Create Account

(GRADED) DeepDive#1-In defense of contraction/how the SMJHL sets an unfair precedent.
#1
(This post was last modified: 06-14-2022, 07:54 AM by Opera_Phantom. Edited 1 time in total.)

Preface

My intention with this piece is not a hit piece directed at SMJHL Head Office. I am only trying to provide facts about the SMJHL league structure at large.

An Unfortunate Situation

Forget I am talking about the SMJHL for a moment. Hell, forget I’m talking about hockey. Lets say, there are 12 teams that make the playoffs. 6 from each conference.

Two teams are in a playoff race for the 6th seed in their respective conference. Honestly, it has been neck and neck all season. No team is more “deserved” of the spot than the other. I think we can all agree no one deserves anything in sports. Regardless, the season comes to an end and one team ends up edging the other out by just a few points in the conference standings. Logically speaking, the team with the higher points total should make the playoffs, right? Well, I hate to say this, but in the SMJHL that isn’t how it works.

Both Carolina and Anchorage missed the playoffs this season due to simple mathematics. No, not the math that proves they had less points than every other team. The contrary is true, both Carolina and Anchorage were both good enough to secure the 6th seeds in their respective conferences of 7 teams during the regular season – I want to note here that Carolina was 17 points better than the team that made the playoffs in their place. The math they lost playoff berths to, is that 2 does not divide into 7 evenly. Unfortunately, Carolina and Anchorage both fall into the two divisions with 4 teams instead of 3. And here's the kicker, every team in both 3 team divisions is guaranteed a playoff spot. 

43% Is A Large Number

Effectively speaking, 6 teams in the league are immune to missing the playoffs. Yes, you heard me right. 6 teams, 42.8% (lets call it 43% for the sake of simplicity) cannot miss the playoffs. 43% of the league has automatic berths to the playoffs. I realize I have said, essentially, the same thing 3 times previously, but I feel like I needed to repeat myself in order to be able to wrap my head around how ridiculous that percentage sounds.

I’ve spoken to coach @Gwdjohnson of the Anchorage organization who has gone on record to say that he is in favor of league contraction. He thinks, “The league is unfair because it incorrectly assumes that teams go immediately from rebuilding into contending after an off year. And if that isn't the case, which it often is, it places teams at a disadvantage that would rather miss playoffs and get a higher draft pick to help their rebuild.”

Stretching Talent

Coach Johnson provides an interesting perspective into the SMJHL league structure here. The league’s talent is spread too thin. Along with the argument that teams with more points should make the playoffs, the talent pool of a lot of SMJHL teams is rather thin and with players rotating out every season, it’s tough for some teams to remain competitive if too many of their players get called up and then begins the vicious cycle of being a bottom team in the league.

An Unfortunate Solution

Simply put, the league needs to shrink by two teams. From my understanding, the playoff structure is due to FHM not allowing 14 team playoffs. So 12 teams it is. Unfortunately, the structure of the league at 14 teams divides the league into conferences that then do not divide evenly. As you can surmise, no one is at fault for this fact. However, I think that the SMJHL Head Office needs to face the unfortunate situation and contract the SMJHL by two teams. It is an unfortunate solution to an unfortunate situation and I would hate to be the guy that has to tell a team they have to fold.

[Image: cd6sM5U.gif]
arigato to everyone for the dope sigs <3

| Updates | Player Page |


Reply
#2

So, thank you for this. I appreciate you clarifying that this isn't a hit piece. However, it is part of our job to respond to things like this. I don't mean to be harsh and I immediately apologize if I come across that way. I absolutely wholeheartedly appreciate discussing the state of the J with anyone who's willing to talk about it. I feel that ultimately, this piece might be missing a bit of context surrounding our current systems, as well as the SMJHL as a whole.

The primary goals of the SMJHL are 1. Retainment and 2. Development. In regards to the latter, we find ourselves with numerous ways that promote development. Such as specific point tasks for our rookies, rookie mentors dedicated to helping people in their rookie seasons (and even beyond as necessary), catch up TPE for people who join late, and other various channels and avenues to help our new players develop into the SHL. As for the former, retainment is a difficult issue. The point of the J is not to win the Four Star Cup, as prestigious as it might seem. Instead, it's to find yourself in an environment that is conducive to having fun and making you want to log in the next day. Part of that means looking at our options for playoffs and evaluating what seems best for the overall health of the J.

To cut to the chase on this one, as you alluded to our hands are relatively tied when it comes to playoff options. Back when we expanded, I'm not exaggerating that we had critically few spots left for people. It was nearly emergency levels as there was zero space for new players joining the J. So, we expanded. Whether or not that was the correct choice is a discussion for a different day, a discussion graced by the existence of hindsight. But the reality of then and now is that we expanded to 14 teams which opened that aforementioned hand-tying circumstance. FHM, both 6 and 8, are not generous when it comes to playoff options. We presented our four most viable options to our J teams and the overwhelming consensus was that the J GMs preferred to expand by 2 teams, with 12 of the 14 teams making playoffs. Our options with 14 teams were either the current system or an alternative where only 8 teams made playoffs. As we looked into the options granted by FHM, ultimately we felt the need to balance the competitive opportunities for J teams alongside the need to uphold our primary directives, key of which is retention in this case.

An alternative system with only 8 teams making playoffs instead of 12 would leave 6 of our teams, that same 43%, with nothing to do after the end of their regular season. That would directly be harmful to our directive of retention and risk the activity of players not on playoff teams, especially as the questions regarding WJC/IIHF may leave people with not much to do. We then took that perspective of not wanting teams to miss playoffs and applied it to the 2 teams who would miss playoffs under our new system. The general agreement from both HO and our teams was that missing playoffs twice in a row would also be detrimental to our primary directives. As a result we developed our current system to guarantee that no team misses the playoffs two seasons in a row. The reality of this is what we currently see, an unfortunate side effect where teams better than others may miss playoffs while those drastically worse will still clinch a playoff birth; this includes even if the team may not wish to do so. I very much respect Gabe and their opinions, they're absolutely someone I know has a good perspective on the J and their ear rightly to the ground on current issues. Unfortunately, our assumption is not that teams immediately complete a rebuild after one season, and is instead that a team possibly missing playoffs two seasons in a row, or even more, is detrimental to retainment, and thus a bigger priority.

A long time ago, a certain user asked people a difficult question when it came to expansion of "If you think X deserved it, please point and tell me which user they deserved it over." When it comes to contraction, I supposed I'd paraphrase that question and ask "Who do you feel doesn't deserve to have a team anymore?" I appreciate your sentiments that this is an unfortunate situation and very much appreciate the perspective on this. I agree that the playoff structure would be better situated with only 12 teams, but I don't feel that reason alone is justification for contraction. Instead, I feel the stretching talent argument holds more validity for reasoning behind such a course of action. If I were to speak as plainly as possible, I guess I'd just say I hope people believe me when I say that I'm ready to have the difficult conversation with two General Managers, their players, and the J as a whole, when it comes to prioritizing the overall health of the SMJHL and doing what needs to be done. My current biggest holdups are 1. That we'll contract just in time to need to expand as the inevitable S69 influx (or other large influx) may arrive (Discussion on the validity of this is one I'm very open to having), and 2. How to fairly determine what teams to contract. Do we go by most recent teams? Teams that people have claimed should always have been SHL teams and not SMJHL teams? Oldest teams? Ones with the most IA players? There are a lot of questions to answer, and I promise that I most of all wish there was an easy solution. If people have suggestions, no matter how they might seem, I promise you I and J HO wish to hear them.

As I've already hit over 1k words I figure I should sign off with some closing remarks. First, thank you, sincerely, for this piece. I'm always looking for feedback on the J and reading people's perspectives, especially that of people currently in the J, is invaluable. This was a well written and concise article, and I'm enthusiastically looking forward to another Deep Dive by you. Second, please keep having these conversations. These kinds of discussions are irreplaceable and again, I'm always looking for people's thoughts. And lastly, on the topic of contraction, if anyone has anything, be it a question, comment, concern, or even you outright disagree with everything I've said, let me or anyone in J HO know.

Thank you again!

[Image: 59269_s.png]


S66 Damian Littleton


[Image: CsnVET2.png] || [Image: wu5MVvy.png]|| [Image: c8B2LE3.png]
Battleborn | Barracuda | Usa
Reply
#3

@Sleepy APPROVED! +5 TPE
Reply
#4

06-14-2022, 01:34 AMACapitalChicago Wrote: So, thank you for this. I appreciate you clarifying that this isn't a hit piece. However, it is part of our job to respond to things like this. I don't mean to be harsh and I immediately apologize if I come across that way. I absolutely wholeheartedly appreciate discussing the state of the J with anyone who's willing to talk about it. I feel that ultimately, this piece might be missing a bit of context surrounding our current systems, as well as the SMJHL as a whole.

The primary goals of the SMJHL are 1. Retainment and 2. Development. In regards to the latter, we find ourselves with numerous ways that promote development. Such as specific point tasks for our rookies, rookie mentors dedicated to helping people in their rookie seasons (and even beyond as necessary), catch up TPE for people who join late, and other various channels and avenues to help our new players develop into the SHL. As for the former, retainment is a difficult issue. The point of the J is not to win the Four Star Cup, as prestigious as it might seem. Instead, it's to find yourself in an environment that is conducive to having fun and making you want to log in the next day. Part of that means looking at our options for playoffs and evaluating what seems best for the overall health of the J.

To cut to the chase on this one, as you alluded to our hands are relatively tied when it comes to playoff options. Back when we expanded, I'm not exaggerating that we had critically few spots left for people. It was nearly emergency levels as there was zero space for new players joining the J. So, we expanded. Whether or not that was the correct choice is a discussion for a different day, a discussion graced by the existence of hindsight. But the reality of then and now is that we expanded to 14 teams which opened that aforementioned hand-tying circumstance. FHM, both 6 and 8, are not generous when it comes to playoff options. We presented our four most viable options to our J teams and the overwhelming consensus was that the J GMs preferred to expand by 2 teams, with 12 of the 14 teams making playoffs. Our options with 14 teams were either the current system or an alternative where only 8 teams made playoffs. As we looked into the options granted by FHM, ultimately we felt the need to balance the competitive opportunities for J teams alongside the need to uphold our primary directives, key of which is retention in this case.

An alternative system with only 8 teams making playoffs instead of 12 would leave 6 of our teams, that same 43%, with nothing to do after the end of their regular season. That would directly be harmful to our directive of retention and risk the activity of players not on playoff teams, especially as the questions regarding WJC/IIHF may leave people with not much to do. We then took that perspective of not wanting teams to miss playoffs and applied it to the 2 teams who would miss playoffs under our new system. The general agreement from both HO and our teams was that missing playoffs twice in a row would also be detrimental to our primary directives. As a result we developed our current system to guarantee that no team misses the playoffs two seasons in a row. The reality of this is what we currently see, an unfortunate side effect where teams better than others may miss playoffs while those drastically worse will still clinch a playoff birth; this includes even if the team may not wish to do so. I very much respect Gabe and their opinions, they're absolutely someone I know has a good perspective on the J and their ear rightly to the ground on current issues. Unfortunately, our assumption is not that teams immediately complete a rebuild after one season, and is instead that a team possibly missing playoffs two seasons in a row, or even more, is detrimental to retainment, and thus a bigger priority.

A long time ago, a certain user asked people a difficult question when it came to expansion of "If you think X deserved it, please point and tell me which user they deserved it over." When it comes to contraction, I supposed I'd paraphrase that question and ask "Who do you feel doesn't deserve to have a team anymore?" I appreciate your sentiments that this is an unfortunate situation and very much appreciate the perspective on this. I agree that the playoff structure would be better situated with only 12 teams, but I don't feel that reason alone is justification for contraction. Instead, I feel the stretching talent argument holds more validity for reasoning behind such a course of action. If I were to speak as plainly as possible, I guess I'd just say I hope people believe me when I say that I'm ready to have the difficult conversation with two General Managers, their players, and the J as a whole, when it comes to prioritizing the overall health of the SMJHL and doing what needs to be done. My current biggest holdups are 1. That we'll contract just in time to need to expand as the inevitable S69 influx (or other large influx) may arrive (Discussion on the validity of this is one I'm very open to having), and 2. How to fairly determine what teams to contract. Do we go by most recent teams? Teams that people have claimed should always have been SHL teams and not SMJHL teams? Oldest teams? Ones with the most IA players? There are a lot of questions to answer, and I promise that I most of all wish there was an easy solution. If people have suggestions, no matter how they might seem, I promise you I and J HO wish to hear them.

As I've already hit over 1k words I figure I should sign off with some closing remarks. First, thank you, sincerely, for this piece. I'm always looking for feedback on the J and reading people's perspectives, especially that of people currently in the J, is invaluable. This was a well written and concise article, and I'm enthusiastically looking forward to another Deep Dive by you. Second, please keep having these conversations. These kinds of discussions are irreplaceable and again, I'm always looking for people's thoughts. And lastly, on the topic of contraction, if anyone has anything, be it a question, comment, concern, or even you outright disagree with everything I've said, let me or anyone in J HO know.

Thank you again!

Thanks for commenting. I totally understand the predicament smjhl HO is in, and you're right, decisions like this aren't easy so thank you for providing more context into the situation. I do not envy you for having to even consider being in a position where you may have to axe two teams.

I would have spent a little more time digging into the context, but I really didn't want to stray too far over the 500 word requirement for deep dives because I'm lazy haha.

Either way, I appreciate the transparency!

[Image: cd6sM5U.gif]
arigato to everyone for the dope sigs <3

| Updates | Player Page |


Reply
#5

06-14-2022, 01:34 AMACapitalChicago Wrote: So, thank you for this. I appreciate you clarifying that this isn't a hit piece. However, it is part of our job to respond to things like this. I don't mean to be harsh and I immediately apologize if I come across that way. I absolutely wholeheartedly appreciate discussing the state of the J with anyone who's willing to talk about it. I feel that ultimately, this piece might be missing a bit of context surrounding our current systems, as well as the SMJHL as a whole.

The primary goals of the SMJHL are 1. Retainment and 2. Development. In regards to the latter, we find ourselves with numerous ways that promote development. Such as specific point tasks for our rookies, rookie mentors dedicated to helping people in their rookie seasons (and even beyond as necessary), catch up TPE for people who join late, and other various channels and avenues to help our new players develop into the SHL. As for the former, retainment is a difficult issue. The point of the J is not to win the Four Star Cup, as prestigious as it might seem. Instead, it's to find yourself in an environment that is conducive to having fun and making you want to log in the next day. Part of that means looking at our options for playoffs and evaluating what seems best for the overall health of the J.

To cut to the chase on this one, as you alluded to our hands are relatively tied when it comes to playoff options. Back when we expanded, I'm not exaggerating that we had critically few spots left for people. It was nearly emergency levels as there was zero space for new players joining the J. So, we expanded. Whether or not that was the correct choice is a discussion for a different day, a discussion graced by the existence of hindsight. But the reality of then and now is that we expanded to 14 teams which opened that aforementioned hand-tying circumstance. FHM, both 6 and 8, are not generous when it comes to playoff options. We presented our four most viable options to our J teams and the overwhelming consensus was that the J GMs preferred to expand by 2 teams, with 12 of the 14 teams making playoffs. Our options with 14 teams were either the current system or an alternative where only 8 teams made playoffs. As we looked into the options granted by FHM, ultimately we felt the need to balance the competitive opportunities for J teams alongside the need to uphold our primary directives, key of which is retention in this case.

An alternative system with only 8 teams making playoffs instead of 12 would leave 6 of our teams, that same 43%, with nothing to do after the end of their regular season. That would directly be harmful to our directive of retention and risk the activity of players not on playoff teams, especially as the questions regarding WJC/IIHF may leave people with not much to do. We then took that perspective of not wanting teams to miss playoffs and applied it to the 2 teams who would miss playoffs under our new system. The general agreement from both HO and our teams was that missing playoffs twice in a row would also be detrimental to our primary directives. As a result we developed our current system to guarantee that no team misses the playoffs two seasons in a row. The reality of this is what we currently see, an unfortunate side effect where teams better than others may miss playoffs while those drastically worse will still clinch a playoff birth; this includes even if the team may not wish to do so. I very much respect Gabe and their opinions, they're absolutely someone I know has a good perspective on the J and their ear rightly to the ground on current issues. Unfortunately, our assumption is not that teams immediately complete a rebuild after one season, and is instead that a team possibly missing playoffs two seasons in a row, or even more, is detrimental to retainment, and thus a bigger priority.

A long time ago, a certain user asked people a difficult question when it came to expansion of "If you think X deserved it, please point and tell me which user they deserved it over." When it comes to contraction, I supposed I'd paraphrase that question and ask "Who do you feel doesn't deserve to have a team anymore?" I appreciate your sentiments that this is an unfortunate situation and very much appreciate the perspective on this. I agree that the playoff structure would be better situated with only 12 teams, but I don't feel that reason alone is justification for contraction. Instead, I feel the stretching talent argument holds more validity for reasoning behind such a course of action. If I were to speak as plainly as possible, I guess I'd just say I hope people believe me when I say that I'm ready to have the difficult conversation with two General Managers, their players, and the J as a whole, when it comes to prioritizing the overall health of the SMJHL and doing what needs to be done. My current biggest holdups are 1. That we'll contract just in time to need to expand as the inevitable S69 influx (or other large influx) may arrive (Discussion on the validity of this is one I'm very open to having), and 2. How to fairly determine what teams to contract. Do we go by most recent teams? Teams that people have claimed should always have been SHL teams and not SMJHL teams? Oldest teams? Ones with the most IA players? There are a lot of questions to answer, and I promise that I most of all wish there was an easy solution. If people have suggestions, no matter how they might seem, I promise you I and J HO wish to hear them.

As I've already hit over 1k words I figure I should sign off with some closing remarks. First, thank you, sincerely, for this piece. I'm always looking for feedback on the J and reading people's perspectives, especially that of people currently in the J, is invaluable. This was a well written and concise article, and I'm enthusiastically looking forward to another Deep Dive by you. Second, please keep having these conversations. These kinds of discussions are irreplaceable and again, I'm always looking for people's thoughts. And lastly, on the topic of contraction, if anyone has anything, be it a question, comment, concern, or even you outright disagree with everything I've said, let me or anyone in J HO know.

Thank you again!

Sure, you could read what acap just said, or I could make you aware of the fact that acap likes Chicago style pizza which would invalidate anything he says

[Image: izzy.PNG]
Reply
#6

Let’s fold CAR and NL. Only solution :handshake:

[Image: 0XJkcN5.png]
Czechoslovakia PROFILE || UPDATE || RAGE. Rage 
[Image: luketd.gif]




Reply
#7

06-14-2022, 11:05 AMdmuda11 Wrote: Sure, you could read what acap just said, or I could make you aware of the fact that acap likes Chicago style pizza which would invalidate anything he says

I’ve never met a pizza I didn’t like.

[Image: cd6sM5U.gif]
arigato to everyone for the dope sigs <3

| Updates | Player Page |


Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)




Navigation

 

Extra Menu

 

About us

The Simulation Hockey League is a free online forums based sim league where you create your own fantasy hockey player. Join today and create your player, become a GM, get drafted, sign contracts, make trades and compete against hundreds of players from around the world.