Quote:1. CW TRIVIA, 3 TPE max - 1.5 TPE for participation, 0.5 TPE for each correct answer. This is completed through a Google form linked below. Make sure to spell your answers correctly or you will not get credit. Post your verification word in your CW post.

trivial

Quote:2. Gnabe Dabson leads in both goals and points while Tony Soprano is second for both. Is that enough to give offensive advantage to Philadelphia?

In the championship series even the smallest advantage can have a massive impact. On this level both teams are the best of the best, and having an impact player such as Gnabe Dabson will definitely give the Philadelphia Forge a bonus. If not directly on the scoreboard, then indirectly as a morale boost or forcing San Fransisco to spend more effort keeping him at bay.

65 words, +1 TPE

Quote:9. Written, 50 to 200+ words.
During their 20 seasons in league Philadelphia has never missed the playoffs. Which is impressive but still there are other teams with longer playoffs streaks, while other teams clean the house others try to stay afloat and do a retool while still staying in playoffs, both with varying successes. Out of last 5 Challenge Cup winners both Los Angeles and San Francisco missed playoffs about 6 seasons before they won their cup while New England has been in playoffs since S67. What in your opinion is best way to achieve success in SHL? Is it better to have high but shorter peak or should teams try to aim staying close to top but likely never reaching it for longer, potentially almost indefinitely? Can they somehow do both?

When it comes time to determine any team's approach to a rebuild or a retool it's impossible to say that one specific direction is better than any other for all teams. There are way too many variables that have to be considered before making such a big decision. What does their current prospect pool look like? How old are the team's current top players? What's the feel in the locker room? Do players want to stick around during the down years or do they ask to be traded to a contender?

When you have the answer to those questions, then you can make your best guess for what approach to take. But we also must note that both approaches mentioned in the prompt have inherit pros and cons.

If you aim for a higher but shorter peak you have a better chance at winning the cup because, if you've successfully rebuilt you should have the best team on paper for a couple seasons. But if you don't manage to win for whatever reason, the window closes quickly and players can burn out from lack of success.

Going for a long-term window could, as mentioned in the prompt, put the team in sort of a limbo state. Never being able to truly contend for the cup, and also never getting any top draft picks to build for the future. However, consistently reaching the playoffs is a good way to keep current talent around. And keeping morale higher.

200+ words, +4 TPE