02-02-2024, 06:42 PM
Hi y'all, @kahri and I checking in after two seasons at the helm of the SMJHL awards department.
It might not look like it too much, but we've been hard at work first integrating with the existing processes, and then starting to implement our own ideas as our team and we both adjusted to each other. The first point that you might have caught this season is the implementation of mid-season watchlists. While it will hopefully look nicer next season, I think this has helped get the team thinking about things earlier, lets you all know how we're thinking, gives you a chance to provide feedback on things we miss, allows for us to more quickly get into voting when the playoffs start, and should lead to an Awards cycle that wraps up with the finals than the next pre-season.
Beyond that, since taking this role on, I've been wanting to touch base with the larger community about what their expectations are of the SMJHL Awards department and what might not be met and what needs additional attention. In addition to that, we also want your feedback on a few things that have come up over the last four months, so fire away!
(In)Activity with regards to eligibility
The SMJHL Awards have always paid attention to inactivity with regards to award eligibility (some cycles better than others sure). Historically, with how easy it is to have well performing inactives due to the limited TPE levels of the SMJHL, care has been taken to ensure that active players who are engaging with the site and community are celebrated. With the shift to the portal, this data has gotten more accessible, and as mentioned in this seasons nominations, the SMJHL HO has clarified their stance on inactive players and their expectations for how they're used from season 74 into the future. We've chosen to align ourselves with their ideas, unified in idea of the SMJHL as a developmental league and one that cares deeply about rewarding active players, by restricting awards to the users that have maintained activity through the entire season. One (well timed) portal update covers the length of the regular season, and without that update the player can't reasonably be expected to have the volume stats commonly looked at for awards, but some awards might still be contended by 3rd line players in specific situations (the Alexis Metzler Trophy / Best Defensive Defender stands out in my mind here).
Looking into the future, as we have a tool that can check IA/Active on a day by day basis against the League Calendar, we're looking to refine this, and give a margin of leeway. Day 1 of the regular season to the end of the finals covered 46 days this year, which we expect to continue as normal. If we give leeway for a player to hit IA over two different weekends in a season, but be eligible for the games, we can expect them to be inactive for at most 4 days. We're wanting to refine our policy for the future as such: Players who are inactive (30 days since portal activity) for more than 4 days during a season are ineligible for awards, regardless of when that occurs. Thoughts?
The Miller, and it's proximity to The Littleton
This is something I've brought up to @SchwarzNarr and @FuzzSHL recently, spurred by the ferocity that some new users have shown in engaging with the site, and the older views that the Miller was only for users who have a player in the J and the Littleton is only for users who have a player in the SHL. While the dichotomy works, it's not rigidly followed and I'm not sure it's really doing what we want with regards to either award. With that in mind, I've internally thrown out some ideas:
A. Make Littleton about contribution to site or SHL/IIHF specific work / Make Miller about SMJHL specific activity, allowing more recognition to people looking to improve the J as a developmental league.
B. Close off Miller to recreates, only first gens in the J (maybe 1-2 seasons into the SHL and recreates coming back from hiatus) are eligible for the Miller - focuses on the new faces and encourages that contribution.
C. Go back to the hard split (really just keep, which the J maintains, that'd be more of an SHL Awards thing).
The ISFL did similar to B and I don't love the effects that had, but I'm curious to what you all feel makes sense for this recognition.
The enigma that is the Jack Cross Award
I'll be honest, I personally hate this award. As an Award Head, and as an SMJHL GM, I think this award is awful, and I think a fair number of my peers think similarly.
I think recognizing valuable contributions that are under the radar is incredibly important, and I think there's a lot of users out there that make the intangible sides of this league tick. This award somehow exists between those ideas, each GM nominating someone, each committee member voting, and many people in the community all have different perspectives of what this award is. There have been numerous debates about if this is a user award, a player award, or both, and while we have tried to make it a player award over the last two seasons it still seems to be an award for the user in the eyes of many GMs as they write nominations and the comments I see among the community members. I personally think that the user side can (and should) be recognized in team awards and media posts, but at this point, I just want to know what the community thinks this award should represent because the ambiguity is leaving everyone a bit dissatisfied.
Feedback on outcomes, criteria, processes, expectations being met or not, or gaps that the current awards don't cover?
Is there stuff coming out of J awards that doesn't sit right? Is there something you would like to see being done differently? (please put your bias aside, I'm sure many of you have felt robbed of awards, this is not that)
What changes outside of the above would you want to see out of the department? We want these to be a celebration of the SMJHL community, a key asset in retention, and something fun for you all to enjoy, but your feedback is how we're gonna make that happen.
Let it rip I guess?
It might not look like it too much, but we've been hard at work first integrating with the existing processes, and then starting to implement our own ideas as our team and we both adjusted to each other. The first point that you might have caught this season is the implementation of mid-season watchlists. While it will hopefully look nicer next season, I think this has helped get the team thinking about things earlier, lets you all know how we're thinking, gives you a chance to provide feedback on things we miss, allows for us to more quickly get into voting when the playoffs start, and should lead to an Awards cycle that wraps up with the finals than the next pre-season.
Beyond that, since taking this role on, I've been wanting to touch base with the larger community about what their expectations are of the SMJHL Awards department and what might not be met and what needs additional attention. In addition to that, we also want your feedback on a few things that have come up over the last four months, so fire away!
(In)Activity with regards to eligibility
The SMJHL Awards have always paid attention to inactivity with regards to award eligibility (some cycles better than others sure). Historically, with how easy it is to have well performing inactives due to the limited TPE levels of the SMJHL, care has been taken to ensure that active players who are engaging with the site and community are celebrated. With the shift to the portal, this data has gotten more accessible, and as mentioned in this seasons nominations, the SMJHL HO has clarified their stance on inactive players and their expectations for how they're used from season 74 into the future. We've chosen to align ourselves with their ideas, unified in idea of the SMJHL as a developmental league and one that cares deeply about rewarding active players, by restricting awards to the users that have maintained activity through the entire season. One (well timed) portal update covers the length of the regular season, and without that update the player can't reasonably be expected to have the volume stats commonly looked at for awards, but some awards might still be contended by 3rd line players in specific situations (the Alexis Metzler Trophy / Best Defensive Defender stands out in my mind here).
Looking into the future, as we have a tool that can check IA/Active on a day by day basis against the League Calendar, we're looking to refine this, and give a margin of leeway. Day 1 of the regular season to the end of the finals covered 46 days this year, which we expect to continue as normal. If we give leeway for a player to hit IA over two different weekends in a season, but be eligible for the games, we can expect them to be inactive for at most 4 days. We're wanting to refine our policy for the future as such: Players who are inactive (30 days since portal activity) for more than 4 days during a season are ineligible for awards, regardless of when that occurs. Thoughts?
The Miller, and it's proximity to The Littleton
This is something I've brought up to @SchwarzNarr and @FuzzSHL recently, spurred by the ferocity that some new users have shown in engaging with the site, and the older views that the Miller was only for users who have a player in the J and the Littleton is only for users who have a player in the SHL. While the dichotomy works, it's not rigidly followed and I'm not sure it's really doing what we want with regards to either award. With that in mind, I've internally thrown out some ideas:
A. Make Littleton about contribution to site or SHL/IIHF specific work / Make Miller about SMJHL specific activity, allowing more recognition to people looking to improve the J as a developmental league.
B. Close off Miller to recreates, only first gens in the J (maybe 1-2 seasons into the SHL and recreates coming back from hiatus) are eligible for the Miller - focuses on the new faces and encourages that contribution.
C. Go back to the hard split (really just keep, which the J maintains, that'd be more of an SHL Awards thing).
The ISFL did similar to B and I don't love the effects that had, but I'm curious to what you all feel makes sense for this recognition.
The enigma that is the Jack Cross Award
I'll be honest, I personally hate this award. As an Award Head, and as an SMJHL GM, I think this award is awful, and I think a fair number of my peers think similarly.
I think recognizing valuable contributions that are under the radar is incredibly important, and I think there's a lot of users out there that make the intangible sides of this league tick. This award somehow exists between those ideas, each GM nominating someone, each committee member voting, and many people in the community all have different perspectives of what this award is. There have been numerous debates about if this is a user award, a player award, or both, and while we have tried to make it a player award over the last two seasons it still seems to be an award for the user in the eyes of many GMs as they write nominations and the comments I see among the community members. I personally think that the user side can (and should) be recognized in team awards and media posts, but at this point, I just want to know what the community thinks this award should represent because the ambiguity is leaving everyone a bit dissatisfied.
Feedback on outcomes, criteria, processes, expectations being met or not, or gaps that the current awards don't cover?
Is there stuff coming out of J awards that doesn't sit right? Is there something you would like to see being done differently? (please put your bias aside, I'm sure many of you have felt robbed of awards, this is not that)
What changes outside of the above would you want to see out of the department? We want these to be a celebration of the SMJHL community, a key asset in retention, and something fun for you all to enjoy, but your feedback is how we're gonna make that happen.
Let it rip I guess?