Jump to content
MattBerserkers

Cage trash talk

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, rainsilent said:

Ultimately though, we are trying to split the hairs of greatness. Like players, goalies don't get great stats consistently by accident.

Agree.  And my dilemma is that during the regular season, there is no other goalie I would want on my team.  But during clutch moments, he's collapsed too many times for me to feel confident in him.  I also agree that many of the goals were not mostly his fault.  But in the end, you want a goalie that can elevate their game in the biggest moments and steal games for you.  That's what makes greatness... in any sport.  And that is not what I see from Rask.  In those moments, I'd rather have a goalie with a 3M salary and 4M spent elsewhere.

Just to go back to the Thomas Cup Finals for a second.  He may have cost Boston 1 game in that series, but look at the entire body of work.  In a 7-game series, he let in 8 goals.  From games 1-7 it went:  1-3-1-0-1-2-0.  That is simply insane!  And if you go back 1 game further, he got the shutout in game 7 of the ECF vs. Tampa.  So Thomas finished those playoffs by only allowing 8 goals in his last 8 games.  Absurd numbers.  Compared to Rask's 18 goals allowed in the 7-game series vs. St. Louis.  Choke job.

To me Thomas will always be the better Boston goalie.  If Rask eventually wins a Cup it will make it closer, but even still.

Thomas:  4x All Star, 2x Vezina, Conn Smythe

Rask:  3x All Star, 1 Vezina


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although, Thomas was a bit of an a-hole about the whole White House visit, but maybe he was just ahead of his time!  :) I've never understood the visit to the WH for sports champions anyways, pretty dumb in my opinion.  


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

/\

And away we goooooooooooooooooo.  Collapse commence.  Like clockwork.

On a more positive note, my draft pick will be a bit better.  I've put about 8 hours of research into it so far, so not totally unhappy about that.  Who I play in the 1st round is a moot point considering I just lost to what would be the 1 vs. 8 matchup. 

Come aloooooong and ride on a fantastic...Slide Slide Slippity Slide...ain't no valley low enough for mountain high


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Paul T said:

/\

And away we goooooooooooooooooo.  Collapse commence.  Like clockwork.

On a more positive note, my draft pick will be a bit better.  I've put about 8 hours of research into it so far, so not totally unhappy about that.  Who I play in the 1st round is a moot point considering I just lost to what would be the 1 vs. 8 matchup. 

Come aloooooong and ride on a fantastic...Slide Slide Slippity Slide...ain't no valley low enough for mountain high

I'm joining you because my backup can't avoid getting pulled, so Baudoin ain't getting no rest and a losing streak is unavoidable 😎 .


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AlexanderRasputin said:

I'm joining you because my backup can't avoid getting pulled, so Baudoin ain't getting no rest and a losing streak is unavoidable 😎 .

It is funny how each team seems to have their own unique problems and it's relatively consistent over multiple seasons.

Probably not an ideal scenario unless you are developing a goalie, but have you considered signing some scrub to play in the affiliate to act as a 2nd backup?  When Amick needs a rest, which is often... and I mean OFTEN lmao, I'll recall Loiselle to play backup in case of goalie pull so that Amick doesn't get thrown into the game.  Even some 78-79 guy for like 400K. 

For what it's worth, the last place Alligators beat me earlier this season when they started their 78 overall goalie.  It was a glorious moment for both teams.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex I don't think your backup is good enough to really be a good backup at the GHL level. He is a really good overall goalie regarding his skill set but 86 reflexes is bad when a lot of the shooters facing you have 95+ shooting.

 

13 hours ago, Paul T said:

It is funny how each team seems to have their own unique problems and it's relatively consistent over multiple seasons.

 

This is because a number of managers resign pretty much everyone on their roster, usually until they get really old, no matter their actual performance. It is, frankly, a stupid practice. If your team has issues why are you going to keep bringing back the same players and the same team and expect something different? If there is an issue with the performance of a player trade them or let them go when their current contract is up. I don't mean to bad mouth Erzac but his team is a prime example. After his S1 championship his team has been struggling to get the results despite the talent. At what point do you stop banging your head against the wall and accept that you need to change up the roster in some way? You don't have to go chasing 'better' overall players to get better results either.  If I had his team I would have turned over almost the entire lower half of that roster a season ago because many of them are just playing poorly for whatever reason. Too many managers get too overall focused and also get too locked up in the team that they have.

 

As for your goalie issues, I think it is down to a lack of endurance in both goalies. Your backup is actually playing rather well on the whole. When both goalies have low endurance giving adequate rest for your starter is quite difficult when the backup has an occasional bad game. When my buzzer team was in its second season, down in the IHL, my starter and backup both had low endurance and a chain reaction happened where both goalies ended up yellow tired. Both of them got hurt in the next game that they started. In my opinion, finding a goalie you wouldn't mind splitting starting time with Amick would be the way to go. Try to get a two goalie system where your second goalie has more endurance and can play a few extra games like what I have with Wilcot.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rainsilent said:

As for your goalie issues, I think it is down to a lack of endurance in both goalies. Your backup is actually playing rather well on the whole. When both goalies have low endurance giving adequate rest for your starter is quite difficult when the backup has an occasional bad game. When my buzzer team was in its second season, down in the IHL, my starter and backup both had low endurance and a chain reaction happened where both goalies ended up yellow tired. Both of them got hurt in the next game that they started. In my opinion, finding a goalie you wouldn't mind splitting starting time with Amick would be the way to go. Try to get a two goalie system where your second goalie has more endurance and can play a few extra games like what I have with Wilcot.

My problem is the late season collapses (when I referred to each team having their unique problems).  There may be a good reason for it, but not one that I've been able to identify yet.  Or maybe it's random... not sure.  Someday I'll figure it out.  But you are right about my goalies in general.  Amick's endurance is awful - and he's my scapegoat that I love to call out publicly - but he plays well enough in general and my backups have always been solid enough to stay afloat.  My goal this past offseason was to do exactly as you said and get a G that could split time, but my offers came up short and I had limited cap space so settled for Pohl, who immediately started decreasing.  His reflexes have declined 6 points this season already.

When I traded for Amick it was right after Erzac won the Cup in S1.  He did it with a dominant goalie who has very poor endurance and played him in almost every game with no negative impact.   I pick up on things like that and started to assume endurance for goalies was overrated, but that has been proven wrong (for the most part).  Amick is similar, minus the athleticism.  The game can be misleading sometimes, but that's my own fault for assuming something to be true with a limited sample size.  As in real life, players can have good and bad seasons, leaving managers guessing, but preventing the game from becoming predictable and boring.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The only thing I can say in regards to late season collapses is that every team tends to go through hot and cold streaks. Long runs, like the one my team is currently on, are rare and teams usually go 5-10 games to the good, then back and forth for a number of games, then 5-10 games to the bad, then back and forth again before the process repeats. Players tend to do the same with some players more up and down than others. The best I hope for in those regards is that my team doesn't enter a slump going into the playoffs. If anything I would rather my team be digging out of a slump going into the playoffs rather than starting to fall into one. That way falling into a slump late in the season doesn't bother me so long as I have around 10 games before the playoffs so my team can dig out of it. Ideally you would want to start to get on a hot streak going into the playoffs but we have no control over that.

 

Edit: Just to note; 5-10 games is not the winning or losing streaks themselves. It is the general trend that the team is going in terms of play.

Edited by rainsilent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I did some research on my trends, splitting by the season into 4 quarters and calculating the # of wins (regulation + OT/SO) during those periods.  The first thing I noticed is that my Win % over the last 20 games of the season hovers around 50%.  Not great for a team with a consistent winning record and who typically holds a 1st place spot at some point during each season.

Season 1 started amazing as I won my first 20 games.  It dipped below .500 in Q2, then rebounded in Q3, only to collapse again in Q4.

Season 2 was pretty consistent Q over Q, but there is a major dip at the end heading into the playoffs.

Season 3 was relatively consistent all the way through, however there was a significant dip in Q3 that I wasn't ever able to recover from.

Season 4 is trending downward.  Data for Q4 is incomplete, but I'm off to an 0-1 start and I'm guessing I will win approximately 7-10 games over the final 19.

Average wins per period.

Q1 = 14.5

Q2 = 12.5

Q3 = 12.0

Q4 = 9.5

image.png

Edited by Paul T

*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a cool graph you put together and quite interesting results. I know for a while my team in Biscuit was a slow starter nearly every season. One season my team was so slow out of the gate that I wasn't out of the bottom 4 by the 15 game mark and wasn't in a playoff position until after the halfway mark.

 

I don't look at it in terms of quarters. I look at it in terms of individual streaks. The only time I have ever had a streak happen to one of my teams that I didn't really see coming due to the trend in how my team was playing was 2 seasons ago with my Buzzer team. After winning 5 of the last 7 or 8 games, including one win against the 3rd ranked team in my conference, my team just randomly tanked the last 10 games of the season with team confidence randomly going from blue/ok to yellow/crisis.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's crazy when stuff like that happens.  Today was a weird game as I rarely get dominated like that.  The bright spot is my backup, Pohl, might be the answer in net.  I think he just joined the Vezina conversation 😮

 

image.png


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rainsilent said:

Alex I don't think your backup is good enough to really be a good backup at the GHL level. He is a really good overall goalie regarding his skill set but 86 reflexes is bad when a lot of the shooters facing you have 95+ shooting.

 

 

This is because a number of managers resign pretty much everyone on their roster, usually until they get really old, no matter their actual performance. It is, frankly, a stupid practice. If your team has issues why are you going to keep bringing back the same players and the same team and expect something different? If there is an issue with the performance of a player trade them or let them go when their current contract is up. I don't mean to bad mouth Erzac but his team is a prime example. After his S1 championship his team has been struggling to get the results despite the talent. At what point do you stop banging your head against the wall and accept that you need to change up the roster in some way? You don't have to go chasing 'better' overall players to get better results either.  If I had his team I would have turned over almost the entire lower half of that roster a season ago because many of them are just playing poorly for whatever reason. Too many managers get too overall focused and also get too locked up in the team that they have.

Absolutely agree with both of these points. And frankly, point A is a direct result of point B. I've targeted 4 goalies this season from 4 different teams, with all kinds of combinations of picks, players, PMs - and to no avail. Managers would prefer to sail along season after season with a completely mediocre team, rather than do a trade or two - it's brutal.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate games like that Paul. I get that they will happen but I still hate them none the less. You did end up getting the consolation of a 1-0 loss rather than a bad blowout.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, rainsilent said:

This is because a number of managers resign pretty much everyone on their roster, usually until they get really old, no matter their actual performance. It is, frankly, a stupid practice. If your team has issues why are you going to keep bringing back the same players and the same team and expect something different? If there is an issue with the performance of a player trade them or let them go when their current contract is up. At what point do you stop banging your head against the wall and accept that you need to change up the roster in some way? You don't have to go chasing 'better' overall players to get better results either.  If I had his team I would have turned over almost the entire lower half of that roster a season ago because many of them are just playing poorly for whatever reason. Too many managers get too overall focused and also get too locked up in the team that they have.

Agree - but I'm totally fine with it 😀

I think there are basically 3 reasons for this.  First, managers don't like giving up assets for nothing.  There's an entitlement attitude in that if you sign the player they are worth something and can be used as a trade chip down the line... and there's some truth to it.  Second, there's comfort in re-signing your own players where you can somewhat dictate the terms of the contract vs. having to rely on free agency and trying to outbid other managers or get lucky.  Third, as we are only 4 seasons in, the free agent pool has been thin, so it goes along with point 2 in that there is comfort knowing your roster is filled.  This one will start to change in the next few seasons as the FA pool becomes bigger.

 


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually enjoyed when random decent FAs appeared in season 1 before people started complaining. Not many, of course, but here and there an 85+ FA is a welcome addition.

Otherwise the player pool becomes a) thinned out and b) distributed among many of these same teams that refuse to trade or are inactive. Look at our FA in Cage, it's nonexistent.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Paul T said:

I think there are basically 3 reasons for this.  First, managers don't like giving up assets for nothing.  There's an entitlement attitude in that if you sign the player they are worth something and can be used as a trade chip down the line... and there's some truth to it.  Second, there's comfort in re-signing your own players where you can somewhat dictate the terms of the contract vs. having to rely on free agency and trying to outbid other managers or get lucky.  Third, as we are only 4 seasons in, the free agent pool has been thin, so it goes along with point 2 in that there is comfort knowing your roster is filled.  This one will start to change in the next few seasons as the FA pool becomes bigger.

 

 

While there might be some truth to it there is a massive negative drawback that goes along with it. Holding on to those players is an active restriction to what you can do in FA while also being an active handicap to your teams performance. You are holding on to a player, bringing several detrimental side effects to your team in the process, just for a, most of the time, modest trade value. It isn't worth holding back your team because of that.

 

Yet the reason the latter part of 2 and the entirety of 3 is true at all is because managers hoard players that don't work for them when they shouldn't. If they let them go to FA the FA pool would have many more players in it and so long as you went in looking for what you needed rather than strictly the best overall player there wouldn't be many bidding wars. The only getting lucky there would be would be in outbidding for the top players. Which, to be honest, should be how that sort of goes anyways. It is literally a self perpetuating issue. The fact that there is no real cap crunch for the really deep GHL teams only serves to add to it.

 

If I had this same mindset I never would have gotten any of my current 4th line players. A 4th line that is, performance wise, one of the best 4th lines around. I traded better overall players for Stubna, Stang and Reason. I traded those players because they weren't working in the role that I had them filling. I didn't trade for Stubna, Stang and Reason knowing, or even thinking, that they would be as good as they are. I traded for them thinking that they had the skill set to perform good enough on the 4th line for the duration of the contracts that they were on. Meaning that they would fill that role until I let them go and filled their spots with better players.

 

3 hours ago, AlexanderRasputin said:

I actually enjoyed when random decent FAs appeared in season 1 before people started complaining. Not many, of course, but here and there an 85+ FA is a welcome addition.

Otherwise the player pool becomes a) thinned out and b) distributed among many of these same teams that refuse to trade or are inactive. Look at our FA in Cage, it's nonexistent.

 

Some of those players were from AI teams. The rest Anders created because the player pool that was generated at the start was strictly to fill the teams meaning that there were no extra players to go around at any level. As I said above though, if managers weren't hoarding players that they didn't need or players that weren't performing for them the FA pool wouldn't be nonexistent. Top end players would still be a rarity, as they should be, but quality 2nd and 3rd line players would be notably more abundant if managers didn't unnecessarily hoard players. This is really going to become a pointed problem in the GHL the further we go because teams with great depth are allowed to keep their rosters due to players not increasing their salary demands enough. It was a serious problem in the past and it will be a problem in the future too if the two faster leagues are any indication.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely agree with everything you said, rain.  I just understand the mentality behind managers finding comfort in signing their own players.  Many might think the current roster is good, they just need 1-2 more pieces to make it all work.  Season 3 FA was a great example for me.  I placed a 2nd/3rd line player on waivers to go after Rackley in FA.  That plan didn't work out and I lost the player to waivers, having my worst season so far.  But overall you are right.

I think the FA market will continue to get better each season.  In S2 it was awful.  Got a little better for S3 and this past season there were plenty of players there for signing.  As new players continue to pour in, more players will become available - managers will start doing exactly as you said above in hopes of signing "better" players and improving their teams.  Just a bit limited at the moment.  I think we are a few seasons away from the FA pool being really good.

In terms of trading, I think there are a fair amount of moves made each season.  Almost every manager has made a trade or two at this point.  But trading is tough in general.  You need to find a fair balance and also offer something that the other manager needs, taking into account team tactics and cap space.  If you find value in a player on another team, chances are that manager also values that player and it will take a bit to move them.  I thought the trade between Cedar and Slaughter was a great example of a fair trade benefiting both teams.  I also think the trade between me and Cedar was a benefit to both teams.  Cedar got the younger, better, bigger player on a cheaper contract, so on paper it looks lopsided, but I was up against the cap and it provided me some breathing room to make moves in case of injury... and it provided me positional balance in that I now have a C who can fill in in case of injury - and I already had depth at D.  I needed to move Obeng after this season anyways and Kozak is a great example of a player that will walk without a contact next season.  I've offered quite a few trades for G this year as well to no avail - and some of the offers I thought were really good, but can understand why they were rejected.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rainsilent said:

Some of those players were from AI teams. The rest Anders created because the player pool that was generated at the start was strictly to fill the teams meaning that there were no extra players to go around at any level. As I said above though, if managers weren't hoarding players that they didn't need or players that weren't performing for them the FA pool wouldn't be nonexistent. Top end players would still be a rarity, as they should be, but quality 2nd and 3rd line players would be notably more abundant if managers didn't unnecessarily hoard players. This is really going to become a pointed problem in the GHL the further we go because teams with great depth are allowed to keep their rosters due to players not increasing their salary demands enough. It was a serious problem in the past and it will be a problem in the future too if the two faster leagues are any indication.

Just re-read this part and I see what you're saying.  Personally, I think the problem is contracts.  Players are signing way too cheap.  I had hoped that the release would have solved that - for example, players in the 90s should sign for 6M+.  I see some signing for less than 3M, which allows managers to hoard (along with potentially getting a team of all 90+ players, but that's another topic).  If hoarding is keeping other managers from getting players, then it seems like an effective tactic to be honest.  I personally don't agree with it because having too many players on your roster, especially on one way deals, will kill your confidence as those players would become anxious - and having too many salaries prevents managers from splurging on those top tier players.

I think if the contracts were fixed it would solve a lot of this.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh - and going back to a discussion that hasn't been had in quite some time.  Roster Limits!!!  I have always felt for GHL level it should be 30.  Maybe offer a bit more leeway for the lower leagues, but I can't imagine why any GHL manager would need more than 30 spots.  This would be the ultimate measure against hoarding players and creating a larger FA pool.

6 C - 11 F - 9D - 4G = 30 players.  Easy peasy.  You can even get creative and do 7C and 12F and 2G, the options are endless.


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all the GHL managers who may relegate this season - and to the SHL teams who don't promote - stick it out!

There is a 16 year old 88 overall defenseman in the Russian juniors who will be eligible for the draft NEXT season.  He'll be what, 92-93 by the time he's 18.  If that's not incentive, I don't know what is.

image.pngimage.png


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/31/2020 at 11:01 AM, Paul T said:

I did some research on my trends, splitting by the season into 4 quarters and calculating the # of wins (regulation + OT/SO) during those periods.  The first thing I noticed is that my Win % over the last 20 games of the season hovers around 50%.  Not great for a team with a consistent winning record and who typically holds a 1st place spot at some point during each season.

Season 1 started amazing as I won my first 20 games.  It dipped below .500 in Q2, then rebounded in Q3, only to collapse again in Q4.

Season 2 was pretty consistent Q over Q, but there is a major dip at the end heading into the playoffs.

Season 3 was relatively consistent all the way through, however there was a significant dip in Q3 that I wasn't ever able to recover from.

Season 4 is trending downward.  Data for Q4 is incomplete, but I'm off to an 0-1 start and I'm guessing I will win approximately 7-10 games over the final 19.

Looks like my late season struggles are real.  Now 1-3 in the last quarter of the season and we've been shut out 3 times.  That's some cold offense right there!  And I only scored 3 against the Dragons because Peek played his backup.

image.png


*BISCUIT - SEASON 16 - TARNISHED SILVER BISCUIT PLATE CHAMPION*

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create a GM profile or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create a GM profile

Sign up for a GM profile in our community. It's free & easy!

Create a GM profile

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...