MarkZ

Sorry man.  Manager interaction can make the game so much better.  For what it's worth, and at the risk of sounding like a used car salesman, there is a BHL spot currently open in Biscuit.  I can't speak for other worlds so not trying to take anything away from them, but there is a TON of manager interaction here.  The available team has a solid core of players and should be somewhat competitive, just needs some work to fill out the roster.  Currently Day 5 so you have a couple of days before the games begin.  Plus for every manager who joins Biscuit, I get a $500 recruitment bonus.  Just kidding.
 
Either way, good luck and hope others start returning your messages

I can't speak for players in world lumber but its not that unual that managers not talk back.  What I do when I really want a quick response is to write a note to the trade partner.  Most will be responsive and that's the best way I've found to interact with other managers. 

That record is short term. Don't trust short term. For dump and chase you have to have a fast and physical team.
 
My advice would be pick the style you want your team to play. The players will learn it and they will focus their training to develop the skills relevant for it faster than other skills. As for what to go for I have descriptions of the offensive tactics here: http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/6845-general-user-guide/
 
To help you I will repost them for you here:
Offensive tactics
 
Crash the Net: This is very simple. Puck and players to the net. In real life this isn't a tactic so much as it is a way of life. Hockey players are preached to crash the net. "Go to the net and good things will happen," "throw the puck to the net because anything could happen" and "there is no such thing as a bad shot" (there actually is) are things you commonly hear if you watch NHL games.
 
What do you need for this tactic? Players high in the physical attribute. Bigger sized players are also a plus. The good about this tactic: You only need one skill to make it work and it is very simple. The Bad: You NEED one skill to make it work or it will not work at all, it is heavily reliant on your players to have higher physical skills and be bigger than the opposing defensemen for it to work, it is simple and very easy to counter.
 
This tactic is the least efficient tactic out there and the most reliant on the opposing team being weak to it makes it pretty much not worth it. This tactic isn't garbage. it is just over reliant on a few things making it a very situational tactic at best. Using a situational tactic all of the time isn't exactly an ideal situation.
 
Dump and Chase: This is all about getting the puck deep and then getting the puck via a strong forecheck. This tactic is less about skill and more about the defensive posture of the opposing team through the neutral zone. If the defensive posture is "up" then a dump and chase is a very good tactic to use. However that is in a real hockey game.
 
What do you need for this tactic? Speed and physical skills predominantly. Like above bigger sized players are a plus. The good: This tactic is all about using your teams physical attributes to the greatest possible effect. It isn't overly reliant on puck skills. The bad: Due to the aggressive hitting nature of this tactic over aggressive players will take a lot of penalties, considering that your team will take more penalties off of the bat as it is that could really kill any momentum your team builds on a regular basis making it difficult for your team to generate much offense.
 
This tactic is still very reliant on a players physical skill so not having a lot of forwards with high physical ratings will hurt this offense a lot. This tactic and the tactic above are the two physically focused offensive styles. The dump and chase is the more versatile of the two as it is less reliant on the opponent and their skills and more about your own players and theirs.
 
Puck possession: This is all about controlling the puck in the opponents end by passing the puck around. This tactic is the basis of most modern hockey offenses. Even the LA Kings use a puck possession offense with a heavy influence of physical play whereas the Chicago Blackhawks use a more finesse based puck possession style.
 
What you need: Puck handling and passing and then more puck handling and passing and then even more. The Good: This tactic is all about the puck skills of your players. This is the most difficult offense to stop with a skilled team. The bad: This is the most difficult offense to run because it is exceptionally reliant on the puck skills of your players.
 
This tactic is very high risk high reward in nature. As a result if you don't do things right things can very easily go very wrong with this tactic. You don't need fast or physical players but that will definitely help.
 
Transition rushes: This is all about counter attacking quickly. Get the puck and get it up ice quickly trying to create odd man rushes. However in the real life game this is not an offensive strategy per se and more another part of the game altogether.
 
What you need: A lot of skating, passing and puck handling. The good: Very aggressive and fast offensive tactic that aims to take advantage of both the speed and skill of your players. The bad: This tactic has the most demands from the players as they need to be fast, good puck handlers and passers.
 
Like puck possession this is high risk high reward but it is also the tactic that demands the most out of the players which demands the most out of you as well as you need the right players for this tactic to work. Also this tactic has some reliance on the opposing team as well making it that much more harder to implement successfully.
 
Since I finally have a week off from work and life short of a sudden call from life I will be adding at least defensive descriptions this week to that after a long overdue time of not adding it. It literally takes hours to do that stuff.

I think that a 99 ranking for any attribute should be an incredibly rare occurrence.    There should maybe be 0-3 players total with a 99 skating attribute.  And one of those 0-3 may not be a great player, may have 60-70s in the rest of their skills, just be incredibly great at that one thing.

I made a mistake. Best info is in the help files. 
 
no clauses or two way clause. moving down will gain 1way and promotion clauses with no salary changes. going up will remove any clauses and give "lower league contract" with no salary change.
 
1 way going up will remove the 1way clause, no salary change and give "lower league contract".
 A *promotion contract* clause will increase the player’s salary if his team is promoted to a higher league. The new salary is calculated so that the player will keep the same percentage salary cap impact. E.g. if the player’s salary was 10% of the cap limit in the previous league his new salary will be 10% of the new league’s salary cap. However, if the new salary exceeds the base salary of the new league level the raise will instead become a 25% raise." Promotion clause will disappear on promotion/ traded up a league.

2-way contract players will stay 2-way if they move down one league. If they were to move another league down their contract switches to 1-way.
 
If they didn't have any contract clauses the contract switches to 1-way if moved one league down.
 
1-way contracts moving up will have no contracts clauses on them.
 
Promotion clauses I believe stays on through the entirety of the contract whether they move up or down.

I have seen multiple players traded down to a lower league... some from GHL to SHL, and others from SHL to BHL.  Obviously those players were on 2-way contracts.  In some cases after being traded down, the player is now on a 1-way contract - and in other cases the player remains on a 2-way contract.
 
I am just wondering if there is anything specific taken into considering that would make a player's contract 1-way vs. keeping it 2-way?  I ask purely out of curiosity. 

One other note... I assume you are talking about Moss. 
 
The 1W/PC makes sense because having a 75 OVR at that salary in IHL is a great deal.  75's are generally top line players in IHL.  And once you promote to BHL(barring an epic collapse in your last few games), the 1W/PC will be removed from his contract and you'll be able to send him to the affiliate.  But even then, a 75 rated player would at the very least be a 3rd pair Dman in BHL.  When I promoted last season, my starting Dmen were rated 86-79-78-77-74-73.

I had asked pretty much the same question here:  http://forums.gmgames.org/topic/8757-1w-contract-after-being-traded-down/
 
I'm in SHL and acquired a player from a GHL team earlier this season who did not have a 1W/PC and after the trade, he had a 1W/PC contract.  But I have also seen other players go from GHL to SHL and not have 1W/PC contracts after.
 
After digging into it a bit further, it seems like most players traded down a league will have their salary adjusted accordingly and take on a 1W/PC contract.  In the rare cases where the players did not take on a 1W/PC contract, their salary was not adjusted... and in both cases it appears they were originally SHL players who were not on 1W/PC contracts, so when traded to GHL, their salary did not adjust.... then when traded back to SHL their salary did not adjust.
 
Follow me?
 
So the short answer is no, this is not a bug.  Players who are traded down a league will have their salary adjusted and take on a 1W/PC... which seems like a fair trade off.
 
*players on their Entry-Level contract will not get the 1W/PC.

The contracts still work mostly the same as before there were affiliates. If a guy signs in a higher league and then is traded down, he gets a 1-way contract.
 
However I haven't really heard your situation brought up before even though it's definitely weird considering that you want to send him to the same league that he was just in. Maybe a solution would be players to keep the lowest league affiliates that they can play for constant and to have it as a notification on the players transfer page. Similar weirdness would happen for a player with a one-way being traded up and then being put on an affiliate. Maybe if a guy gets sent up, any new higher division affiliates that a team has is allowed to take the player. Any affiliates that the player couldn't play in before due to his contract stay locked.

I just traded for a player in the league above me BHL.  When I traded for the player he was in the BHL team's AAHL2 League.  When the trade went through he was on my IHL team  with a one way contract. So now I can't send him down.   This has now happened to me 2 times.  Is this a bug?  Because if he has a one way contract ( he did not) he should not have traded down to my league.  He now shows a one way contract. 

He will play out the old contract and whatever he agrees to will be an extension to that.

Well, the team traits are calculated mostly from players traits, so it is exactly the point koekefix meant. The fact the all 3 teams Portland beat in the playoffs have better confidence and winner instinct (especially the winner instinct by quite some margin) and same or similar team work. Also skill-wise Portland was no better and the last 5 games with bad faceoff skills they were overshooted by a lot and spend more time defending themselves.
But that is hockey and they deserved it. They just played really well and it worked, perhaps also good tactics was the reason. I wish them the cup.
 
I agree with rainsilent that Kaila's confidence played role. I also noticed that after trades, the team performance is decreasing. And not only if you trade key position player who cause this with the confidence reset. For example after I traded fro Council who I used only as 3rd line center, my scoring decreased significantly and in 12 games I suffered same number of losses as in the first 48 games. And Council was one of the best players with (almost) point per game production. Of course this is small sample and it might not mean anything, but I noticed something similar before. My guess would be that small decrease of team work and team confidence might hurt the performance, so you would have lower scoring and in my case once the winning streak was over, the team was playing worse then before (during the streak before the trade). And with many GHL teams being very close to each other in quality, that can easily make 2-1 games into 1-2. Most of the seasons before, I did minimum trades and the few were mostly in the beginning of the season. This season I made 4 trades in last 20 games of regular season and the team results got much worse. 

I also think one or two of the attributes in the profile count towards grit as well.  For instance, Tough or Agitator under Dirty seems to me would be gritty players and those not nervous or anxious would probably also help to make them more gritty players than those that are Lazy and don't give up easily.  Not sure which attributes from above or my comment count more towards grit, but my guess is they all influence it a bit. 

If you go to tactics when at your team page and then explain tactics you will find it in the player characteristics part of the description for crash the net, dump and chase and aggressive forecheck. As for what I think I think it is talking about players with high spirit and physical attributes. Maybe speed too. Kind of what you think of when you are talking real life hockey too.

What is the "grit" referred to in the explanation of tactics? Does it refer to physicality or spirit or a combo of the two? Thanks for any insight!

Yeah, the finance screen isn't working 100% on the trade screen as it currently treats it as though all salary movement is being done with everybody on the main team. Although, I am pretty sure that it is fixed with the next update.

The current free space in the ongoing and next season assumes the roster and assignments remain the same. Buyout is however calculated from the full contract value, and as stated, leaves you actually paying more than when keeping the player assigned.
 
In this case the numbers:
Full contract cap charge $29,000
Assigned cap charge $2,900
Buyout cap charge $14,500
 
So you released an assigned player, who was counting $2,900 against the cap. After releasing, the buyout counts as $14,500 against the cap. Thus, after releasing, you've $11,600 less to spend next season, compared to when he was assigned.
 
E: Yes, the process is a bit confusing. If you want to see the real cap situation for buyout, you've to bring the player up first.

Been there, done that.
 
Your team most likely has many high rated players for division iv (or IHL), I'm assuming. I myself was able to win a lot of games despite having only good teamwork. Since I don't know what type of players make up your team, I'll try to help.
 
1. Your team's confidence is only ok or uncomfortable because your players are not suited to your tactics. Check your offensive and defensive tactics, and see if the majority of your players match your tactic's player characteristics section. Some tactics require high physical players in relation to the rest of the players in your league, while some require good skating, and others good puckhandling. Scout the rest of the teams in your league that have good confidence and see if their players all have specialties, or one or two stats that seem much higher than the first. You can also read the thread in help files for further help.
 
2. Your winners instinct from what I understand does not significantly change based on your game results. It is based off of your player traits, such as friendly, cocky, determined, anxious, etc. I personally find the winners instinct the hardest to increase, but in general, here are some tips.
 
Limit the amount of nervous players on your team to below 5. Same with anxious players.
 
Fill your team with determined and heroic players, but make sure they make up no more than 2 thirds of your team (around 7-12 players is good).
 
Don't be deceived by the compassionate and friendly traits. These massively increase your teamwork, but too many of these players, and your winners instinct will fall into the toilet. It takes a lot to drop your teamwork once it is high, so don't be afraid to dump some of those players for cocky and arrogant players.
 
 
I found it a bit confusing myself when I was a new manager, but yeah, basically teamwork and confidence are based off of game results, but confidence is mainly based off of how your players find your tactics. Winners instinct is hard to get high, but you should master it with a bit of experimenting.
 
Hope this helped.

Nope, that's not how it works right now. You play 3 games no matter what, and whoever wins at least 2 moves on. I agree that if you win the majority of the games, your round should end then and there for injury reasons. Although playoffs are getting revamped soon, so that may change.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html
 
 
Rk Season Lg   GP      G      PP     PPO   PP%      PK%      SA      SV         SV%         GAA
2017-18 NHL                     
2016-17 NHL 1230    2.77   0.57   2.99   19.10    80.90      30.1     27.5     .913        2.59 3
2015-16 NHL 1230    2.71   0.58   3.11   18.66    81.34      29.6     27.1     .915        2.51 4
2014-15 NHL 1230    2.73   0.57   3.06   18.66    81.34      29.8     27.3     .915        2.52 5
2013-14 NHL 1230    2.74   0.59   3.27   17.89    82.11      30.0     27.4     .914        2.56 6
2012-13 NHL 720      2.72   0.61   3.32   18.22    81.78      29.0    26.5      .912        2.54 7
2011-12 NHL 1230    2.73   0.57   3.31   17.31    82.69      29.7    27.1      .914        2.54 8
2010-11 NHL 1230    2.79   0.64   3.54   18.02    81.98      30.3    27.7      .913        2.61 9
2009-10 NHL 1230    2.84   0.68   3.71   18.23   81.77      30.2     27.5     .911         2.66 10
2008-09 NHL 1230    2.91   0.79   4.16   18.95   81.05      30.1     27.4 .    908        2.73

The "today" label is a bug, but only visual. The contract offers may take longer than 3 days. Let me know if they still are stuck after 4 or 5 days.
 
But if you removed the offer, it should not get back. Did you remove the offer from the contracts offer screen or did you remove it from the player's page?
 
Thanks for report.

Has anyone figured out their teams ideal team focus? I've been tinkering with it every game to see if I can get an assistants report better than:
 
The current team focus in today's game seemed to weakened team momentum  
No matter how I change it I always get that. I've gone with both an offensive and defensive approach, I've taken into consideration how my team has performed under certain team focuses and tried to tailor it to that, but havent had any positive results.
 
ncik

What IneffableLeafs said sums it pretty well in my opinion. One thing I've thought of: players puck handling and maybe physical categories could also effect how easily players give away the puck. I'm not sure if this is the case, but would make sense in my opinion.

My best guess would be that lazy players give away the puck the most. Basing this on logic as well, snipers and playmakers (who do the most with the puck) would be more prone to giveaways than players with simpler assignments, such as enforcers, two way forwards, and grinders. Again based on logic, arrogant and cocky players would be selfish and thus give it away instead of pass, for example.
 
In terms of takeaways, the opposite. You'd probably want purposeful players or ambitious players. Grinders comes to mind as that is their job, to takeaway the puck by any means necessary.