canucklax Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Old news, stop being a stupid troll lax. I just think you shouldn't be involved in the re-rate process this offseason after what has happened. I'd rather it take more time, be done right, give guys a break from the league, instead of being rushed through while you smoke too strong of weed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmen81 Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I'd like the re-rates to be done as close to the real thing as possible. Also for younger players who are still highly regarded prospects who might not be that successful in STHS should still get a decent re-rate if they still have good potential for the Nhl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I just think you shouldn't be involved in the re-rate process this offseason after what has happened. I'd rather it take more time, be done right, give guys a break from the league, instead of being rushed through while you smoke too strong of weed That's fine with me, I've got better things I could be doing with that time anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaMash Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I just think you shouldn't be involved in the re-rate process this offseason after what has happened. I'd rather it take more time, be done right, give guys a break from the league, instead of being rushed through while you smoke too strong of weed I agree with this. One person shouldn't take on the majority of it in such a short time. I know more than one person did them, but Insom did an awful lot in a short period of time. I'd prefer the off-season to be longer, with slower re-rates done. The first 3 seasons have moved very quickly, there's not a reason why a longer break would be a bad thing right now. I think everyone's interest in the game might go up after a bit more of a break too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dion Phaneuf Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I'd like the re-rates to be done as close to the real thing as possible. Also for younger players who are still highly regarded prospects who might not be that successful in STHS should still get a decent re-rate if they still have good potential for the Nhl. I disagree (just a little). 3 seasons in, I think that we should just let some prospects become busts. I hate it when nearly every decent prospect gets a good re-rate regardless of how they did in the regular season. I've dealt a lot of prospects over the last three seasons...Minnesota had one of the best prospect pools when this league started. Some of these guys have turned into studs (ex. Granlund, Brodin) while some have struggled and shouldn't get that re-rate (ex. Dumba), and some have been developed well and should get that decent re-rate (ex. Phillips, J. Larsson). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaMash Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I disagree (just a little). 3 seasons in, I think that we should just let some prospects become busts. I hate it when nearly every decent prospect gets a good re-rate regardless of how they did in the regular season. I've dealt a lot of prospects over the last three seasons...Minnesota had one of the best prospect pools when this league started. Some of these guys have turned into studs (ex. Granlund, Brodin) while some have struggled and shouldn't get that re-rate (ex. Dumba), and some have been developed well and should get that decent re-rate (ex. Phillips, J. Larsson). I think that Gmen means more along the lines that one poor season shouldnt completely kill a prospects development and you should still see growth out of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otis Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I just think you shouldn't be involved in the re-rate process this offseason after what has happened. I'd rather it take more time, be done right, give guys a break from the league, instead of being rushed through while you smoke too strong of weed LOL +1 <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dion Phaneuf Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I think that Gmen means more along the lines that one poor season shouldnt completely kill a prospects development and you should still see growth out of them. In that case, I agree but the re-rate shouldn't be great, just average or below average. Like if the prospect had a horrid season maybe his ETA should go from 1-2 seasons to 2-3 seasons. Basically, the prospect still has a chance but it'll take longer for him to make the jump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intoewsables Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 If a player is producing "as he should", he should absolutely be left alone. When I was re-rating players, I had a rough idea of how many goals 'X" SC rating should produce over a full season, 'X' assists for PA rating and so on. Any player that exceeded those expectations would get a boost, and vice versa. Just because every GM wants their players to improve doesn't mean that's how it should work. Also, young players would typically receive a bump in physical attributes whereas older players would start losing their foot speed, endurance, durability, etc. I'd like the re-rates to be done as close to the real thing as possible. Also for younger players who are still highly regarded prospects who might not be that successful in STHS should still get a decent re-rate if they still have good potential for the Nhl. Do you know how few prospects actually make it to the NHL full-time? Potential is only worth so much if a player isn't producing, and I don't understand why prospects are expected to magically improve when they play like ****. Remember when Hodgson-Schroeder was supposed to be our next 1-2 punch down the middle in a few years? Rodin was supposed to be a top-6 winger; Sauve was a sure bet to be a top-4 D. Lots of young players go through stalls in their development as soon as they reach the pro level. No reason STHS should be any different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crom! Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Here is your list of uncreated players.. Taylor Leier PO:6.5D Atte Makinen PO:0.0 Marcel Noebels PO:6.5C Petr Placek PO:0.0 Matt Ford PO:6.5C Haydn Fleury PO:0.0 Michael Parks PO:6.5D Jerret Smith PO:0.0 Shane Harper PO:6.5D Ryan Kujawinski PO:0.0 Derek Mathers PO:5.5D Spencer Martin PO:0.0 Luke Pither PO:7.0D Tyler Hostetter PO:6.5D Valeri Vasiliev PO:6.5D Jakub Kovar PO:6.0C Colin Suellentrop PO:6.0C Nick Luukko PO:6.0C Ricard Blidstrand PO:6.0D CREATE SOME !!! It's not my team, it's Romo's. My farm team with Chicago had full lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmen81 Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I'm not saying every prospect should get boosts each year. Basically the players I am mostly referring to are college players. Who have taken a little longer to prove themselves. We are a couple of years ahead of the NHL and certain players haven't had a chance to prove themselves in the NHL, but have top 6 potential or top D potential. Just because they have struggled in STHS I don't think they should get a bad re-rate. I'm not saying the re-rates should go through the roof until they actually prove themselves in the show I'm just saying it should be taken into consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intoewsables Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I'm not saying every prospect should get boosts each year. Basically the players I am mostly referring to are college players. Who have taken a little longer to prove themselves. We are a couple of years ahead of the NHL and certain players haven't had a chance to prove themselves in the NHL, but have top 6 potential or top D potential. Just because they have struggled in STHS I don't think they should get a bad re-rate. I'm not saying the re-rates should go through the roof until they actually prove themselves in the show I'm just saying it should be taken into consideration. Depends on how much weight you want what they do IRL to hold once they've been created. I think it's beyond silly because there's virtually no point in creating them if we're going to ignore what they're doing in game. Not my decision though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmen81 Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Another thing is would a first rounder from our last draft who is still a few years away from the NHL get a better re-rate then someone who was a first rounder in 2011 or 12 but hasn't quite made the NHL yet and is still regarded as a top prospect? I do understand that these types of decision are tough and I am ok with whatever happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimon Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Another thing is would a first rounder from our last draft who is still a few years away from the NHL get a better re-rate then someone who was a first rounder in 2011 or 12 but hasn't quite made the NHL yet and is still regarded as a top prospect? I do understand that these types of decision are tough and I am ok with whatever happens. IMO, first rounder from the most recent draft would have higher PO but attributes would be lower. First rounder in 2011/12 etc. would possibly have lower PO but bit higher attributes to reflect his development (e.g. in the CHL). This is with regards to uncreated players. If a player is producing "as he should", he should absolutely be left alone. When I was re-rating players, I had a rough idea of how many goals 'X" SC rating should produce over a full season, 'X' assists for PA rating and so on. Any player that exceeded those expectations would get a boost, and vice versa. Just because every GM wants their players to improve doesn't mean that's how it should work. Also, young players would typically receive a bump in physical attributes whereas older players would start losing their foot speed, endurance, durability, etc. That's basically how I do things. Also I think some young players (around 22-24 y.o.) could/should get a PO boost depending on how their season went. For example, a player like Mikael Granlund is already at 60 PO at 23 perhaps it could be bumped due to his fairly impressive second full season in the NHL (41 pts). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dion Phaneuf Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Another thing is would a first rounder from our last draft who is still a few years away from the NHL get a better re-rate then someone who was a first rounder in 2011 or 12 but hasn't quite made the NHL yet and is still regarded as a top prospect? I do understand that these types of decision are tough and I am ok with whatever happens. I'd say it depends on the prospect. If he's good then he shoud be rated as so (possibly better than a '11 or '12 pick). For the average prospect, I would think that they'd have a lower rating (basically what toews said). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 GM's I know of that aren't filling there farms. Romo Russian Rocket Majical ( he gets a break for now ) MGK Inane I told you guys I was in Europe for a month, I'm back now and submitted full lines for tonight. chill out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 plus as I've also said I have more than enough players to field a complete team, I have no idea why the program doesn't use them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*VaNcOuVeRCaNuCkS* Posted August 14, 2013 Author Share Posted August 14, 2013 Regarding the teams with "Unknown Players" There should be no excuse as to why you shouldn't be able to ice a full AHL team with all the time we have had during the season As an example Tampa has enough players to fill out an AHL team but for some reason STHS doesn't like to cooperate 100% of the time, after every game I look over my roster and make sure there were no injuries and if I have to replace someone I do I then copy all roster and lines and they should be good to go for the next game I know for a fact Boston (Inane) has enough players to form a team but he has been in Europe for the past 3 to 4 weeks so he does have an excuse (he is back now so I expect him to adjust his lines accordingly) I can't comment on the otehr teams listed as I have not had an opportunity (lately) to look at their roster Regarding Re Rates This offseason I would like to spend more time rating players but some GM's (not going to name names) have been constantly bugging me to get the season started Re Rates take a lot of time if you want them done properly and I have tried to find a happy medium to please most if not all of you I think the process of the off season will change and SOB and I and whoever is involved in the ratings will discuss some options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disaronno Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Big divisional match up tonight! Need a win to stay in the hunt. LA KINGS STARTING LINE-UP Dustin Brown [C] - Patrice Bergeron [A] - Nail Yakupov Drew Doughty [A] - Josh Gorges Robin Lehner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Regarding the teams with "Unknown Players" There should be no excuse as to why you shouldn't be able to ice a full AHL team with all the time we have had during the season As an example Tampa has enough players to fill out an AHL team but for some reason STHS doesn't like to cooperate 100% of the time, after every game I look over my roster and make sure there were no injuries and if I have to replace someone I do I then copy all roster and lines and they should be good to go for the next game I know for a fact Boston (Inane) has enough players to form a team but he has been in Europe for the past 3 to 4 weeks so he does have an excuse (he is back now so I expect him to adjust his lines accordingly) I can't comment on the otehr teams listed as I have not had an opportunity (lately) to look at their roster Regarding Re Rates This offseason I would like to spend more time rating players but some GM's (not going to name names) have been constantly bugging me to get the season started Re Rates take a lot of time if you want them done properly and I have tried to find a happy medium to please most if not all of you I think the process of the off season will change and SOB and I and whoever is involved in the ratings will discuss some options Hayes randomly was on my NHL team so there was an unknown player in his spot for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.