[ColumbusGM]

Sometimes I get ideas that I think might work for ITC, but usually I come up with them in places that are inopportune. By the time I get in front of a computer, I've forgotten what the idea was. Maybe it wasn't as earth shattering as I immediately thought at the time and that's why it slipped my mind.

Anyway, in my somewhat limited ventures into attempting to recruit for ITC (because, let's be honest, this League DESPERATELY needs an influx of new general managers), I've stumbled across what appears to be an emerging theme... the prospective GMs don't like that we're so far ahead into the future.

Now, you can't turn back time, and I'm not advocating completely restarting from scratch, because that would not make any sense whatsoever. And maybe this has come up in the past but I'd like to toss it out there now to test the waters.

I think for the 2020 draft, we should include real prospects who will be drafted in the real NHL come this June. This is a good idea for a variety of reasons:

1. It creates some loose link to reality that might entice a prospective GM
2. It's something different that could add a little interest for the already-existing base of GMs because it's getting a little stale around here
3. It's not something that has to be done every draft, and it wouldn't really be feasible to do it everytime because we probably go through 3 drafts in a real calendar year.

For those who might disagree with this idea, before you immediately discount it as a worthless waste of time and energy, keep in mind my reasons for bringing it up. We need new GMs in this game desperately to reignite the fire that seems to be fading a little bit for some of us. The league has become staid. There's nothing really to keep people active or engaged. I'm not suggesting it's a cure-all, but it's something a little different and out-of-the-box for ITC.

What do you guys think?

[DevilsGM]

I'd suggested this a few seasons ago, and for various reasons of confusion with how old players are, it was set aside.

I'm in favor of doing things that get people who are outside of the league, into the league as active and excited members. I have a guy on a music message board that wants to use EHM, but he sees names like Boyd Carver and Owen Kemp and all the others we have who AREN'T NHL players, and it's like walking into something impossible. I think this helps.

I've been recruiting at Fhockey, Facebook, and a few other non-sports/hockey message boards I frequent, and its hard.

[PhoenixGM]

I think that it is a good idea BUT I like so much to CREAT an atmosphery for the players.

I always search a photo for my prospects. Firstly, I look for the junior/amateur team and try to get someone that is similar in weight and height.

And if we do it, will be great.

I will work hard next week to get GMs in orkut (a facebook very know in Brasil) where has a lot of NHL fans...

[krown]

I think this is a good idea, and would only be once every calendar year obviously.

Also, in another league I'm in, a random decent prospect has his name changed to one of the GMs, although I think it was the last name only. This added an extra something as well!

[Josh - Det]

krown, on 15 May 2010 - 03:04 PM, said:

I think this is a good idea, and would only be once every calendar year obviously.

Not entirely. Considering that it hasn't been done you're looking at several years worth of guys that aren't in the league starting in 07.

There is also no need to put a full 250+ player draft class in. If you split it up a little we wouldn't catch up for a good 10 ITC years at least.

[NYRangers]

If this was to be done, I think the "real" prospects should at least resemble their namesakes in position and skill level, otherwise, at least to me, it would seem a little odd to have Sidney Crosby be a 7th D or something like that.

We could also input everyones names in the name file, first and last, and let randomness take care of a possible GM named player.

[LeafsGM]

I think these are all great ideas. But I think if you are really interested in prolonging league longevity and not just a quick fix, you need to do what you guys were balking at when I first joined the league -- dispersing the talent. There are 6-8 teams that are ridiculously loaded (and then arguably 3 of those teams that are more loaded than the other 5).

All the new GMs we do recruit -- leave. And I think its because to get a deal in this league, with the way it is currently structured, you have to cough up multiple 1st round picks to even enter discussions with the "good" GMs, and all the poorly run teams have GMs for the most part who are run by the league, inactive, or disinterested. Trades and the chance to compete are what fuels activity. The fact the rulebook is epic, the GMs in the league are competitive and smart, and the legacy of the league are only going to get you so far when you hit draft year 2020.

Now, I doubt anyone will go for what I'm suggesting. People will say they'll step down rather than let go of the dynasties they've built, etc, etc...but if we want to continue to play together as a group and bring in fresh GMs, and actually have competition for the cup rather than a game of "which GM can sneak into the playoffs to get blown out by teams A, B, C, D, or E" I think its something that has to be seriously considered.

I'm not trying to sound arrogant, but I don't think there are a whole lot of GMs are like myself or James...who will join this league this late into it, knowing they have a perennial loser, and be willing to stick around long term and play simply for the challenge. We've seen that this year with COL, BOS, LA and a handful of others that slip my mind at the moment.

Just my $0.02.

This post has been edited by LeafsGM: 16 May 2010 - 05:58 AM

[PhoenixGM]

LeafsGM, on 16 May 2010 - 10:57 AM, said:

I think these are all great ideas. But I think if you are really interested in prolonging league longevity and not just a quick fix, you need to do what you guys were balking at when I first joined the league -- dispersing the talent. There are 6-8 teams that are ridiculously loaded (and then arguably 3 of those teams that are more loaded than the other 5).

All the new GMs we do recruit -- leave. And I think its because to get a deal in this league, with the way it is currently structured, you have to cough up multiple 1st round picks to even enter discussions with the "good" GMs, and all the poorly run teams have GMs for the most part who are run by the league, inactive, or disinterested. Trades and the chance to compete are what fuels activity. The fact the rulebook is epic, the GMs in the league are competitive and smart, and the legacy of the league are only going to get you so far when you hit draft year 2020.

Now, I doubt anyone will go for what I'm suggesting. People will say they'll step down rather than let go of the dynasties they've built, etc, etc...but if we want to continue to play together as a group and bring in fresh GMs, and actually have competition for the cup rather than a game of "which GM can sneak into the playoffs to get blown out by teams A, B, C, D, or E" I think its something that has to be seriously considered.

I'm not trying to sound arrogant, but I don't think there are a whole lot of GMs are like myself or James...who will join this league this late into it, knowing they have a perennial loser, and be willing to stick around long term and play simply for the challenge. We've seen that this year with COL, BOS, LA and a handful of others that slip my mind at the moment.

Just my $0.02.

Guys,

read carefully what he said...

Many GMs arrive here and is totally lost! New GMs in ITC need much more then a simple knowledge of EHM, need to UNDERSTAND the league.

WE ARE IN A CRISIS ERA IN ITC. Please, open your eyes, you know that about 8 GMs enter here all the day and more 7 or 8 enter here 2 or 3 times a week only.

One point important is CHANGE HOW WE GET PP:

- Someone here read the News of each team?
- How about start to post discussions in the forum, about the league?

We need urgent to discuss about it.

[DevilsGM]

On the NHL NAMED Draft issue: Doesn't someone produce one for the game at fhockey, or elsewhere already? I would NOT be in favor of having a draft where Sid Crosby was a 7th dman... lol.

On Leafs point: Agree with just about everything you said. It's why I highlight and point out every time someone trades a first to Atlanta. LOL. This is a difficult issue for me, because I don't want to have a dispersal draft. It's unfair. I also don't want to veto trades that are fair, but not smart. I do try to bring awareness, in various forms, so others don't make the same mistake.

Why don't we do this: Add back in the waiver draft. If not every year, every-other-year? That's one way to thin things out.

[Pittsburgh!!!!!!!]

DevilsGM, on 16 May 2010 - 11:09 AM, said:

On the NHL NAMED Draft issue: Doesn't someone produce one for the game at fhockey, or elsewhere already? I would NOT be in favor of having a draft where Sid Crosby was a 7th dman... lol.

On Leafs point: Agree with just about everything you said. It's why I highlight and point out every time someone trades a first to Atlanta. LOL. This is a difficult issue for me, because I don't want to have a dispersal draft. It's unfair. I also don't want to veto trades that are fair, but not smart. I do try to bring awareness, in various forms, so others don't make the same mistake.

Why don't we do this: Add back in the waiver draft. If not every year, every-other-year? That's one way to thin things out.

To be fair, if Crosby was forced to play defense, I think he could make an adequate injury replacement/"7th" d-man.

Also, I'm fine with adding real players to new draft classes.

At the very most, all it would take is to generate a draft class, then edit players' positions/ht/wt/name to correspond with a real player. Ceilings and POT and everything can still be random, but obviously I won't make Mark Katic a 98POT d-man with 100 ceilings over, say, Drew Doughty who gets to be 68pot and 20con.

[PhoenixGM]

Back with waiver draft can be good for the league...

[Josh - Det]

PhoenixGM, on 16 May 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:

Back with waiver draft can be good for the league...

I doubt a waiver draft would solve these problems. The guys in Steve's minor leagues aren't ITC All Stars. You might get the odd 4th liner from a waiver draft in here, but not usually much else.

[DevilsGM]

We could always tweak the waiver draft to protect less players.... or come up with newer rules on how to do it?

[Josh - Det]

DevilsGM, on 16 May 2010 - 03:58 PM, said:

We could always tweak the waiver draft to protect less players.... or come up with newer rules on how to do it?

We'll look at the ATL roster for this. Even if you limited it to say...10 F, 5D, and 2 G, here is who Steve, theoretically, could protect/lose:

F Ilya Kovalchuk 85/76
F Lindsay Babich 84/82
F Dmitri Mozgunov 84/83
F Jason Graham 81/84
F Darryl McIntyre 86/74 (too young to be elig)
F Jeremy Platinga 93/84
F Henry Brisebois 93/75
F Zdeno Segina 83/87
F Wayne Kevury 83/70
F Radek Sasek 53/82
D JF Lavoie 56/89
D Del Street 76/83
D Josef Machaj 78/82
D Aidar Tupikov 75/80
D Peter Sundqvist 48/89
G Kari Lehtonen
G Jeff Deslauriers

Waiver Elig:
Simon Gagne (retire), Henrik Zetterberg (retire)
Dean Van Evans 54/76
Ty Robb 53/75
Derek Archer 44/83


Derek Archer might get taken, but he isn't going to make a difference for Steve or whoever takes him. The picks he made in this draft will help him signifciantly in the future, but right now his team isn't ridiculously deep. It's good, but you'd have to do something extreme to make a dent. Unless teams can only protect 6-10 players I doubt it makes much of a difference, and that's a little too extreme for me.

I think some tactical changes would benefit the league more than a waiver draft. Hitting and strength combined lead to turnovers in EHM. Hit and grind is a supertactic in EHM, but it has been addressed. If the league addresses how much hitting/strength is in the league/coming into the league there would be a larger benefit. Look at Audun's turnover numbers. It's insane. No team is that good with the puck. Almost every single player has a positive ratio. He has a relatively talent-less 3rd line, but they are epic hitters.

Playmakers, snipers, and two way forwards with 70 hitting/70 strength shouldn't be borderline unvaluable. I'm not saying take it out of the game entirely, or that you change it and everything is perfect, but it would make a big difference in competitive balance. The Stars roster is solid, but it shouldn't be 55-16 talent-wise.

[LeafsGM]

Josh - Det, on 16 May 2010 - 08:04 PM, said:

We'll look at the ATL roster for this. Even if you limited it to say...10 F, 5D, and 2 G, here is who Steve, theoretically, could protect/lose:

F Ilya Kovalchuk 85/76
F Lindsay Babich 84/82
F Dmitri Mozgunov 84/83
F Jason Graham 81/84
F Darryl McIntyre 86/74 (too young to be elig)
F Jeremy Platinga 93/84
F Henry Brisebois 93/75
F Zdeno Segina 83/87
F Wayne Kevury 83/70
F Radek Sasek 53/82
D JF Lavoie 56/89
D Del Street 76/83
D Josef Machaj 78/82
D Aidar Tupikov 75/80
D Peter Sundqvist 48/89
G Kari Lehtonen
G Jeff Deslauriers

Waiver Elig:
Simon Gagne (retire), Henrik Zetterberg (retire)
Dean Van Evans 54/76
Ty Robb 53/75
Derek Archer 44/83


Derek Archer might get taken, but he isn't going to make a difference for Steve or whoever takes him. The picks he made in this draft will help him signifciantly in the future, but right now his team isn't ridiculously deep. It's good, but you'd have to do something extreme to make a dent. Unless teams can only protect 6-10 players I doubt it makes much of a difference, and that's a little too extreme for me.

I think some tactical changes would benefit the league more than a waiver draft. Hitting and strength combined lead to turnovers in EHM. Hit and grind is a supertactic in EHM, but it has been addressed. If the league addresses how much hitting/strength is in the league/coming into the league there would be a larger benefit. Look at Audun's turnover numbers. It's insane. No team is that good with the puck. Almost every single player has a positive ratio. He has a relatively talent-less 3rd line, but they are epic hitters.

Playmakers, snipers, and two way forwards with 70 hitting/70 strength shouldn't be borderline unvaluable. I'm not saying take it out of the game entirely, or that you change it and everything is perfect, but it would make a big difference in competitive balance. The Stars roster is solid, but it shouldn't be 55-16 talent-wise.

Making a waiver draft would be a start. Its not just the issue of who is available. Here's what would currently happen: Steve will probably keep Van Evans bcause of his hitting, and offer up a slightly better player (one of the names you protected) and add in a 3rd for a 1st rounder. Due to his extreme depth.

But I don't think either everyone should put out a witch hunt on Steve. He's playing the same game as everyone else. He busts his tail simming for us, and he is certainly playing within the current set of rules. There are other teams that are just as competitive and that is what is producing the unbalance and the difficulty in recruiting.

[Josh - Det]

LeafsGM, on 16 May 2010 - 05:05 PM, said:

Making a waiver draft would be a start. Its not just the issue of who is available. Here's what would currently happen: Steve will probably keep Van Evans bcause of his hitting, and offer up a slightly better player (one of the names you protected) and add in a 3rd for a 1st rounder. Due to his extreme depth.

But I don't think either everyone should put out a witch hunt on Steve. He's playing the same game as everyone else. He busts his tail simming for us, and he is certainly playing within the current set of rules. There are other teams that are just as competitive and that is what is producing the unbalance and the difficulty in recruiting.

I'm not after Steve at all...just used him as an example.

I think the difficulty recruiting is more of how far along we are though. Calgary and Dallas are both open. People could easily step into those spots and do well instantly.

[LeafsGM]

Josh - Det, on 16 May 2010 - 08:52 PM, said:

I'm not after Steve at all...just used him as an example.

I think the difficulty recruiting is more of how far along we are though. Calgary and Dallas are both open. People could easily step into those spots and do well instantly.

I wasn't speaking about you specifically.

This post has been edited by LeafsGM: 16 May 2010 - 04:56 PM

[SensGM]

On the draft class issues. It's easy to do up a draft class with real names, I did a full 150 made draft class once for my own EHM and if we wanted to take a vote of say 10-20 actual NHL players I would be happy do volunteer to do up the stats for them and everything for the league if asked. Then we could get a couple of NHL players in each draft, maybe some of them top dogs, maybe some of them depth players. Just a thought.

Waiver Draft: I've been a fan of this coming back for a long time, I think it is useful as depth players picked up cheap can turn into valuable injury replacements or possibly make an AHL team quite competitive and I think just makes a GM have to think more and care more for their team.

Dispersing Talent: I don't think it's something we should do. Sure it would balance the league but for GM's who have spent many years building their team to be competitive it's not fair. IF anything my suggestion would be allowing those GM's to break one rule and offer them a chance to go to one of the lower rebuilding teams and have the challenge of building another franchise if they wanted to. I dunno I think FLA or MTL could due greatly with someone like Steve or Jer at their helm as an example.

Hitting: I agree, I think it would be cool if we did something to cap this hitting issue. The true value of a player is on how he can hit and I think we need to find someway to maybe make those snipers and finess players a little bit more of an asset. Editting some drafts to lower the amount and controlling them would be a good long term solution as I think their is no short term solution at all.

I also think that it would be cool if maybe the GM voted GM of the year actually did get their last name put onto a player in the draft determined at random from the top 100 CSB ranked players (then they could be good or bad or any position, completely random) just as a fun extra reward.

I also think we should readdress the topic last year of making cash a team makes being able to buy prizes to help balance players or make AHL rewards for doing well. I think maybe a good way to balance is make it that teams that don't make the playoffs in a season during that off season can use some of their extra cash to buy a couple development boosts for players then it does at least help struggling or rebuilding teams without truly taking away from 'top' teams.

[Josh - Det]

SensGM, on 16 May 2010 - 08:01 PM, said:

Waiver Draft: I've been a fan of this coming back for a long time, I think it is useful as depth players picked up cheap can turn into valuable injury replacements or possibly make an AHL team quite competitive and I think just makes a GM have to think more and care more for their team.

Anyone claimed in the waiver draft would have to be on the ITC roster though, so it wouldn't impact the AHL much. You'd have to put the guy on waivers to get him to the AHL, and the team that lost him would just reclaim him. You'd be looking at picking up a 4th liner here or there unless someone was egregiously over the cap which has some value, but I doubt it would make much of an impact.

[SensGM]

Ya but it's fun and just imo adds something to the league.