|
Post by John-Michigan on Nov 18, 2014 21:32:29 GMT -5
My thoughts:
This comment may have been lost in the "not that guy" thread.
Is there any thought or discussion regarding player cards and using a 3 year nhl average to determine their ghl card?
I think it brings a bit more of realism. If a player has a off year or lost due to injury we all know his following year card is shot to shit. If we use an average, ghl cards would remain some what consistent. This will also cut down on the # of trades a team may make by trying to dump a player having a off nhl year.
??
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Nov 18, 2014 21:35:45 GMT -5
I am definitely for some research to look into this, it had been discussed at one point
|
|
|
Post by John-Michigan on Nov 20, 2014 12:24:16 GMT -5
BUMP
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Nov 20, 2014 15:11:05 GMT -5
Sorry just had to dig out the asshole next door..... We talked about this when it was a possibility that their was not going to be a NHL season. Why would we do this? We are a sim off last years stats. Players have bad years and good ones. Why would we get away from that going on in here? I think the 3 year average would work for asking prices.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Nov 20, 2014 21:25:24 GMT -5
The asshole next door was not the one stuck in the snowbank, I don't even know that lady, lol...
I believe the idea was to keep teams from realizing an unfair value on a good player who has an off year or who is injured in a contract year but I think you may be right on this one, mountain man, using a three year average for contracts would eliminate that and still give the chance of a player having a bad card because of an off year, which I agree, is realistic.
|
|
|
Post by Matt-Colorado on Nov 20, 2014 21:46:52 GMT -5
I do like three year averages. Saves teams from an off/injured year and also helps prevent anomalies like Anderson and Hunwick last year.
Let's look into this!
|
|
|
Post by Dane-Hamilton on Nov 20, 2014 22:09:22 GMT -5
Don't like it keeps young guys becoming real players down for another year or so and would keep old vets useable in our league when they should be put out to pasture.
|
|
|
Post by Matt-Colorado on Nov 20, 2014 22:34:57 GMT -5
Why not keep guys under 25 without three years of 60 games on a year by year card?
|
|
|
Post by John-Michigan on Nov 20, 2014 22:55:09 GMT -5
lots to chew on. lets hear from glenn
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Nov 21, 2014 5:17:08 GMT -5
So you are saying Frattin should have a NHL card for playing in the AHL next year?
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Nov 21, 2014 7:33:44 GMT -5
Averages could be done but I kind of like the one year one card system we use now. If I am watching my players in the NHL this year and I see they are tearing it up, I like the fact knowing that they are going to have a real nice card next year. I am not saying we can't do averages but there would have to be a preponderence of evidence proving that to be a better way to go.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Nov 21, 2014 9:10:04 GMT -5
I like the one year, one card...what I don't care for is players getting a low ball salary due to an off year or an injury. Is contract negotiation something that we could use a three year card average when figuring out asking prices? Just not sure on the feasibility of this.
|
|
|
Post by Alex-Edmonton on Nov 21, 2014 11:00:36 GMT -5
I think the biggest key is to somehow balance it out so the stamina is a reflection of actual ice time. Meaning if a guy has great stats but for limited games that should be reflected in the sim so that a guy who is up short term does not become a regular or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Nov 21, 2014 14:00:02 GMT -5
But that is how it already works
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Nov 21, 2014 14:51:53 GMT -5
But that is how it already works correct!
|
|