Paul T

Members
  • Content Count

    536
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    103

Paul T last won the day on November 7

Paul T had the most liked content!

4 Followers

About Paul T

  • Rank
    Hall of Famer

Profile Information

  • Location
    BOSTON

Recent Profile Visitors

3,674 profile views
  1. West Chicago vs. Deadwood game today brought back some memories of those two teams battling it out in Biscuit.
  2. Not really. I'm good with Season 3. I'll make a real push in season 4.
  3. Paul T

    Advanced stats help

    There’s some good descriptions in the new helps files. There’s one that lists out all the stats. I think they are a great addition to the game, but not sure how much I’ll use them in making decisions. Sample size is way too small so far as they only factor in the last 5 games or so.
  4. Only question here is regarding Big Games. What is considered a "big moment"? Playoff games?... games toward end of season?... games against top teams?... 3rd period?... figure it out for myself?...
  5. There's a few pieces of info up there that change the way I look at players a bit. Thanks for this.
  6. Half question/Half thinking out loud... and this just dawned on me... do you think when training is set to Offensive or Defensive that it factors in mostly Tactics - and when the training is set to General it factors in mostly player Role? That would be interesting.
  7. Paul T

    S3 GHL Power Rankings

    Always appreciate these. Thanks again, Erzac. The LeopardStealheads are off to a hot start... ready to dominate the regular season once again... which will secure a really bad draft pick... and get smoked in the 1st round of the playoffs. Let the fun begin.
  8. I think in theory you are right. The main reason I don't necessarily agree with this is because the overall ratings are already known... for current players, for free agents, for prospects... so it's not equivalent to real life that way. To me the overall rating is the absolute base info you can get on a player, so why not make it easier to retrieve (along with shot R/L, height, weight). In real life there are so many draft analysts, that they kind of tell you how good a player is at a certain time. To me, the deeper information is the specific attributes. Personally, I don't really go by the players overall rating since I want them to fit my team and a specific line and role. The more in depth info is attributes, injury history, traits, stats and development. Development probably being the biggest one since that impacts where a player will land overall. I also strongly believe that stats are a good indicator of how well players perform. I've acquired some players in the past with high overalls who just can't score and others who exceed expectations, so I think that is a great hidden trait. But I would also be onboard with being able to export the specific attributes and leaving the overall hidden as well. Just SOMETHING to shave off some time and encourage managers to do draft research. Right now I think there's 2 types of managers when it comes to the draft. Those who spend 10+ hours and those who don't bother at all. I could be wrong.
  9. That's exactly it. Clicking through 500+ players to check their overall (so you don't miss a gem) takes at least an hour. That gives you your list of prospects you want to scout. For me it's typically 75-100 players, and I'm in GHL. If you're in a lower league you have to do more research. If you are thorough, you spend a good 5 minutes on each player upfront, then another 5 minutes on each player closer to the draft (checking development, stats, etc.). If 75 players that's 12.5 hours, on top of the hour you spend doing the initial scrub, the hour it takes to add all to your shortlist and click the up/down arrows to rank them for the draft, and before that a good 5 hours of ranking each player (in excel or whatever). That's almost 20 hours. I think if there was an export function that would cut this down a bit, it would encourage managers to spend time doing draft research. Most just say the hell with it and trade their picks for an established player and I don't really blame them. So I still think that managers will have to put in the time and will be rewarded if they do, but I think there should be options to make it more efficient. There should be a benefit to drafting and developing your own players.
  10. Ah, I get what you're saying. I still like the idea of multiple focuses better, but this is an interesting idea as well. Conversations is always good - even when opinions differ. #2, totally agree, but was trying to keep 2 things in mind. First, sometimes managers just don't have a lot of free time to do much research due to real life obligations. In those circumstances it would at least be nice to offer some way of exporting base information such as player overalls. Also I think managers who put in the work should still get rewarded, but it would be cool to shave off some time and trim it down, say from 15 hours to 5 or 10. Right now to thoroughly review the draft takes too many hours. #4, if it's easy enough to code, definitely. Otherwise, our PP and PK are already set up, so I assume PP wouldn't change and PK would just remove the winger.
  11. I'm not sure I totally agree. In almost every NHL game you see teams use all of these strategies in a single game. One shift they are cycling the puck down deep, the next shift they dump and chase, the next shift they get a takeaway and transition up ice quickly. Often times a single line will use 2 or 3 of these tactics per shift. I don't think teams are limited to a single tactic. I get why the developers set the game up this way as it simplifies things quite a bit and forces managers to focus on obtaining players that fit their tactical choice. This is also why I suggested an alternate solution of limiting teams to become familiar with 2 tactics instead of all 4. That might be a good mix of keeping the original theme while adding a bit more depth to your overall strategy.
  12. Because I'm in a post-y mood today. This is mostly a copy and paste from a thread I started over a year ago, with a few items removed, but still think all of these suggestions would be great for the game. (1) PLAYER STATS I would LOVE the ability to export player/league stats into excel. At the very least, have the league stats page show more than the Top 20. Maybe top 100-200. Additionally, I think it would be cool to have some type of stats archive for each league by season - and team by season. I guess I'm just hoping for some better/expanded options for current season and historical stats without having to dig into them by team and/or player. For example, if someone wanted to see stats for their league from two seasons ago... or their own team's stats from two seasons ago, etc. (2) DRAFT PREP I feel that drafting should be a big part of this game. There are quite a few reasons why managers trade away their draft picks and I think one of the main reasons is not wanting to spend the time preparing for the draft. I know a few guys on here that do their research and it takes them many hours (15-20 hour range). Of course you don't have to put THAT much effort into it, but every team gets 2 draft picks and with leagues expanding to 28 teams, there's a lot of data to review. There has to be an easier way than looking up each player one by one, especially with everything to consider (Current Overall, Improvement, Individual attribute ratings, Stats, Traits, Injury history, Height/Weight). That's a lot of info to sort through. I think managers should be encouraged to put some time into the draft, but it should be more efficient. Not even sure what I'm asking here. Maybe a way to export some of this info into excel, even if it's just the base info like Overall Rating, Height/Weight, Hand...? (3) TACTICS BY LINE This one might need a separate thread/vote. Initially discussed here: http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/8862-adding-more-tactics/ My suggestion was that team should be allowed to play different tactics per line. So for example, a smaller faster line for transition rushes... a bigger physical line who can crash the net, etc. I think it would allow managers to get more creative with their lines. Even if teams were only allowed to become fully familiar with 2 tactics instead of all 4 to keep some sort of identity. Maybe instead of being familiar with only 1 O/D tactic, teams can be familiar with 2. I don't know if this is possible and I'm not looking to make this too complex, just looking to add a bit more depth to the game, if possible. (4) SHOOTOUT LINEUP & STATS This one has been discussed a few times over the past 2 years. I would love the ability to set a lineup for shootouts. Pick your best 5 players... and if the shootout is tied after 5 shots, have it repeat. A lot of important games have ended in shootouts recents and you are helpless to the result as you have very little control over it. Additionally, it would be great if there were separate stats for shootouts. Discussed here: http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/5142-shootout-lineup/
  13. I've had a few players this happened to as well. Loiselle for example. During the final year of their contract they will sign an additional year at entry level. I think just an annoying glitch if drafted players are offered a contract "too soon" (after draft on Day 108, but before Day 1 of the following season). In the long run, there's no impact on overall length and salary over the 3 year entry level period.
  14. Warning: Another book of a post written by Paul T. Please proceed with caution. There are many factors involved in training such as the intensity level, offensive/defensive/general, and what tactics you play - but I think the most important factor is the Player Role. I think this because I have tracked my players progress for quite a few seasons, both new and old worlds. I could list many examples, but to save everyone some time, I'll give a specific one. My 19 year old Hemminki Jokinen. Below is a table that shows his development per attribute for the minors (Cage S1) and his first season as a pro (Cage S2). Attribute Minors Pros Skate +5 +2 Pass +3 +1 Puck +7 +3 Shot +3 +2 Def +8 +2 Phys +1 +1 Spir +6 +4 End +1 +2 Now most of the rates seem to be in line with my previous research that shows that players "typically" improve at a rate of 50% in their first year as a pro as compared to the minors (again, there were exceptions in my research, which are likely due to the other factors mentioned above + the hidden potential and ratings caps, etc.). The only two that seemed to have material variances are Defense and Spirit. Defense did not continue to progress as it did in the minors and Spirit progressed the most, despite progressing 3rd overall in the minors behind Defense and Puck. The main reason for this is because Jokinen played a Two Way role in the minors and last season I had him as a Grinder all season, thus the decrease in Defense and increase in Spirit. Training was also on Hard and General. This poses two questions for the Admins. First, in terms of training, when does the game take into account all the factors for training?? For example, if a player plays a game as a Two Way, but then his role is changed right after the game to Playmaker - does the player train as a Two Way or Playmaker? I would assume it is whatever the player role is at the time the training runs, but I also know that ice time plays a factor (taking faceoffs in game improves faceoffs), so maybe the opposite is true... would be nice to confirm! Second, are there plans to have more advanced training in the future, such as training for a specific role eventhough the player currently fills another role? Obviously if a player is 99 Shot and 85 Passing, you want to play them as a Sniper, but would prefer the player trained Passing. Back to the first point, if the answer is right before the training occurs, more active managers could play certain roles and train as others, but obviously this would have to be toggled daily and be quite time consuming. Having the second point as an option would eliminate the need for that. The End.
  15. That might have been me as I said something similar, but it was more around PK and PP. For example, similar players who get 20 minutes of ice time, but the first gets 4 mins on the PP and the second gets 4 mins on the PK, the player that was on the power play would have a higher performance. Not all the time, but in general, it seems.