Create Account

The FHM Cheat Guide - Examining What Makes an Elite Player
#1

In this article, we are going to take an extra-deep dive into what exactly make certain players top performers each season and break down their builds in excruciatingly small details. The index has been designed so lovely that it records not only each single players statistic line for each season, but it also saves their exact build for every individual season as well. I have made a rather large spreadsheet explaining all of these statistics and what exactly they mean to the prospective "game-changers" of the SHL, and you will see some screenshots of that in just a moment, but here is the very short guideline I created and followed to generate a list of applicable players / seasons to study:

- Season 53 through Season 66 (all of the seasons saved on the current FHM index)
- The leading point and goal scorers from each season, plus anyone who scored 95+ points.
- ... with the exception of Season 66, just the points / goals leaders from there (I didn't include the rest of the group since there were so many, and with it being the first season in FHM8, it may skew the results as an outlier.)


And that's literally it. From that small guideline, I was able to narrow down my study to just 26 individual performances over the past 14 seasons, with a couple players making multiple appearances (you will see the list just below.) What is the ultimate goal here? I know the meta stands firm on what exactly are the strongest attributes to focus on when building the solid foundation, but is there anything we are missing? That is the single focus of this article and deep dive; to maybe find a common thread among all of our league's top performers. With that being said, here is the list of players & their respective seasons I will be covering:

[Image: 3jaX9Gs.png]

More than just a couple future Hall of Famers on that list, and rightfully so. You will see all of their individual performances and builds shortly, but first I want to preface this by saying that the first four seasons in this study (Seasons 53,54,55,56) still fell under the old 50-game seasons. I have added some statistics and fail-safes to prove a few things and level the playing field along the way, but it's a key point that I will return to later on in the article. Also keep in mind that this past season (Season 66) was the first one with the new engine, FHM8. It's likely too soon to make a determination if that has skewed results at all, but it's something worth noting. Let's get started.


GOALS
Ryuuji Minamino - 60 (Season 62)
Mats Marner - 51 (Season 64)
Luukas Lilja/Mats Marner/Mitchell van der Heijden - 49 (Seasons 66/66/60)


We will start off with a banger group of players, with Marner making his first (of many) multiple showings. With the increase in the length of seasons starting in Season 57, naturally more goals are going to occur, so this isn't exactly the strongest statistic to start off with. With all of that being said, it's still wildly impressive to say the least. Averaging out the build from each of these players through their respective seasons I was able to tell a few things, and we'll go over the three highest attributes to begin with. The three highest, in order, were Puckhandling, Strength, and Getting Open (well the last two were technically tied, but we'll go with those as the top three.) For the sake of my experiment, it doesn't really bode well trying to find "new things" because these are literally the meta build pillars. Although I did find Passing and Balance really high up there as well, as you'll see just below. For the sake of sanity, I'm going to almost completely disregard Fighting in this piece just because only 1 player had anything other than 5 in it (Karl Krashwagen, go figure.) The lowest attributes were Shotblocking, Shooting Range, and Positioning. The first two I can understand, since they were too busy scoring goals to be bothered with defensive work, but the third one was a bit of a surprise. It does fall under defensive ratings though, so maybe I'm overthinking it a little bit. Alright, below you have all five seasons averaged out into a single build:

Code:
Offensive Ratings
Screening: 14.8
Getting Open: 18.8
Passing: 18.2
Puckhandling: 19.4
Shooting Accuracy: 17.2
Shooting Range: 11.6
Offensive Read: 18.6

Defensive Ratings
Checking: 18.6
Hitting: 14.2
Positioning: 13.6
Stickchecking: 17
Shot Blocking: 11
Faceoffs: N/A
Defensive Read: 17.6

Physical Ratings
Acceleration: 17
Agility: 15.4
Balance: 18.2
Speed: 16.2
Stamina: 17.2
Strength: 18.8

GOALS PER GAME
Ryuuji Minamino - .91 (Season 62)
Theo Morgan - .86 (Season 56)
Flacko Lagerfield/Ola Wagstrom - .84 (Seasons 54/53)


Blast from the past, huh? We'll give the third place finishers their glory here in just a moment, but I think we should all take a moment to realize just how absurd Minamino's Season 62 was. I'm sure there's some history prior to Season 53 that makes it look dull at best, but it was truly a remarkable season for him and blew the modern goals record clear out of the water. Maybe someone can correct me, but is that the closest anyone has ever come to scoring 1 goal per game for an entire season? Anyway. Not to take away from Morgan's or Wagstrom's incredible careers, but Flacko's Season 54 was almost as absurd in a completely different way, which we'll touch on in just a bit. Falling almost in line with the overall goal leaders, it seems the top three attributes this time are Puckhandling, Getting Open, and Offensive Read. It looks like Passing took a tumble down the cliffside where Balance hung on a bit tighter. What's interesting to note here, however, is that it seems the increase in Offensive Ratings was supplemented primarily from the decrease in Physical Ratings. They were willing to sacrifice a bit of their physical build to supplement the offense, namely Balance and Strength, while maintaining a solid defensive structure. The lowest three attributes here are Shotblocking, Shooting Range, and Hitting. Below you can find the averaged build from these four performances:

Code:
Offensive Ratings
Screening: 14.5
Getting Open: 19.5
Passing: 16.25
Puckhandling: 18.75
Shooting Accuracy: 18.25
Shooting Range: 11
Offensive Read: 18.75

Defensive Ratings
Checking: 16.75
Hitting: 12
Positioning: 13.25
Stickchecking: 15.75
Shot Blocking: 8.75
Faceoffs: N/A
Defensive Read: 16.75

Physical Ratings
Acceleration: 17.5
Agility: 14.75
Balance: 16.75
Speed: 16.5
Stamina: 16.5
Strength: 16.25

POINTS
Luukas Lilja - 107 (Season 66)
Ryuuji Minamino - 106 (Season 62)
Aaron Wilson - 104 (Season 61)


Minamino keeps his streak alive so far, coming in at a cool 2nd place for most points within the last 13 seasons. Much like the goals category we covered first, overall points is a little subjective considering some of the seasons lasted just 50 games vice the 66 we see now. Regardless of that motion, Lilja takes the top spot with a record-breaking 107 in just this past season. When it comes to the attributes, we finally get to see just a little parity here with the leaders being Puckhandling (as is tradition), along with Checking and Strength. O-Read, Getting Open, and Balance make a strong case for 4th/5th/6th but it seems like being able to soundly play all 200ft of ice generates offensive chances. Not only that, but being able to muscle your way around the ice seems to help as well. The lowest three stats we see here are Shotblocking and Shooting Range (to nobody's surprise), along with Positioning. While it seems like a complete 200ft game is the key to amassing the absolute most points as possible, it comes as a bit of a surprise that Positioning (a defensive ability) falls right near the bottom of the priority list when building. Here's the average build for the three seasons listed above:

Code:
Offensive Ratings
Screening: 15.3
Getting Open: 18.6
Passing: 18.3
Puckhandling: 19.6
Shooting Accuracy: 17
Shooting Range: 11
Offensive Read: 18.6

Defensive Ratings
Checking: 19
Hitting: 15.3
Positioning: 13.3
Stickchecking: 17
Shot Blocking: 9.6
Faceoffs: N/A
Defensive Read: 17.6

Physical Ratings
Acceleration: 17
Agility: 14
Balance: 18.6
Speed: 14.6
Stamina: 17.6
Strength: 19.3

POINTS PER GAME
Flacko Lagerfield - 1.68 (Season 54)
Theo Morgan - 1.64 (Season 56)
Luukas Lilja - 1.62 (Season 66)


And this is why Lagerfield's Season 54 might be one of the greatest seasons of all time. Simply put; the sheer number of points the man amassed in just a 50 game season is absurd, it may be the closest we will ever see to someone scoring 2.0 PPG for an entire season. Has anyone come closer than this? Maybe someone reading will have some insight into the ancient SHL times. Anywho, we move on to the last categorical breakdown before I go into some fancy charts down below. As you can tell, this is calculated so it doesn't matter whether it was a 50 or 66 game season. We see some interesting parity here with the top attributes now coming in as Offensive Read, with a three-way tie for second with Getting Open, Puckhandling, and Shooting Accuracy. What I'd like to point out here is the sheer drop-off that Strength experienced just moving from sheer points to, points-per-game. Is it due to the older seasons from Lagerfield and Morgan? They do have the lowest points in them between the three, with 15 and 17 respectively. There may be an argument here that sacrificing points from Strength (an undoubtedly strong attribute) to supplement more offensive-minded attributes could generate even more offense than previously thought.

Code:
Offensive Ratings
Screening: 12.3
Getting Open: 18
Passing: 17
Puckhandling: 18
Shooting Accuracy: 18
Shooting Range: 10.6
Offensive Read: 18.3

Defensive Ratings
Checking: 16.3
Hitting: 11.6
Positioning: 14
Stickchecking: 16.3
Shot Blocking: 8
Faceoffs: N/A
Defensive Read: 16.6

Physical Ratings
Acceleration: 16.6
Agility: 15.3
Balance: 17.3
Speed: 16
Stamina: 16.3
Strength: 16.6

Offensive Ratings Side-by-Side
[Image: 2hwZM7y.png]

Alright so let's take a look at this from a different perspective, first from the Offensive Ratings side. Clearly the meta still dominates here, with Puckhandling and Getting Open reaching right near the peak of TPE earnings, with Offensive Read just behind them. The general correlation between them all is undeniable and really kind of expected, but the Goals and Points paths are nearly identical... they're literally overlapped the entire time. You do see a small sample-size of parity looking at Screening and Passing in particular, but it's really not that far off. I think too many people fall into the categories of "will Screening even help me?" and "why add Passing if I'm going to try and score goals anyway?" for these two to find exact results up and down the league. I do find it interesting, however, that Shooting Accuracy is lower for Point and Goal scorers, indicating that sheer mass amounts of opportunity may outweigh the ability to actually be accurate.

Defensive Ratings Side-by-Side
[Image: iOHpDqu.png]

So when writing this article, or even thinking of how I would approach this topic, I went into it thinking there would be a pretty obvious correlation between Goals and Goals per Game... and the same thing for Points and Points per Game, just out of sheer judgement and obviousness. After throwing all of this data into a spreadsheet and the graph, it has turned almost 180 degrees on me. Much like you see on the Offensive side of things, Goals and Points are nearly overlapped as they traverse from one statistic to the next (this time is a little different, but the point stands). However, GPG and PPG have put far less effort into the defensive side of the game when compared to their counterparts. Now there's a lot you can read from this, and I want to leave it open for possible discussion, but I will throw in my two cents into why/how this is. GPG and PPG are more long-term and sustained efforts over a season, in theory, whereas pure Goals and Points can be derived from mass amounts of scoring in a shorter period of time. Assuming those are both true, you might assume that a player dedicated to only producing effectively on one half of the ice (offensive zone) would produce more output. Just spit balling here, what is everyone's takeaway from this?

Physical Ratings Side-by-Side
[Image: q3NNPZr.png]

Again, here we see the alignment remain (roughly) the same between Goals and Points, where GPG and PPG right nearly an identical line this time. I feel like the Physicality Ratings in FHM have really been an enigma since we made the transition from STHS, because they seemed to be so heavily relied upon back then (along with Defense, of course). It has, however, been pretty widely accepted that Agility and Speed don't really buy you much in the case of the engine. We haven't touched on this yet either, but it is also worth noting that GPG and PPG do not have as much TPE to allocate as the Goals and Points players do. For the sake of my sanity, I did NOT dig through old update threads to play with those numbers, but it is interesting to see that sustained superior performance on the ice (technically) does not mean superior TPE earnings. These players could've even peaked while in regression (maybe someone can look that up for me?) Either way, I think the biggest takeaways from the breakdown include:

1. Highest TPE totals do not always match highest output.
2. The meta is strong, but it does not dominate 100% of the time.
3. Evenly dispersed TPE proves effective in the long run, but most players don't play that until regression hits.
4. Front-loading one of Offensive/Defensive/Physicality does technically work but may damage overall team results.

Complete Builds Side-by-Side
[Image: hZSayPv.png]

Alright so here I just put the complete builds together in a side-by-side comparason, instead of breaking it down by each section. I've still drew a line where each ratings section ends and the next one begins (Offensive, Defensive, and Physical in that order.) This is probably the best graphic in the entire article IMO, just because you can see the complete scope of what attributes each individual build focused on, and where exactly they fell out when compared to the others. All fifteen seasons studied here followed generally the same path, with a little bit of parity to note on the Physical Ratings, and maybe even a bit on the Offensive side of the house as well. I think the reason we see the majority of players following the same trend Defensively is because that is, in theory, what broke STHS and forced the switch to FHM. It's what we're all familiar with, so it's naturally that we're going to follow what we know (albeit completely different from the old engine.)

What does the "Ideal Build" look like?
[Image: bu93zUj.png]

So here I had a little fun and averaged out all 26 individual seasons to come up with the "ideal build", not just the 15 we've focused on leading up to this point. As expected, it seems like most of the top-tier successful players in the SHL follow roughly the same path as our best-of-the-best group. While it tends to float right in the middle of the four main categories for the most part, you can actually tell at times it gravitates more towards the Goals/Points group rather than the GPG/PPG ones. I think the question to ask now is, does that actually indicate a better-performing build, or just a more popular one? I'm not going to post exact numbers from the complete 26-season average, but the highest attribute totals for this were Getting Open, Puckhandling, and Offensive Read... right in the wheelhouse of the meta. Just missing the podium for 4th/5th/6th by literally fractions of a point were Strength, Balance, and Defensive Read.

While the meta continues to dominate, and likely will for the foreseeable future, Strength/Balance/Defensive Read sitting just on the bubble may indicate there may be more to FHM that we just haven't discovered yet when assessing to the absolute best / most successful build possible.

LET'S GET CONSPIRACAL

Alright, so let's take a moment and think about something. Suppose that TPE has absolutely nothing to do with success... suppose how successful your player is in the engine is entirely dependant on what his name is? Yes that's correct, we're going to quickly break down what letters are the most popular among the highest scoring seasons since Season 53. I've found a "letter frequency" calculator online and plugged in all of our players' names into there to determine which letters are the most popular. Behind, the untold secret of FHM:

Code:
A: 26
R: 22
L: 19
O: 17
I: 16
N: 16
E: 15
M: 11
S: 10
U: 9
H: 9
K: 8
G: 7
D: 7
C: 7
T: 6
B: 6
F: 6
Y: 5
J: 4
V: 4
W: 3
P: 1

So there's actually some pretty surprising results here, including that the letter "K" was used eight times in total, whereas the letters Q/X/Z were the only ones not used at all in the small study. "U" is the least used of all the vowels, and "P" being used the least of all the consonants (that were actually used, that is). A/R dominated the least by a pretty sizable margin, to the surprise of really nobody.

FINAL THOUGHTS?

So I posted a few times above & throughout the article on my actual findings, but overall, I think this was a super successful deep-dive into what actually makes an elite-level player so successful. There's obviously a meta build that proves very successful in the FHM sim, but there's definitely room for experimentation and improvement upon those attributes. That's even been proven by a few players within that 26-season group, so there's certainly room for more than one dominant build in the engine.

Code:
Words: 2,700+, six charts, and an insane amount of research.

Player Page || Update Page

[Image: a5C9JXf.png]



CERTIFIED THREAD KILLER
MONTREAL IMPACT FOREVER
Reply
#2

wtf slay king

[Image: OzriPox.png]


Player Page - Update Page





artermis,Feb 2 2017, 04:11 PM Wrote:9gag pretty lit tho
Reply
#3

Amazing article

[Image: 65151_s.gif]





[Image: Tqabyfh.png] [Image: OOcGSpM.png]
Reply
#4
(This post was last modified: 09-15-2022, 12:10 PM by Chevy.)

Whoa.

*edit: Also 3k post hype!*
Reply
#5

09-15-2022, 12:09 PMChevy Wrote: Whoa.

*edit:  Also 3k post hype!*

You're no longer allowed to post, sorry

PatriotesUsaWhalers



[Image: CampinKiller.gif]





Reply
#6

Good work

[Image: sIjpJeQ.png]





Reply
#7

This was an incredible read! I think what's interesting looking at Marner's build in this case study is that the best seasons have come deeper into regression being around 1.6-1.7k tpe rather than around 2k with higher stats

[Image: apSD6uj.gif]
[Image: leafsftw1967.gif] 


Malamutes  Stars Malamutes  Stars
Reply
#8

decent media I guess, next time put some pie charts

[Image: ROZESIG.png?ex=65571031&is=65449b31&hm=9...height=654]
Reply
#9

Great job! I will look at that when I recreate as a forward Tongue

[Image: SyiOY8U.png]
[Image: un22.png] [Image: 5tu6.png]
Reply
#10

i made the test group lets gooo

[Image: arTbD7O.png]

Germany Berserkers Stampede Stars Barracuda syndicate
Reply
#11

sucks the way the meta developed, checking should be down with hitting/positioning if you were actually trying to make a 1-dimensional sniper

[Image: unknown.png]



UsaScarecrowsBlizzardSpecters | [Image: specterspp.png][Image: spectersupdate.png] | TimberArmadaSpectersFinland

[Image: cainbanner_35.jpg]
Reply
#12

brb, recreating as Loraine Arlo for maximum letter positivity.

[Image: Zoone16.gif]


[Image: 9QVaMRC.png] [Image: canybyK.png] [Image: sXDU6JX.png]
Reply
#13
(This post was last modified: 09-16-2022, 04:01 PM by spooked. Edited 1 time in total.)

Good article, but the downfall is always that the league has already settled what the meta is and it would need to have a full overhaul in thinking of the site to produce useful information. Everyone is building the same (and the update scale somewhat enforces this through efficiency), so the results will of course say "this build is the best" cause everyone is using that build or something extremely close.

We would need much more variety in how the update scale/builds work to really have things that are different so we can compare, which is basically a player role world that for some reason we moved away from. It would be cool if we actually had some speed and agility builds in the league or builds with a weakness on either physicals/defensives/offensive attributes so people aren't all just "good all rounders" pretty much across the board with very minor differences.
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.