Jump to content

Photo

Affiliate hoarding.


  • Please log in to reply

#1

Posted January 05, 2018 - 06:11 AM

suomyyra

    Professional Scout

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: August 2017
6
Rep - Floater

I see GHL managers are giving offers to mid 20s, 75-80ovr and bad traits players. Every league have their own affiliate hoarders and its gotta stop. You guys are pretty much ruining the game for other managers in lower leagues. Maybe some policy with limited space for player contracts could help?



#2

Posted January 05, 2018 - 06:31 AM

koekefix

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 296 posts
  • 6 thanks
    GM Since: August 2015
121
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBelgium
It's not only those kind of players. The offers are ridiculous every season and you see GHL teams packed with top players in affiliate teams. As long as nothing happens this will continue. And it's not only this issue that's ruining the game, but it's a start.

#3

Posted January 05, 2018 - 10:23 AM

granpubah

    Assistant GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: January 2017
41
Rep - Reliable

I just took a look at the top team in GHL Fishbowl  and Mike Grubb deserves a major shout out.   He has 6 players assigned to his affiliates and one of those is 35 yrs old.   I'm not suggesting that all GHL level teams should only carry 6 affiliate players but Mike's team shows that teams do not have to hoard to be successful.   A limit either in dollars or in number of players is fair and necessary.



#4

Posted January 05, 2018 - 11:10 AM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts
  • 22 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
297
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile

First a waiver system is coming to allow lower league managers to claim players. How exactly it will work I don't know. That said I did call at the outset that overly greedy managers would abuse the affiliate system.

 

Second there is a right way to find and go after players for an affiliate system. Its simple. Wait until the end of FA and then go after any FA not being offered a contract by lower league teams that you have interest in. It allows other teams (most importantly lower league teams) to go after FAs that they may actually need.



#5

Posted January 06, 2018 - 12:42 AM

Steve

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: February 2015
212
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationSri Lanka
At this point, I have decided loaning players to other teams/players is a better way to go instead of the affiliate system. At the start, Anders was debating the merits of both systems and ultimately, I think due to public opinion, chose our current system. Now that we all have seen it in action, I think loaning players would be more fun and create a lot more player interaction and create more of a win-win situation. That said, I don't know the difficulties in coding such a major change.

#6

Posted January 06, 2018 - 12:51 AM

Steve

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: February 2015
212
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationSri Lanka

I see GHL managers are giving offers to mid 20s, 75-80ovr and bad traits players.


I admit I made an offer to a BHL level starting goalie for my affiliate. Mostly because I prefer to grow my team from FA instead of drafting, for better or worse. However, due to the coding updates, the player chose a lower level contract to my GHL offer. Obviously, this could be unique to this player, but maybe there is more going on behind the scenes to encourage players to not accept contracts if they know they will be low or off the depth chart.

#7

Posted January 06, 2018 - 10:21 AM

flowbish1

    Head Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
  • 0 thanks
    GM Since: June 2017
13
Rep - Helpful
  • LocationK'ek part au Qu├ębec.

Please Anders, just put a maximum number of players/contract for each team. Something between 40-50 would really help with this hoarding, and would make it more realistic.
As for those who would have more than the limit when being set, they could still continue with all the players they still have, yet wouldn't be able to sign any player until they dropped under the limit.


Fred Longpre

Riversdale Heroes BHL Clapper


#8

Posted January 06, 2018 - 03:41 PM

neuralhandshake

    Assistant GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: May 2016
28
Rep - Helpful

Steam Profile

I'd love to see both a contract limit and the ability to loan or recall players. Waivers give me a lot of anxiety, even if they are realistic. 



#9

Posted March 23, 2018 - 04:03 AM

suomyyra

    Professional Scout

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts
  • 1 thanks
    GM Since: August 2017
6
Rep - Floater

New free agency, same frustration. It seems that most of the young players are still going to higher leagues with BIG TWO WAY contracts and just wait 20-30days and they will be traded to lower league for draft picks and hot prospects. Its not that fun to try to sign 80-85ov youngish players to SHL when GHL teams offer them 2 or even 3mil contracts (same goes with every league). Frustrating to try to build team with 1yr contract washed up veterans. Its not going to change soon but i just had to vent once again. Cheers and good luck for all.



#10

Posted March 23, 2018 - 07:46 AM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
362
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

New free agency, same frustration. It seems that most of the young players are still going to higher leagues with BIG TWO WAY contracts and just wait 20-30days and they will be traded to lower league for draft picks and hot prospects. Its not that fun to try to sign 80-85ov youngish players to SHL when GHL teams offer them 2 or even 3mil contracts (same goes with every league). Frustrating to try to build team with 1yr contract washed up veterans. Its not going to change soon but i just had to vent once again. Cheers and good luck for all.

 

There are multiple threads on this floating around the forums, so I'll say it here as well.  I think a roster limit would solve most of this.  I've gone back and forth on the actual limit a few times now and after analyzing teams and salaries, I feel it should be league specific:

 

GHL - 30 player limit

SHL - 35 player limit

BHL - 40 player limit

IHL/LIHL - 50 player limit

 

The higher the league, the easier it becomes to stash players in the affiliate.  It's tougher to do in lower leagues AND keep a competitive roster.  I know some might think the 30 player limit is too low, but GHL teams should be able to build a solid roster from 6C, 11F, 9D, 4G.  Plus having a staggered limit would make more players available for the lower league teams and higher leagues would have to be specific with their roster (if you're a GHL or SHL manager I'm sure you can handle it).

 

For what it's worth...

Stashing good affiliate players should be an acceptable practice.  It starts to become an issue when it gets excessive.  So overall I agree with what is being stated here.  The problem is that *technically* it is not against the rules - so it's hard to fault managers for trying to build and better their team.  Getting everyone to agree on "gentlemen's rules" never works when competition is involved.  Plus it is very tough to resist throwing offers on stud players sitting there in free agency, especially when you have the cap room to do it.  Signing players is one of the exciting parts of a manager game.  It is very possible that the managers who are doing this are just caught up in the excitement and not really thinking about how it is negatively impacting everyone else.  That's why I think the roster limit would help.



#11

Posted March 23, 2018 - 08:14 AM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts
  • 22 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
297
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile

A few things. 30 players is too few. That is 10 extra players total. That means your getting rid of drafted players very quickly. Too quickly. It completely prevents from building a team and sustaining it from within via through the draft. I get player hoarding is an issue but the answer is not the other extreme where sustainability is found through pot luck signings in FA.

 

Also for simplicity sake choose a number and stick with it for every league. It makes it easier to code and for all to understand. The simpler things are to code the more likely they are to be looked at to be added into the game and the less likely they are to break and the easier they are to fix if the do break or have bugs. The easier to understand the better for all players in the game.

 

As for hoarding players Anders is working on a fix so please be patient.



#12

Posted March 23, 2018 - 08:48 AM

littleb

    Assistant GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 134 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: September 2017
144
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationMinnedosa

Biggest thing is wages on these star players need to go way up.... bigger wages solves the problem naturally.

 

90+ players should be the rarity which I understand it isn't but make it too expensive to have more than 2 or 3 and soon the problem will weed itself out.



#13

Posted March 23, 2018 - 08:54 AM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
362
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

@rainsilent - I didn't see that as an extreme.  I see 10 extra players as being enough - but you do make a good point about the draft picks.  I suppose in a perfect world, the roster limit would not apply to players aged 18-20 (since this issue is really around free agency), but I also get your point about simplicity so asking for that may be too much to code.

 

As for the staggered limits... I dunno.  As someone who has played Biscuit BHL & SHL - and IHL/LIHL in another world for a while - I can say that is considerably easier to stash players in the affiliate the higher the league.  It's not so easy to do this in lower leagues and stay competitive.  But I'm all for simplicity.

 

To be honest, the whole thing doesn't even bother me that much.  I just like having clear rules for everyone to follow... and right now there seems to be too many rules that are merely insinuated.  And as you can see, everyone has a different opinion on everything.  Roster limits would help solve this one.  But until then, the players who are doing this are not breaking the rules and every lower league team is at the same disadvantage.  At the same time, I can see where it is annoying for other players and could push people away from the game.

 

Thanks for the update... I'm interested to see what type of fix Anders has planned.



#14

Posted March 23, 2018 - 05:54 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts
  • 22 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
297
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile

The roster limit has to apply to all players for simplicity sake. You can't have 18-20 players not counting. Edit: ok you can but again simpler is better usually. If GHL teams have only 10 extra players they would theoretically be continuously trading prospects for picks, drafting those players and then trading them again just to stay under the roster limit. It creates a ridiculous situation.

 

Also if it is more difficult to hoard players in the lower leagues than what is the point of the higher roster limit? I ask this in complete, genuine honesty.

 

Finally creating a roster limit doesn't directly address the real issue with player hoarding. The fact that teams can sign players of any age and skill level and then stash them away in their affiliate system. With the roster limit it would theoretically be possible to still stash away 10 real quality players and still hoard them. What I suggested to Anders in the original hoarding thread is a much better solution because it is direct. Any player above a certain age and overall (I think 23-25 and older at say 83 overall for GHL teams is about right) that get sent to the affiliate immediately goes on waivers for x time. Only after that time is up and no team claims them will they then go to the affiliates and stay on said team. Every new season the players that are at or above the age limit go to the main roster and have to be sent to the affiliate at the start of the season to have the process repeat again unless the manager decides to keep them on the main roster to again prevent from player hoarding.

 

Edit: Paul T it doesn't matter how much you care or not. It is important to talk about it and any other issues in the game openly. The more friendly dialogue that happens over an issue the more possible solutions that can be found. The more possible solutions that get discussed the more likely it is that a really good solution gets found. Good solution idea or not talking about issues with the game in an open and friendly manner only will go to help make the game better as issues are getting discussed which will lead to suggested fixes which will lead to improving the game.

 

As for low player salaries yes it is a real issue but what isn't helping is the inflated overalls. I think once player overalls come back down again we can see what the salary demands are doing and go from there. That said players weren't asking enough then either so bumping up player salary demands at least a little wouldn't be a bad thing in my mind at all. After all the ideal situation is that the best teams have to deal with cap crunches and difficult decisions in who to keep and who to give away or get rid when their team is good because of quality depth.



#15

Posted March 23, 2018 - 08:48 PM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
362
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

Edit: Paul T it doesn't matter how much you care or not. It is important to talk about it and any other issues in the game openly. The more friendly dialogue that happens over an issue the more possible solutions that can be found. The more possible solutions that get discussed the more likely it is that a really good solution gets found. Good solution idea or not talking about issues with the game in an open and friendly manner only will go to help make the game better as issues are getting discussed which will lead to suggested fixes which will lead to improving the game.

 

Well I didn't say I didn't care.  I just stated that from a strategic standpoint, the affiliate hoarding doesn't bother me all that much personally because it affects all lower league managers equally.  But yes, I agree with your point here, which is exactly why I take part in these discussions.  If there is a problem that people address, it is good to discuss possibilities of how to make the game better and more enjoyable for everyone.  I really dig this game and hope to stick around for a while.  Whatever I can contribute toward making it better is a bonus.

 

As for lower league roster limits - I just think that if one league has it they all should for consistency purposes.  It would also get managers used to having a limit as they move up the chain.  But realistically, sure, there would be no reason to put a roster limit in LIHL.  Probably not IHL either.  I just know that my SHL roster is much bigger than my BHL roster was - and if I wanted to keep signing players and putting them in the affiliate I could... but I'm not going to because I don't need to.

 

I still respectfully disagree that the roster limit wouldn't address the issue.  Like I said previously, stashing affiliates is a good strategy and should be used by everyone.  It just seems to become problematic when it becomes excessive.  At what point do you draw the line?  I also like the idea of strategically signing players who actually fit your team, not just throwing out 15-20 offers and seeing what sticks.  I emphasize that last point because I am a huge fan of anything that adds a level of strategy to the game.

 

I do like the waivers idea that you mentioned.  It's a great idea and would definitely help.  The one problem I see with waivers at the moment is you can put a player there for immediate cap relief, but if someone bids on them, you can just recall them so you don't lose them.  I'd like to see the waiver time get set to 5 days minimum almost like the IR spot, that way it can't be exploited.  But I suppose that's for another discussion.

 

And yes, I am all for friendly dialogue (almost to a fault :) ).  I'm not the type of person who gets uptight about anything really, especially a game.  In this case I can see there are quite a few managers who are bothered by the hoarding (it was being discussed in the world chat last night as it was happening in Dangles).  And while I agree with them that it could become frustrating, the players who are doing it aren't breaking any rules.  It's good to nip these issues in the bud before managers become angry or discouraged and start quitting over it.  That I'm sure we can all agree on.



#16

Posted March 23, 2018 - 09:35 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts
  • 22 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
297
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile

I didn't say that the roster limit wouldn't address it. I said that it doesn't directly address it. Introducing a roster limit does nothing to directly address player hoarding. A team could skimp on prospects and fill their entire roster space with quality players for the league they are in. Its a very indirect way of addressing the issue meaning that the actual meaningful impact it is going to have is going to be limited by each individual managers decision specifically in how much roster space they want to have for developing prospects vs hoarding quality players. For example take your limit of 10 excess players for GHL teams. If just 3 teams decides to use their complement of 10 extra roster spaces to hoard players that is 30 less GHL worthy players playing in the GHL. That pretty much leaves us where we are now in terms of player hoarding and we have essentially gone nowhere in terms of addressing player hoarding. And yes that means that said team isn't developing their current prospects but they can trade roster players or the players they are hoarding for 1st and 2nd round GHL picks depending upon the quality of players they are giving away thus it doesn't really hurt those teams in the long run anyways.

 

The current ability to remove players off of the waivers I think was done to allow managers to remove players they accidentally placed on waivers to take them off of waivers. However you wouldn't have that option with assignment waivers, ideally anyways. Once you assign a player that meets the waiver requirements the game ideally should ask if you are sure and warns you of the risk of losing them through waivers with no chance of undoing the option. If the manager decides to assign them to an affiliate they accept the risk and the player has to go through waivers and the manager cannot remove the player from waivers.



#17

Posted March 24, 2018 - 11:49 PM

Steve

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: February 2015
212
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationSri Lanka
I know Anders is always tweaking, but one thing I noted this free agency season is 90 plus old guys are still going for super cheap, like 2M for one year. Maybe because there are so many high ovr old guys (supply and demand, too much supply here), this just makes it easier to sign and assign good mid and low level players.

I am actually for roster limits. Every professional league of every type of sport has roster limits, why not us? Plus, it'd have a domino effect when teams promote. Why keep lower level players that are several seasons from your current league? Releasing them will allow lower leagues to get them, where they belong, and it would cascade all the way down to LIHL.

Rainsilent, per churning and burning draft picks, I am ok with this. I have never been a fan of the 3rd pick teams get anyways, they are mostly used to steal decent players from the lower league anyways since it becomes better than a 2nd pick at that level.

Regardless, some moderation on limit size, tweaking draft picks (maybe), waiting a few more seasons for the over rated players to cycle out, and moving to a North America style league all could help alleviate this problem.

#18

Posted March 25, 2018 - 03:49 AM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts
  • 22 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
297
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile

Don't think that I am saying that there shouldn't be a roster limit. When the suggestion first came up a long time ago I said somewhere in the ballpark of 40 is where I think we should be. Too low of a roster limit and proper team building becomes nearly impossible as does sustaining your team from efforts within. Too high a limit and it might as well not be there. With around 40 you can have 5 depth players give or take a few and 10-12 prospects with some extra room left over for multiplayer trades.

 

Edit: Also turning and burning picks means that someone somewhere is selling out their picks/prospects for a short term risk while the team benefiting is maintaining their position atop the league they are in with valuable future assets. So long as the team benefiting works the deals to maintain status que they aren't ever going to move and it will remain status quo. If you guys don't think human managers are that gullible look at the team that won the GHL in Biscuit the prior two seasons. They got human managers to give them way more value than the players they were trading away were worth and now that team is a gold mine of young players.



#19

Posted March 25, 2018 - 09:47 AM

Paul T

    Professional GM

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • 3 thanks
    GM Since: May 2017
362
Rep - Outstanding
  • LocationBOSTON

In light of recent testimony, I have made a slight change to my opinion on roster limits by league.

 

GHL - 35

SHL - 40

BHL - 45

IHL -  50

LIHL - unlimited

 

My SHL roster is currently 41 players, and aside from a player I have been coveting for the past 3 seasons and am trying to acquire via trade (which would actually reduce my roster since I'd be giving up multiple players), my roster is pretty much set for the season.  There are 5 players I could do without and another 4 players I will probably never use.  That could get me down to 32 if I really had to.

 

I get the opinion that roster limits should be consistent across the board, but I still have the opinion that (1) it is much easier to stack your affiliate the higher the league, and (2) the higher the league the more managers should have to strategize.  You GHL guys are the cream of the crop... I'm sure you can do it ;)

 

Again, I am all for whatever is best for the game.  I'm not trying to argue any one else's opinion - I think they are all solid.  My opinions are purely based on what would require more strategy among managers and also create a fair playing field for everyone.



#20

Posted March 25, 2018 - 06:07 PM

rainsilent

    GamePlanHockey Advisor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts
  • 22 thanks
    GM Since: April 2015
297
Rep - Outstanding

Steam Profile

If you remove the extra players that I have signed (young IIHL/IHL/BHL quality players unsigned at a start of a season that show promise for growth that I signed a season or two ago so they had a chance to develop) my roster is at 37. Who I would get rid of to get to 35 wouldn't be a hard decision. After this season is over if I keep this roster as is the rest of the season and stay in the GHL I will be letting go of 8 players. 35 is definitely manageable for a GHL team. A bit tight but definitely manageable.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users