|
Post by Owen-Moncton on Dec 4, 2018 12:43:58 GMT -5
This is starting to remind me of debates I have participated in with hard core hockey analytics aficionados wherein specific data sets are used to support a position that is counterintuitive to what eyes/common sense etc. might suggest. That an average minor leaguer may make his way to the show out of nothing but organizational need does not automatically suggest he's ready. Years ago when the Leafs had zero depth at all, one Jiri Tlusty, a sniper at the junior level who was drafted 11th overall, found himself summoned to the show. He scored two goals in his first game. One bounced in off his ass. Nevertheless, he was anointed the savior Toronto needed in short order. His career headed south in no time. In 2008, he was utterly useless and found himself traded to Carolina I believe for Philipe Paradis. My point here is that a promotion to the show does not always indicate greatness. I think what we are seeing here is a guy who was promoted based on opportunity vs readiness. And even if he is ready to back up, if a marginal asset can actually platoon with legit starters and have significantly better numbers than the AHL goalie of the year, I respectfully and humbly suggest that we are doing it wrong. Once a stats guy argued that Mikail Grabovski was the best option to center Kessel. Because numbers. Problem was, they were both puck carriers who use their speed to gain the attacking zone. Grabo liked to try to dangle three guys and take it to the net. Kessel liked to rip it mid stride before the goalie can get set while he used his wheels to back defenders off. In short they were the furthest thing from compatible as demonstrated by 3 different head coaches. Data is awesome when supporting/testing a premise that observation suggests but it can't always drive a line of thought, especially when plain reason suggests otherwise. Not trying to start a war of words with anyone, just pointing out the obvious: if NHL experience drives metrics like stamina, then the bar needs to be higher than 10 games before a guy has 70% the stamina of a starter. Because TECH/ATH scores that are driven by minor league results wont stand up against the highest levels of competition. And clearly, a 7 STAM allows you to platoon a raw rookie. Didn't Glenn clarify that both NHL and AHL games played in a season it what drives stamina? Following this thread makes me curious what Ken Dryden's GHL card would be like following the 1970-71 season... Jed, what is the reason for nerfing Stamina? is it not to more accurately reflect how a rookie might perform against better competition? When playing NHL18 on semi-pro, I just won back to back Stanley Cups. Three of five of the league leaders in hits and points wore my colors. My goalie (Fleury) was capable of a shutout every week. So I started playing in pro mode and acquired Flower along with a few of my favourite players. I'm getting lit up 8-3 most games, because the competition level is higher. If AHL results were taken into account to give AG such favorable numbers, why does Sparks have the same STAM with ZERO NHL games last year, but far worse TECH/ATH scores despite being goalie of the year and a Calder Cup winner? To my mind, he has better TECH/ATH abilities of the two as proven by the numbers they both put up last year. Somehow, his numbers are way worse yet he has the same 7 STAM as Georgie. I get that the argument here is the computer generated these numbers and that it is cold hard data, but the system will only create the statistical result we tell it to by adhering to the formula we input. I submit that the data cant reward a 7 STAM to an inferior asset because he was around for 10 NHL games and give a better asset who didnt play an NHL game last year lower ratings and identical STAM. The fix is simple. Any goalie with fewer than 15-20 CAREER NHL games is not capable of a STAM greater than 5. That way, they can only play as a backup. They can be lights out, and put up Vezina-like performances if the numbers suggest as much, but like once or twice a month before they need a nap. That would more accurately reflect appropriate usage than the current system. This is my last comment on the subject. I just want to clarify that the reason we are talking about it is because we actually love this SIM and we want to see it continue to evolve. Those of us raising issues arent a bunch of malcontents looking to bitch. We are invested in this experience and simply want to give input for consideration with a view to helping this become the best product it is capable of being. MY team will suck all year whether we address this issue for next year anyway, so it's not like I'm campaigning for anything that benefits my team. I just think a few tweaks will make the overall experience one that more closely emulates pro hockey.
|
|
|
Post by Jedediah-Hartford on Dec 4, 2018 14:00:07 GMT -5
Didn't Glenn clarify that both NHL and AHL games played in a season it what drives stamina? Following this thread makes me curious what Ken Dryden's GHL card would be like following the 1970-71 season... Jed, what is the reason for nerfing Stamina? is it not to more accurately reflect how a rookie might perform against better competition? When playing NHL18 on semi-pro, I just won back to back Stanley Cups. Three of five of the league leaders in hits and points wore my colors. My goalie (Fleury) was capable of a shutout every week. So I started playing in pro mode and acquired Flower along with a few of my favourite players. I'm getting lit up 8-3 most games, because the competition level is higher. If AHL results were taken into account to give AG such favorable numbers, why does Sparks have the same STAM with ZERO NHL games last year, but far worse TECH/ATH scores despite being goalie of the year and a Calder Cup winner? To my mind, he has better TECH/ATH abilities of the two as proven by the numbers they both put up last year. Somehow, his numbers are way worse yet he has the same 7 STAM as Georgie. I get that the argument here is the computer generated these numbers and that it is cold hard data, but the system will only create the statistical result we tell it to by adhering to the formula we input. I submit that the data cant reward a 7 STAM to an inferior asset because he was around for 10 NHL games and give a better asset who didnt play an NHL game last year lower ratings and identical STAM. The fix is simple. Any goalie with fewer than 15-20 CAREER NHL games is not capable of a STAM greater than 5. That way, they can only play as a backup. They can be lights out, and put up Vezina-like performances if the numbers suggest as much, but like once or twice a month before they need a nap. That would more accurately reflect appropriate usage than the current system. This is my last comment on the subject. I just want to clarify that the reason we are talking about it is because we actually love this SIM and we want to see it continue to evolve. Those of us raising issues arent a bunch of malcontents looking to bitch. We are invested in this experience and simply want to give input for consideration with a view to helping this become the best product it is capable of being. MY team will suck all year whether we address this issue for next year anyway, so it's not like I'm campaigning for anything that benefits my team. I just think a few tweaks will make the overall experience one that more closely emulates pro hockey. I was only pointing out the difference between what Glenn said and what you were saying, I did not (and have yet to) take any side on this subject as of yet.
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Dec 4, 2018 14:04:57 GMT -5
"Neal Pionk will never amount to anything" - Chris Suffolk
There was a time when ALL skaters under 42 NHL games played would be "nerfed"
and, all Goalies under 14 games would be "nerfed"
Now what exactly is the definition of 'nerf'?
A huge part of the frustration here, is we do not have a guide on how the sim works...as well as rule book, ect ect ect. A lot of info is done on the fly and becomes available from the big man, in dribs and drabs.
Frustration.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 4, 2018 14:28:39 GMT -5
"Neal Pionk will never amount to anything" - Chris Suffolk There was a time when ALL skaters under 42 NHL games played would be "nerfed" and, all Goalies under 14 games would be "nerfed" Now what exactly is the definition of 'nerf'? A huge part of the frustration here, is we do not have a guide on how the sim works...as well as rule book, ect ect ect. A lot of info is done on the fly and becomes available from the big man, in dribs and drabs. Frustration. Unfortunately time limitations do not allow me gather detailed requirements and to have the league sign off on them. Nor does time allow me to go through a detailed code review with anyone interested in doing so to get some sort of buy in that the card generation or the sim itself is working properly. Using the same analogy as I have used many times before you know how a plane works. You get on one at an airport and it flies from point A to point B at which point you get off of it. You don't need to understand that the turbine fans need to be set at 1.53 degrees offset to produce optimal thrust. So I contend that you, and all other owners, know very well how the sim works. Frustration
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Dec 4, 2018 14:46:53 GMT -5
I flew to Atlanta a few weeks ago and you can damn well better believe as I passed the 'Captain' whilst boarding, I said "I'm in seat 16A coach and I expect you to bring a copy of the entire cockpit schematics for me to peruse while I eat my cheesesteak".
I would later be escorted off that flight but that was for something entirely different.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Dec 4, 2018 15:00:40 GMT -5
Just going by your logic Neal Pionk played in 28 out of 82 games! That should lessen his ability to play a full season in the GHL. Oh wait it doesn't? That's strange. "This is the only position that gets a reward for not playing actual games". I would argue that this is the only position that gets nerfed for not playing in actual games. We are nerfing goalies (and they should be) because we are assuming they could not play at the same rate they did for their call-up if they played their total number of games that year (47 for AG). In Pionks case or any skaters we let that slide and give him a card assuming he could keep his 28 game pace up over the entire 82 games. Discussed in the other thread but the current solution seems to work and has been there since 2015. Take AHL GP into account for stamina the GHL card takes a hit. Use only NHL games played for card stays how it was and stamina reduced. Am I wrong in assuming that skater's cards are still nerfed if they do not reach the 41 game mark and this post is way off base?
|
|
|
Post by Dane-Hamilton on Dec 4, 2018 15:39:11 GMT -5
Just going by your logic Neal Pionk played in 28 out of 82 games! That should lessen his ability to play a full season in the GHL. Oh wait it doesn't? That's strange. "This is the only position that gets a reward for not playing actual games". I would argue that this is the only position that gets nerfed for not playing in actual games. We are nerfing goalies (and they should be) because we are assuming they could not play at the same rate they did for their call-up if they played their total number of games that year (47 for AG). In Pionks case or any skaters we let that slide and give him a card assuming he could keep his 28 game pace up over the entire 82 games. Discussed in the other thread but the current solution seems to work and has been there since 2015. Take AHL GP into account for stamina the GHL card takes a hit. Use only NHL games played for card stays how it was and stamina reduced. Am I wrong in assuming that skater's cards are still nerfed if they do not reach the 41 game mark and this post is way off base? Not sure how much it is nerfed but any skater over 15 games played appear to have very useable GHL cards. Strome actually Cornwall's 1st line center Cirelli 18GP - 74-47 Strome 21GP - 76-48 DiDomenico 24GP - 78-38
|
|
|
Post by Owen-Moncton on Dec 4, 2018 16:24:33 GMT -5
"Neal Pionk will never amount to anything" - Chris Suffolk There was a time when ALL skaters under 42 NHL games played would be "nerfed" and, all Goalies under 14 games would be "nerfed" Now what exactly is the definition of 'nerf'? A huge part of the frustration here, is we do not have a guide on how the sim works...as well as rule book, ect ect ect. A lot of info is done on the fly and becomes available from the big man, in dribs and drabs. Frustration. Unfortunately time limitations do not allow me gather detailed requirements and to have the league sign off on them. Nor does time allow me to go through a detailed code review with anyone interested in doing so to get some sort of buy in that the card generation or the sim itself is working properly.Using the same analogy as I have used many times before you know how a plane works. You get on one at an airport and it flies from point A to point B at which point you get off of it. You don't need to understand that the turbine fans need to be set at 1.53 degrees offset to produce optimal thrust. So I contend that you, and all other owners, know very well how the sim works. FrustrationOK, I lied. this is my last post. Whay can't we agree that after the sim runs its report and generates a value, we agree that any goalie with less than 15-20 games cannot have a stamina that allows him to platoon effectively with a starter?
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 4, 2018 16:53:48 GMT -5
There might be one more post yet to come Owen. Because there is nothing wrong with the card the way that it/they are calculated. That's what I have been trying to convey with each and every one of my posts. 1) Tech/Athl points calculated by stats and nerfed as deemed by the card generator (which is in effect my logic) 2) Stamina determined by total games played in both the NHL and AHL (how much workload can the goalie carry). 3) Goalie cards nerfed even further (if very good to exceptional as was pointed out with Murray a few years back (GMs decision). It seems like the primary crux of your argument is it doesn't feel right or it doesn't pass the smell test. This all started with Cam Talbot (who had a subpar season last year, and has enthusiasticly blown goats this year) should have a better card than AG. I respectfully disagree based on: 1) AG's better than average save percentage last year 2) The total number of games he played 3) That he as an average card This whole league is a "what if" simulation. What if these guys played together? What if a backup NHL goalie played 40 games instead of the 20 that he actually played? The bottom line is 10 games is a decent sample size as I articulated and provided evidence to above. That being the case I think AG's card is as it should be.
|
|
|
Post by Owen-Moncton on Dec 4, 2018 17:08:36 GMT -5
There might be one more post yet to come Owen. Because there is nothing wrong with the card the way that it/they are calculated. That's what I have been trying to convey with each and every one of my posts. 1) Tech/Athl points calculated by stats and nerfed as deemed by the card generator (which is in effect my logic) 2) Stamina determined by total games played in both the NHL and AHL (how much workload can the goalie carry). 3) Goalie cards nerfed even further (if very good to exceptional as was pointed out with Murray a few years back (GMs decision). It seems like the primary crux of your argument is it doesn't feel right or it doesn't pass the smell test. This all started with Cam Talbot (who had a subpar season last year, and has enthusiasticly blown goats this year) should have a better card than AG. I respectfully disagree based on: 1) AG's better than average save percentage last year 2) The total number of games he played 3) That he as an average card This whole league is a "what if" simulation. Wha if these guys played together? What if a backup NHL goalie played 40 games instead of the 20 that he actually played? The bottom line is 10 games is a decent sample size as I articulated and provided evidence to above. That being the case I think AG's card is as it should be. Well, you're right about one item, being another post. Beyond that, it's another story my friend. What irks me isnt that Talbot cant stop a beachball, or even that his card next year is going to be as bad or worse save for a trade out of EDM. What irks me is that an unproven asset has the ability to platoon quite comfortably with a legitimate starter. That shouldnt be the case, and if the logic applied to the engine says it should, then the logic should be re-evaluated. This isnt sour grapes, Glenn. If you think the TECH/ATH assignment is correct after ten games, fine. What I think you are refusing to acknowledge, is that limited success is not sustainable over a whole season. It's December 4th and Georgie already has 8 starts, and one of the best GAA in the league at 2.18. That alone suggests the logic might require a re-thinking going forward. And by going forward, I mean next season, not today. None of this benefits me, this year or next. My point is about making the moving parts that make this thing so engaging more realistic. Take it for what it's worth and if you think that despite all of the constructive feedback coming from numerous participants, you got it right and there's no room for improvement, fair enough. Your house, your rules. I respectfully and enthusiastically disagree with you. For the record, Georgie-boy has the 8th best GAA in the league this year behind John Gibson. He's 17th in SV% and 13th in wins. Pretty fucking stellar for a guy with 10 NHL games and a 3.15 GAA over that stretch. He was only slightly better in Hartford with a 2.98 That alone indicates that over a larger body of work, he'd regress to the norm or below. Do we really think those numbers accurately represent what he's doing to the league this year? Seriously? -out.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Dec 4, 2018 17:41:05 GMT -5
Well, I will apologize, for I am not 100% correct. All, I want, is for the "sim" to be as real as possible. Which, is what "I thought" it was replicating. "If it's in the NHL".
It is as opinionated as anything else honestly. My perception of the proper way to run a franchise is a far cry from what another GM wants to do. There's nothing wrong with that.
For ex: my use of Sateri as a starting goalie because I didn't want to pay umpteen million for a starting goaltender.
And, who am I to say that Neal Pionk won't be anything! Or, that Sprong is being shopped because the Pens have lost favor in his ability. Those are facts. I am NOT always correct, but I have a pretty decent track record for predictions. And, my GHL record isn't too shabby either, save for that season I tanked and the other season I quit because I was a crybaby bitch.
BUT, afterall is said and done...Like Owen said...ALL I really care about is the betterment of this AWESOME friggin league that Master Glenn has created. I guess the real reason WE ALL feel like we can bitch and whine and kick our feet so often, is because we feel like a true dysfunctional family!!!! I love to hate you guys, BUT I LOVE signing back on and unwrapping those responses!!! I'm not as articulate as you youngsters are, but I can sling shit when time comes.
I hoe you all NEVER take my comments personally, it's always just for US....NOT just me. I'm NOT a ME kind of guy.
All is good with me, with whatever Glenn says we do...I wish Glenn didn't have a 9-5 job so he could just be available 24/7 for my issues ALONE....but then we'd have to hire a staff for you other knuckleheads.
|
|
|
Post by Dane-Hamilton on Dec 4, 2018 17:43:17 GMT -5
In response to Georgiev numbers, aside from the 3 games Dubnyk was hurt he only plays when a team comes to town that lets put it nicely is less than stellar. His GAA is more a result of him playing teams that won’t get more than 20 shots against him. Sv Percentage average at best.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Dec 4, 2018 17:49:57 GMT -5
In response to Georgiev numbers, aside from the 3 games Dubnyk was hurt he only plays when a team comes to town that lets put it nicely is less than stellar. His GAA is more a result of him playing teams that won’t get more than 20 shots against him. Sv Percentage average at best. I agree Dane. On top of that, Georgie isn't playing on the exact GHL team as was the NYR team from last season. The dynamics/stats of each of the members skating in front of him will/should alter his stats in the GHL.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 4, 2018 18:25:53 GMT -5
There might be one more post yet to come Owen. Because there is nothing wrong with the card the way that it/they are calculated. That's what I have been trying to convey with each and every one of my posts. 1) Tech/Athl points calculated by stats and nerfed as deemed by the card generator (which is in effect my logic) 2) Stamina determined by total games played in both the NHL and AHL (how much workload can the goalie carry). 3) Goalie cards nerfed even further (if very good to exceptional as was pointed out with Murray a few years back (GMs decision). It seems like the primary crux of your argument is it doesn't feel right or it doesn't pass the smell test. This all started with Cam Talbot (who had a subpar season last year, and has enthusiasticly blown goats this year) should have a better card than AG. I respectfully disagree based on: 1) AG's better than average save percentage last year 2) The total number of games he played 3) That he as an average card This whole league is a "what if" simulation. Wha if these guys played together? What if a backup NHL goalie played 40 games instead of the 20 that he actually played? The bottom line is 10 games is a decent sample size as I articulated and provided evidence to above. That being the case I think AG's card is as it should be. Well, you're right about one item, being another post. Beyond that, it's another story my friend. What irks me isnt that Talbot cant stop a beachball, or even that his card next year is going to be as bad or worse save for a trade out of EDM. What irks me is that an unproven asset has the ability to platoon quite comfortably with a legitimate starter. That shouldnt be the case, and if the logic applied to the engine says it should, then the logic should be re-evaluated. This isnt sour grapes, Glenn. If you think the TECH/ATH assignment is correct after ten games, fine. What I think you are refusing to acknowledge, is that limited success is not sustainable over a whole season. It's December 4th and Georgie already has 8 starts, and one of the best GAA in the league at 2.18. That alone suggests the logic might require a re-thinking going forward. And by going forward, I mean next season, not today. None of this benefits me, this year or next. My point is about making the moving parts that make this thing so engaging more realistic. Take it for what it's worth and if you think that despite all of the constructive feedback coming from numerous participants, you got it right and there's no room for improvement, fair enough. Your house, your rules. I respectfully and enthusiastically disagree with you. For the record, Georgie-boy has the 8th best GAA in the league this year behind John Gibson. He's 17th in SV% and 13th in wins. Pretty fucking stellar for a guy with 10 NHL games and a 3.15 GAA over that stretch. He was only slightly better in Hartford with a 2.98 That alone indicates that over a larger body of work, he'd regress to the norm or below. Do we really think those numbers accurately represent what he's doing to the league this year? Seriously? -out. Dane nailed it on the head in the thread below. Again, this is a "what if" simulation and what if AG with an averaged card and a fort that will allow him to prob play 40 games in the blue played in net for one of the best teams in the league. I am guessing he would have a 2.18 GAA and a .908 save percentage. I am not saying the card generation or the sim is perfect but arguments like how he is doing on the league this year for Hamilton is about as speculative as you can get. Bring me cold hard facts to chew on and digest. In the 6 or so pages, I have yet to see them.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Dec 4, 2018 18:42:15 GMT -5
Well, you're right about one item, being another post. Beyond that, it's another story my friend. What irks me isnt that Talbot cant stop a beachball, or even that his card next year is going to be as bad or worse save for a trade out of EDM. What irks me is that an unproven asset has the ability to platoon quite comfortably with a legitimate starter. That shouldnt be the case, and if the logic applied to the engine says it should, then the logic should be re-evaluated. This isnt sour grapes, Glenn. If you think the TECH/ATH assignment is correct after ten games, fine. What I think you are refusing to acknowledge, is that limited success is not sustainable over a whole season. It's December 4th and Georgie already has 8 starts, and one of the best GAA in the league at 2.18. That alone suggests the logic might require a re-thinking going forward. And by going forward, I mean next season, not today. None of this benefits me, this year or next. My point is about making the moving parts that make this thing so engaging more realistic. Take it for what it's worth and if you think that despite all of the constructive feedback coming from numerous participants, you got it right and there's no room for improvement, fair enough. Your house, your rules. I respectfully and enthusiastically disagree with you. For the record, Georgie-boy has the 8th best GAA in the league this year behind John Gibson. He's 17th in SV% and 13th in wins. Pretty fucking stellar for a guy with 10 NHL games and a 3.15 GAA over that stretch. He was only slightly better in Hartford with a 2.98 That alone indicates that over a larger body of work, he'd regress to the norm or below. Do we really think those numbers accurately represent what he's doing to the league this year? Seriously? -out. Dane nailed it on the head in the thread below. Again, this is a "what if" simulation and what if AG with an averaged card and a fort that will allow him to prob play 40 games in the blue played in net for one of the best teams in the league. I am guessing he would have a 2.18 GAA and a .908 save percentage. I am not saying the card generation or the sim is perfect but arguments like how he is doing on the league this year for Hamilton is about as speculative as you can get. Bring me cold hard facts to chew on and digest. In the 6 or so pages, I have yet to see them. The discussion I was having was NOT about how good his is/was doing....it is specifically HOW MUCH he COULD play in the GHL based upon his REAL NHL/AHL stats. Now, you all have to see there is a huge difference between actual games played NHL, versus GHL. No?
|
|