23-24 Card Creation

[Glenn-Philadelphia]

I have downloaded all of the regular season stats (NHL and AHL) and have gotten an early start on player card creation for next year. Nothing will be released prior to the end of our current season's playoffs but we are well ahead of our normal pace in getting the cards published.

This thread will also double as a place where questions can be asked about the new cards.

[Jedediah-Hartford]

Last July, I raised a concern regarding one of my player's cards. After a few posts back and forth with Glenn I learned that when a player has an AHL card and an NHL card generated, the "better" card is used. However, I believe "better" is subject to opinion, so I inquired as to what the unused card looked like for the player in question, but received no reply at that time.

I've been waiting for the next card creation stage to arrive so I can ask the question in a broader manner - Who makes the decision over what is considered the better card? As a team owner, I feel that choice should be mine as I know how I value my players. If there are two cards generated, why shouldn't I be able to look at both and decide which one I feel suits my team best?

[Glenn-Philadelphia]

Cards usually are very objectively apparent as to the better one. For non goalies its based on the relative card value (total composite points). In the past, the higher card is deemed to be better and then used. I can't think of a logical reason a team would want to use a lesser skater card in these circumstances but I would certainly listen to a GMs rationale for wanting to do so on a case by case basis.

In the past we have offered GMs the ability to choose a goalie version they want to use. If a goalies primary stats have been heavily influenced by a few number of NHL games owners have been given the option of choosing the AHL version (which would have a higher stamina and more nerfed stats) as opposed to the higher stats and lower (usually much lower so) stamina. This was usually driven by the teams need to rely on this player as a starter or backup.

[Brenden-Oregon]

The only reason I can think of is if the player's AHL card is more balanced between offense and defense and the player's NHL card is skewed more towards offense. If the team is lacking some offense, the owner may want a 72-22 (94) card instead of a 48-47 (95). Without a minor league team/sim, I would say the lesser total card would be more valuable for us in the big leagues, especially if you pair that player with someone who has a good defensive rating for a forward.

[Jedediah-Hartford]

Apr 25, 2023 14:13:16 GMT -5 Brenden-Oregon said:

The only reason I can think of is if the player's AHL card is more balanced between offense and defense and the player's NHL card is skewed more towards offense. If the team is lacking some offense, the owner may want a 72-22 (94) card instead of a 48-47 (95). Without a minor league team/sim, I would say the lesser total card would be more valuable for us in the big leagues, especially if you pair that player with someone who has a good defensive rating for a forward.

This is exactly the kind of situation that I think might have transpired last year.  Let's say you have a stay-at-home defenseman whose AHL-generated card gets nerfed out to 47-47, but who has an NHL-generated card that comes out as 20-73, that 20-73 card is going to be way more useful than the 47-47. 

In the case of the my situation, a 45-45 card for forward Scott Reedy equaled minor league roster material last season, but something like a 60-29 would have been considered usable (at least by me and my middling roster) on the 4th line or at the very least as squad depth.  As it happened, Jack Studnicka and his 59-29 card got into 20 games for my team this season as my team had at least one player injured more or less throughout the season.  Depending on what Reedy's NHL-generated card would have been, there's a decent chance he gets into some games for my team this past year, and having him as an option might have affected other offseason acquisitions.  I have no idea because even now I've yet to be informed as to what Reedy's NHL-generated card would have been, despite asking for that information last July. 

[Glenn-Philadelphia]

I am very familiar with this process right now as I was just reviewing it with the 23-24 card generation I was was working on earlier today. I can confirm it does take the higher value of the sum of the cards offensive and defensive composite scores.

I just looked at last years tables and Reedy's NHL card would have been 68-20.

[Scott-New York]

Now, the question is... do we consider a 68-20 a more usable GHL card than a 45-45? Despite the latter having a higher card value, I would be more inclined to roster the 68-20

[Matt-Colorado]

Same.

[Chris-Suffolk]

It should be up to the team holding the players rights.

If the GM decides to burn a year of his contract and enter him into his lineup with a usable card, so be it. It's the GM's prerogative.

[Jedediah-Hartford]

Apr 27, 2023 14:48:27 GMT -5 Scott-New York said:

Now, the question is... do we consider a 68-20 a more usable GHL card than a 45-45? Despite the latter having a higher card value, I would be more inclined to roster the 68-20

For me, any card with 60+ on at least one side is one I'd want in my pocket as an option.  Certainly I don't want all my offensive players to have DEF comps in the 20s, but forwards still have defense behind them, I think there is more value in a 68-20 for a player whose role is to help the offense.  And with blueliners, if a player has a 70 DEF paired with a 15 OFF, that player is still competent to fulfill the role I acquired them to perform.

As it happens, I'm thinking I might have a similar scenario with Phil Di Giuseppe for the upcoming season's cards, his split of AHL/NHL stats for last year isn't that dissimilar from what Reedy had the year prior.