still get to set your budget for this season, it has not been set yet. Your budget must be submitted to C2X prior to the start of the season. You are currently just riding out the end of last years budget. Every year each organization gets to completely restructure their budget, if they want to.

You are still in full control, and can set it however you like. Hell, we had one bonehead last year that put his entire budget into legal just so he could sign an overrated egocentric self-proclaimed superstar that had a flop of a season (too pointed? lol... couldn`t resist).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick hit, as I'm likely to be on the way to work fairly shortly...

Teams can set their budget once a year, at any point after the playoffs. Some teams have already adjusted theirs, others have not.

But you don't have to set it all at once. For example, if you want some money placed into Legal for the summers free agency period, you can do that. But you don't have to spend the whole $35 million all at once. You can leave other areas like Medical or Player Development open until later on in the summer. You wouldn't be able to take money out of one program once it's been invested, but this gives you the chance to be a little more flexible.

Feel free to discuss, debate, suggest and so on. I'll speak more to it when I get back from work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a very sound and pragmatic solution/compromise.

What would be the reasoning not to allow us to be able to continually adjust our Medical or Player Development right up until the season opener though?

It doesn't have any consequences to the Off Season, other than you either can afford more room for minor leaguers and develop a minor system better, and then call then up if they play the best among competition in that particular position....as well as allow trades betweeen our affiliates, which isn't uncommon, itrw.

Also being able to adjust your Medical or your PD, doesn't have any ramifications on the Regular season until Opening Day. As long as the payroll in under what you've allowed for by the start of opening day, what difference does it make how we divide it up, or how many times, among our Front Office budgets? As long as a final budget is submitted for the begining of the season, what precedes it shouldn't really have a bearing, or worse, a hamstringing effect on an organization moves in the Off Season.

It seems logical.

Am I missing something?

If the Canucks decide to invest $8 million dollars to build a medical facility for their players tomorrow, they don't get half way through building it and then decide to pull half their funding for it to put it towards something else. The money is spoken for.

It's a fairly simple system in order to give the game a bit more depth and realism. I don't want to complicate something that's been working just fine so far.

It's been in the rules that once a budget is set, it can't be adjusted until the next season. If teams were unsure about their needs regarding it, they shouldn't set it until right before the season when their picture is more clear. This is exactly why I haven't set my budget yet.

When something comes up, it's just one more thing a strong General Manager has to work around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Canucks decide to invest $8 million dollars to build a medical facility for their players tomorrow, they don't get half way through building it and then decide to pull half their funding for it to put it towards something else. The money is spoken for.

It's a fairly simple system in order to give the game a bit more depth and realism. I don't want to complicate something that's been working just fine so far.

It's been in the rules that once a budget is set, it can't be adjusted until the next season. If teams were unsure about their needs regarding it, they shouldn't set it until right before the season when their picture is more clear. This is exactly why I haven't set my budget yet.

When something comes up, it's just one more thing a strong General Manager has to work around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One is not able to tweak or adjust it if one runs into a situation, whether it was of their making or not. Sometimes situations occur that isn't in ones control and decisions are made that affect a GM's organization adversely, for the greater good.

I feel that there should be a remedy or mechanism to help a GM be able to react to those scenarios.....I think it's only fair to those who spend countless hours researching players, making pitches and followups for trades and signings and looking forward to the future while trying to manage their assets of today.

Or control should be as nimble as we are, or as nimble as it can be.

Not sure why you're arguing against having greater contro and flexibilityl over your organization before the season starts??

Or are you just a fan of the status quo no matter what?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Realism is all well and good, but so is a little flexibility....this is a 'game' after all.....and the aim should be to encourage entertainment and 'funness', not frustration borne out of unnecessary rigidity without remedy.

Also, if people had their budgets set before others did, then why didn't they have more of a benefit from it during signings? I mean, the pendulum swings both ways on that, doesn't it? Shouldn't those people who set their budgets earlier on get their signings first, over 'who fits better'......othewise it's all risk and hardly any reward.

Newbies, such as myself set the budget because we were under the illusion that it would help and we wouldn't be mirred in problems later on, what's the benefit for them folks?

1. Teams who had budgets set benefited from having more up to date front office programs than others. Teams that have not yet set them for this year are still running on last years numbers. All budgets are taken into consideration and all teams benefit differently depending on how they've set their budget, but the budgets are not the sole deciding factor. A lot of variables go into each signing, and they're different for every player.

2. Example: A defenceman who plays 20 minutes a night has two offers on the table. One is from a team that already has 6 NHL calibre, active defencemen who each play 16-23 minutes a night each. The other is from a team that needs some help on the blue-line and the defenceman can be a top contributor. I'm not going to sign the defenceman with the first team just because he set his budget a month earlier than the team that's clearly a better option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Teams who had budgets set benefited from having more up to date front office programs than others. Teams that have not yet set them for this year are still running on last years numbers. All budgets are taken into consideration and all teams benefit differently depending on how they've set their budget, but the budgets are not the sole deciding factor. A lot of variables go into each signing, and they're different for every player.

2. Example: A defenceman who plays 20 minutes a night has two offers on the table. One is from a team that already has 6 NHL calibre, active defencemen who each play 16-23 minutes a night each. The other is from a team that needs some help on the blue-line and the defenceman can be a top contributor. I'm not going to sign the defenceman with the first team just because he set his budget a month earlier than the team that's clearly a better option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not arguing at all... Just trying to understand. More like light friendly conversation. Take a deep breath.

I do actually like the way the budget is, just because its simple, and only a once a year decision. I hold off till the beginning of regular season, hand in my budget, and thats all. Through all the injuries and movements I had last year, i wouldn`t have needed to change my budget. My negotiations go smoothly (sometimes), LTIR works very well and is there when I need it, and my minors budget is large because my overall plan is long term.

Sounds like in your plan I could continue to do the same thing, so that`s just fine.

I am cool with whatever, I just roll with the punches.

`status quo no matter what`? Dude, what are you talking about? Do we know each other? Did I forget to call after I took you home that night? towel.gif I believe I even suggested an idea in my reply to you... I thought you liked it... sniff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what Sharpie is going for. That since the "cylces" of each FO section is different, they should be set at different times.

Legal and Player Relations are really heavy in the off-season, and then lighter during the season. I'd say that should be set at the end of the playoffs, say June 15th. Setting these in September is hard because it's hard to forsee what you will be planning for in July when they will count for.

Player Development and Medical have no effect on the off-season, so setting them on June 15 would be pointless. They would be best set say October 1st, after camp and before the season starts.

My thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for signing a full team... I know agents are busy and get a lot of offers, but the most frustrating thing about the game is making an offer to a few UFA's, hearing nothing for a couple weeks, then finding out he signed with someone else. So I didn't spend any time looking at other players because I was left in limbo. Some kind of mandatory feed back would be great, maybe an "Interest level" before negotiating even starts... for example...

"Interest: None" - means the player has no intention of even negotiating.

"Interest: Some" - means your offer doesn't stand out in anyway, but it's within the ballpark. Negotiations probably wont happen or might already be happening with someone else.

"Interest: Very" - means the player will most likely negotiate unless something else huge drops in.

"Interest: Coming Home Baby!" - means the player really wants to sign, it's just down to negotiating now.

2 word feedback when the offer is received would... simply amazing...

Edit: horrible intoxicated typo, glad you can all still read despite my inability to write.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading the discussion and suggestions about the FO Budgets, here's what I get out if it:

Sharpie has the most convoluted way of saying, "I screwed up when I was a new GM and didn't realize that if I set my FO budget without any money for my PD then I can't have any minors system. I know it's against the rules but instead of screwing up my organization can I take some from my Medical budget? I'm sorry, I've learned my lesson that I should have asked for advice first. It won't happen again. Please and thanks. "

Instead, you propose to change the system, which works, and phrase it being a question about 'cycles' when in fact there is only one cycle, a year. The system works because it is simple for the League to maintain, for GMs to understand and to customize/distinguish your organization the way you want to. If there is any change to the system it should be that there is only one date that all teams must have their budget in, say Oct 1st, so that a GM must plan ahead rather than be reactionary.

In this instance, if Sharpie were to change his approach to the issue, I would be ok with him taking from his Medical to put into PD because I can't imagine any organization not putting money into a minors system. That would be unbelievably negligent and could harm a franchise for years.

Next time, try asking for advice first, as was put in my original post, admit a mistake and rather than trying to shift the burden if responsibility away from yourself.

That's my take.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BUFFALO SABRES DEPTH CHART

Alex Burrows - Claude Giroux - Justin Williams

Ryan Clowe - Joe Pavelski - Steve Downie

Benoit Pouliot - Valtteri Filppula - Mikael Samuelsson

Gabriel Landeskog - Lauri Korpikoski - Daniel Winnik

Sergei Samsonov - Cody Eakin - Jason WIlliams

Billy Sweatt- Peter Holland - Brad Richardson

______ - Chris DiDomenico -_______

Dan Boyle - Chris Pronger

Drew Doughty - Kris Letang

Niklas Hjalmarsson - Brian Lee

Niklas Grossman - Dylan Olsen

Roberto Luongo

Ty Conklin

IR: Marc Savard

RIGHTS: Erik Gudbranson, Ryan Murphy, Joel Armia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...