WhAt AbOuT uPdAtErS

Not hard to not go over the cap.

Aren't the updaters supposed to be a last chance thing to make sure this doesn't happen? Or are they just paid to update the player page and say "Cheers " like robots every time?

Not hard to not go over the cap, but apparently very hard to do your job

Yeah, they should be checking the math every time they add TPE to a player page. Ideally, if you pay attention each week, it shouldn't be difficult to spot the error.

There seems to be nothing wrong with how he added shit to his player in his update thread (or at least I can't see it on a quick glance). Could there have been a typo in updating that gave him an extra 1 in a 70-80 stat, resulting in 4 extra TPE?

Sorry for the double post but ... @BadWolf

So I just put the TPE from his first update into the Create a Player tab and it came up as 225 (if you add the 1/4 in scoring after the fact). That's 4 TPE more than 221, which is what he [correctly] claimed on his update thread (155 + 66 -> 221). The error he's being punished for is 4 TPE.

So honestly, the only way this 4-point error could have happened is if he was approved at 159 TPE.

...Right?

Sorry for the double post but ... @BadWolf

So I just put the TPE from his first update into the Create a Player tab and it came up as 225 (if you add the 1/4 in scoring after the fact). That's 4 TPE more than 221, which is what he [correctly] claimed on his update thread (155 + 66 -> 221). The error he's being punished for is 4 TPE.

So honestly, the only way this 4-point error could have happened is if he was approved at 159 TPE.

...Right?

Based only on your post and looking at your post you linked, that sounds like the case. First update was fine. Possibly approved over the cap.

So that's an smjhl ho error then right?

Aleksander Kozlov | C | 2027 TPE | Tampa Bay | Russia | S56

Name: Aleksander Kozlov

Born: February 4th, S38

Height: 6'2"

Weight: 208 lbs

Number: 13

--------------------------------------

Drafted 5th overall by Carolina Kraken in S55 SMJHL Draft 

Drafted 1st overall by Tampa Bay Barracuda in S56 SHL Draft

Gary Grease | D | 2031 TPE | Winnipeg Jets | Team Canada | S39-S54
Name: Gary Grease
Born: June 24th, S21
Height: 7'7"
Weight: 354 lbs
Number: 99
------------------------------------------------------------
History
S38: Drafted 19th overall by Colorado Mammoths
      Signed 1-yr/$3mil deal with Colorado Mammoths
S39: Drafted 12th overall by Winnipeg Jets
      Signed 3 year ELC with WPG
      Named Captain of Colorado Mammoths
      Won WJC Gold with Team Canada
S40: Called up to Winnipeg Jets
S41: Signed Extension With Winnipeg: 2x2million
S43: Won Aiden Richan Trophy (breakout star)
S44: Won challenge cup
S45: Won Turd Ferguson Trophy (most PIMS)

S56 1st Overall

Gary Grease Career Stats: Click Here
Graphics Shop: Click Here

   

Sorry for the double post but ... @BadWolf

So I just put the TPE from his first update into the Create a Player tab and it came up as 225 (if you add the 1/4 in scoring after the fact). That's 4 TPE more than 221, which is what he [correctly] claimed on his update thread (155 + 66 -> 221). The error he's being punished for is 4 TPE.

So honestly, the only way this 4-point error could have happened is if he was approved at 159 TPE.

...Right?

Based only on your post and looking at your post you linked, that sounds like the case. First update was fine. Possibly approved over the cap.

And I checked all the other math and it's fine (small caveat: did not check very closely that the TPE was added correctly).

So
1. Where's my $5M for completing the updater job?
2. Should COL really be punished if Incite updated correctly for his whole career and it wasn't determined until he hit the cap that he had added 4 extra TPE?

Seems weird to suspend a player for an updater issue if that is true.

Should punish GM/Team if they failed to get it fixed while knowing about it though. Why not take their third? Like always ?

Player Thread | Update Thread

Based only on your post and looking at your post you linked, that sounds like the case. First update was fine. Possibly approved over the cap.

And I checked all the other math and it's fine (small caveat: did not check very closely that the TPE was added correctly).

So
1. Where's my $5M for completing the updater job?
2. Should COL really be punished if Incite updated correctly for his whole career and it wasn't determined until he hit the cap that he had added 4 extra TPE?

The updater did point out the error, and either the player or the gm could have made the fix. But it wasn't fixed until today, as the last two posts in the update thread show.

But is it really incite's fault? Debatable, but I'd lean towards no since his updates were correct. Probably more the GM's fault. Idk it's tricky.

I hate the edit/quote buttons on mobike

Based only on your post and looking at your post you linked, that sounds like the case. First update was fine. Possibly approved over the cap.

And I checked all the other math and it's fine (small caveat: did not check very closely that the TPE was added correctly).

So
1. Where's my $5M for completing the updater job?
2. Should COL really be punished if Incite updated correctly for his whole career and it wasn't determined until he hit the cap that he had added 4 extra TPE?

The punishment isn't just because he had 4 extra TPE. It's because COL GMs were informed Incite had 4 extra TPE, were given permission to fix the error on Incite's behalf, and failed to do that correction.

HO and Updater teams are to blame for it getting this far, but they took all the appropriate corrective actions when the error was discovered. COL failed to take their step in correcting the issue, so they should be punished. 

Whether it was intentional or not, COL's inaction gave them an unfair competitive advantage. I'm confident COL would not have been punished if they would have appropriately corrected the audited player in a timely manner.

Cedric's Trophy Case
---
SHL Hall of Fame
Class of Season 63
---
S46 Challenge Cup
12-4-1 | 0.906 SV% | 2.68 GAA
---
S48 Challenge Cup
16-4-2 | 0.921 SV% | 2.45 GAA
---
2x IIHF Gold (S47, S52)
2x IIHF Silver (S46, S49)
---
All-Star Teams
S46 All Rookie Team
2x 2nd Team (S46, S50)
2x 3rd Team (S48, S49)
---
SHL Awards
Mike Honcho Award (S50)
---
SHL Nominations
Ryan Jesster Nomination (S46)
3x John McBride Nominations (S49, S50, S53)
Anton Razov Nomination (S48)
---
SMJHL Career Season Wins
99 (T-1st STHS Era)
---
Detroit Falcons Career Season Wins
99 (1st STHS Era)
---
Laurifer Trophy - 2 Wins
S43, S44 (as Player)
S44 (as GM)
---
S42 WJC Gold (USA)
---
Tom Corcoran Trophy - 3 Wins
S42, S44, S45
Nominated S43
Most Tom Corcoran Trophies, Single Career (3)
---
Raymond Lindsay Trophy - 1 Win
S44
Nominated S42
---
Esa Anrikkanen Trophy
Nominated S42
---
Ideen Fallah Trophy
Nominated S44

Dee's Trophy Case
The hell are you lookin at?
Kick rocks, punk

And I checked all the other math and it's fine (small caveat: did not check very closely that the TPE was added correctly).

So
1. Where's my $5M for completing the updater job?
2. Should COL really be punished if Incite updated correctly for his whole career and it wasn't determined until he hit the cap that he had added 4 extra TPE?

The updater did point out the error, and either the player or the gm could have made the fix. But it was fixed until today, as the last two posts in the update thread show.

But is it really incite's fault? Debatable, but I'd lean towards no since his updates were correct. Probably more the GM's fault. Idk it's tricky.

While it is an issue that the updater pointed it out on like the 13th and the GM didn't post there for a whole week, this issue has existed since the player was created. Updaters are supposed to audit their teams once a season (I'm going from S25 rules when I was updating still). That means whoever approved the player missed it, and whoever audited Colorado at the end of S44 also missed it.

So yeah, my main point is everything was correct from what Incite and the GMs could see -- until it suddenly wasn't. If you backtrack through each update, it's not obvious that a mistake was made. If the updaters were diligent up front, this would have been a non-issue. That's why I don't think they should be punished at all.

Also it's FOUR TPE my goodness

Whether it was intentional or not, COL's inaction gave them an unfair competitive advantage. I'm confident COL would not have been punished if they would have appropriately corrected the audited player in a timely manner.

Well he was approved 10/12/18, and the error was spotted 01/13/19; that's 93 days.

So I'd say they have til April 16th to respond.

Someone should hire this GCool fella to be an updater or something.

 

Someone should hire this GCool fella to be an updater or something.

Nah, I can't pick this up. I'd rather do podcasts and have my activity level ebb and flow. Also I'm bored as fuck at work right now, so opportunity is here.

But honestly if you're getting paid to do this you should be investigating like I did. This took maybe 15 minutes. Sad that we'll pay people enough to not write 5000 words of media a season and make other people wonder why it's not completely automated lmao

How did you reach out to incite and Alaska? I know sometimes people don't know when they've been tagged, like if it was just through the update thread. If you reached out directly I'd understand why this was punished.

Seems weird to suspend a player for an updater issue if that is true.

Should punish GM/Team if they failed to get it fixed while knowing about it though. Why not take their third? Like always ?

We based our decision on the lumbardi case when he was over cap, trying to stick with what was done in the past.