So this season, the Post Game Show format got a revamp. There was reason to be wary of a change to the system: no one reads PGS anyways, why does it matter how nice it is or whether it's a quality post? Let's compare PGS totals from last season to this season to see what has truly been changed. Also note, this season's PGS isn't completed, nor has the sing-up period ended (that deadline is the end of the season).

S28 PGS Totals

PGS signed up for = 38
PGS completed = 20
% completion = 52.6%
# of views total = 1217 views
Views/PGS = 43.5 views/PGS completed

S29 PGS Totals

PGS signed up for = 84
PGS completed = 51
% completion = 60.7%
# of views total = 1332 views
Views/PGS = 26.1 views/PGS completed

These numbers do need a bit of context. Here's how the system of PGS got revamped:

- Claims and PGS were switched from 2 game groupings to single games. This allowed more people to sign up for games. This also means that the number of PGS signed up for in S28 could effectively be doubled since each PGS was 2 games, which also cuts the # of views/PGS in half to count for each game.
- The grading of PGS was completely changed. Originally, all you had to do was meet the 300 word cap and type up a little synopsis of the game. The new system required telling the story of the game and taking 1 item from each of 3 groups posted and completing those items on top of the synopsis. Check the S29 PGS Thread for more info on the groups and new requirements[/URL]. The thought was to get new members acquainted with the game threads and to give veterans new reasons to care about PGS, with in-depth stats you can't just grab from 5 seconds of viewing the game thread.
- The new system could give you 2 TPE if you didn't meet expectations in the PGS. This was seen as controversial since this is a subjective grade for the most part, but the +2 TPE grade was used only in a few situations.
- The new system opened the PGS back up to send-down players, with the rule that if a rookie needed a game, a send-down would be kicked out. This rule never needed to be used since there are so many games available and the 15 TPE cap stayed.
- The new system opened up games by which "sim week" we were in. This meant that once Day 8 was simmed, Days 8-14 became available for claim. This goes against the traditional system opening availability for all the games at once, and meant active members claimed games throughout the season. If someone dropped off the face of the earth, they wouldn't hurt the PGS system in place.
- The implementation of the "sim week" also meant that you could claim games faster and hit the cap faster. I instituted a 2 games per "sim week" rule instead of the normal 2 PGS/IRL week from seasons' past. This measure was taken to keep things fast and see more immediate results, to drive activity throughout the season instead of just at the start of the week. You now had something to do in the middle of the week for TPE.
- Not sure how grading was done in the old system, but the new system implemented a separate TPE claim post to post your PGS link, your name, and the PBP managers would @ mention you and post your grade as an edit to your post whenever they were available to grade. Knowing me, that was usually around once a day at least. I picked this up as a banker editing posts in the team thread and thought it would be nice to keep on for stuff like this so that you don't have a shit ton of Updated posts clogging a claim thread, but I don't have to edit the main post every time and force updaters to double and triple check the user's update thread to see claims and caps and stuff.

So, with this in mind, what do the numbers mean?

- Viewership went up overall and per PGS submitted. This arguably leads to more interest in the SMJHL, sometimes regarded as the red-headed stepchild to the SHL but still the favorite cousin over the IIHF. Hopefully, this also gave SHL GMs the opportunity to see what each prospect brings to the table in terms of commitment to earning TPE and writing/GFX skill.
- More people are taking the opportunity to earn TPE, but that's also due to the PGS being opened to a wider group. Limiting TPE options is a popular thing in the SHL after the Inflation era and the "modern era" where TPE was everywhere, but the openness of PGS and only an extra 15 TPE per season for when you're a send-down could only give a player maybe 30 TPE advantage.
- Harsher grading standards led to higher quality material. The new system allowed for creativity and people took advantage of it, ranging from the SMJHL Today Podcast to graphics to ads sponsoring segments, to twists on assigned items in each group. This variety broke up some of the monotony from seeing each PGS last season being the same 300 word goal summary with a few GIFs each time out.
- From my place on high as the manager of the system, I could tell which teams were really active. The lil brigade over at the Knights accounted for a few of the players that reached the cap, meaning most of the Knights games were covered in the PGS thread. Here's a quick breakdown of games claimed for each team, keeping in mind that when someone says, "Sign me up for 2, IDK what 2" I always make sure to put them with their SMJHL team, and that I'm doing total number, not sorting out which team claimed games:
- 19
- 18
- 21
- 22
- 22
- 31
- 14
- 20
This clearly shows the Knights being the most active, with the Firebirds trailing far behind, all other things being equal. I tried to claim more of the early games first, and it seems that worked well and probably inflated some teams' numbers in games claimed.

Now for the crucial question: what needs to be changed?
- Keep the sim week availability schedule, but maybe limit it to 1 PGS per sim week to spread out the games covered. Just 14 of the 84 games claimed this season came after the 100 game mark for the SMJHL, and I'd like to see that spread out more. You still get your games fast, but it doesn't force you to spend all your time on early games.
- Raise the cap to 20. This allows active members more of a chance to stand out amongst the draft pool, but not by enough to drastically change things (maybe 10 - 20 TPE over the course of a career). It'd get us 2 more games for people that are aiming to cap out, so more games done and more activity as a result.
- Implement this system in the SHL. I think this could take off in the SHL because of more people actually caring about the content, more experienced users completing the PGS, and more stat mining taking place so we know more about the league and the players in general. This season has been a fun test run in the SMJHL, and I think it'll be better in the SHL with more critique and development of best practices.
- Have a more defined set of rules for minimums for the distinction between 2 and 3 TPE. I know this was an issue this season with the difference between a 2 TPE PGS and a 3 TPE PGS. I'm still a bit hazy on where the line is, because we don't want to make these too hard to where people are disinclined to do them, but not too easy to where no quality posts are generated. I'll work on this, and am asking for suggestions and discussion on this topic.
- From what I can tell, the process was more streamlined in terms of grading to updating. I got no PMs about updaters not understanding what the PGS posts were, people kept track of their caps, self-regulation went a long way.

I'm open to any suggestions and comments about the process, and encourage them. Thanks for a great season so far with this system, and don't forget, we still have until the end of the playoffs to get these done! Sign up here, and that first post should have all the information and links you need to complete more PGS! Thanks to <a href='index.php?showuser=2179' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-45'>Snuffalupagus</a> and <a href='index.php?showuser=2216' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-17'>CaptainCrazy</a> for helping me this season, couldn't have done it without you! Thank you all!

Code:

WC = 1500 words

EDIT: Gonna post questions and answers to remove some double questions and add to that sweet WC:

Originally posted by Eggy216+Jun 16 2016, 03:31 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1' id='QUOTE-WRAP'><tr><td>QUOTE (Eggy216 @ Jun 16 2016, 03:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I pretty much skimmed your post tbh, but I had two thoughts based on what I read.

1. How much did people outside of the SMJHL pay attention to these? Hell, I'm a GM and I didn't even read a single one. Is there any way to possibly get more reach beyond those writing them?

2. I think you need to be careful about raising the cap. You've already allowed send downs to do them which is going to contribute to TPE inflation. For those down for one send down season, that's +15. That doesn't even begin to cover players like Randleman sent down for 3 years (+45 TPE). Increasing the cap to 20 inflated those numbers to where a one year send down is seeing +25 more TPE than before, and a Randleman is seeing +65 TPE, which could factor greatly into potential inflation which we don't want to see after changing the scale.[/b]

I don't know. It sucks, but I have no clue. I think implementing this system in the SHL might help a little bit, and also solve the answer to #2. I'm assuming no one looks at them based off historical bias and, once they read some, would be more interested in the statistical analysis or podcasts produced from this. Again, it's my hope this becomes a league-wide thing.

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 04:25 PM<br />I don't think you understand what I mean by TPE inflation. Instituting it league wide would make the probably 10x worse. TPE inflation would happen if we increased the number of available opportunities/the amount of TPE available. Making this a league wide thing would make it so that (let's say in a ten year career) you're earning 150 to 200 TPE more than you were before. It completely defeats the purpose of the new build scale. Having send downs do them already risks moving closer in that direction, and increasing the cap/making it league-wide totally blows up TPE levels.

<a href='index.php?showuser=1322' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-45'>mpc</a>

Also true, didn't really think about it like that. So is having send-downs do PGS too much of an advantage or can that stay?

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 04:35 PM<br />You'd want to talk to more people than just me. It becomes an issue when you have like 3, 4, 5 year SMJHLers, but at the same time are those people really doing PGS/earning TPE anyway (except for people like Baller)

I'd argue it doesn't affect the build THAT much, but does help some. Let's say it's a 5 year SMJHLer. That's 75 TPE, but that happens what, 1 time per 10 seasons? Even with more 3 year send-downs, it's 45 TPE extra, doesn't kill anyone, not THAT big a difference.

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 04:44 PM<br />Personally I'd say either allow send downs to do them or increase the cap, but don't do both.

Then I'd say increase the cap, don't let send-downs do it. That gives all rookies an equal chance to get a larger TPE without inflating it. +6 TPE difference won't hurt anyone.

Originally posted by Toonces@Jun 16 2016, 04:40 PM<br />This draft class is a lot larger than last seasons, I'm sure that has something to do with it. It's cool to see more of these getting done but back in the day (s20 :lol it was nearly impossible to get these and they weren't as tedious and time consuming.

Also fair, it's judging between a summer and spring draft class, and we're not done yet for S29.

What part of the new PGS format is tedious, <a href='index.php?showuser=1290' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-10'>Toonces</a>?

Originally posted by Toonces@Jun 16 2016, 04:46 PM<br />The writer lacks freedom.

You have groups in which requirements are to be met in order to gain the full payout.

People should be able to be as creative as they want to be and not be forced to add something in that they may not have planned to do.

So maybe just make it you have to choose 3 from the list instead of 1 from 3 groups to allow for more freedom? The other side of this is we do need there to be a level of complexity to make the TPE worth the trouble.

Originally posted by Jenny@Jun 16 2016, 04:53 PM<br />i like this. i def would've rather just been able to pick three from the whole list rather than having to pick within the categories.

Done.

Originally posted by Jenny@Jun 16 2016, 04:52 PM<br />tbh I think all I'm seeing here is increased viewership/participation due to send-downs being able to do the PGSs as well. I totally liked that (biased bc as an SMJHL free agent i'm still trying to catch the active members of my draft class), and as someone who did both the old PGSs and the new, I thought the new version was slightly more fun and certainly allowed for flexibility (being able to do graphics, especially).

I think it would be pretty fun to have them league-wide, as they're interesting and less intensive than a full-on PBP, but ultimately impractical. That's with regard to TPE inflation, primarily, but also regarding this particular approach. I still don't think many people are going to scroll through a whole long PGS thread and read them when they can just look at the game sheet (I know I only read PGSs I was linked to by friends). Anything I can think of to fix this - each team has their own thread, the games have to go in order, the game sheet is linked in the PGS - is way too complicated. There would have to be a pretty dedicated PGS team to make that shit work - people complain about the PT team not being on top of their shit, so.

that said, you did a sick af job, <a href='index.php?showuser=1322' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-45'>mpc</a>. kudos.

That's fair, I can see how that's a reason for the inflated views, along with a summer class. I'm glad the new format offered more creative outlets and flexibility.

Yeah, the league-wide thing is a pipe dream tbh, sounds fun in my head but there are a ton of loops to jump through for it. I'm not sure what you're talking about with the each team has its own thread thing, but I agree that's stupid. Game sheet linking was a bit lax this season, and I mainly put that in to encourage people to do it, but I don't think I knocked anyone down for that. Yeah, games in order is idiotic too, need to do them as people can to promote the activity, not waiting.

<!--QuoteBegin-Bishop@Jun 16 2016, 04:57 PM
The issue with the nature of a post game show is you already know the results and likely only the winning team will have interest in reviewing it (or if you had a good game).

Ideas for more interest:

- PGS has to be completed prior to game results shown to general public

- SMJHL PT's should include information from these PGS's - for example: based on a PGS write a 200 word speech you would give your team after its win or loss, nclude 3-5 points the PGS author included in the PGS.

- Champions week PT's also need to include questions for these ( to help promote them)

- I personally feel raising the cap would get more done, but not increase how often these PGS's are viewed[/quote]

I agree that that's a drag, and removes some incentive. To address by point,

- Hard AF to coordinate, also makes things slower all around. I think we tried this once and it failed miserably. Great in theory, but impractical.

- Really like this tbh, makes them meaningful and gets more views.

- See #2

- I can see that viewpoint, but still agree the TPE cap should be raised.

too long, didn't read
ily you russian fuck

I pretty much skimmed your post tbh, but I had two thoughts based on what I read.

1. How much did people outside of the SMJHL pay attention to these? Hell, I'm a GM and I didn't even read a single one. Is there any way to possibly get more reach beyond those writing them?

2. I think you need to be careful about raising the cap. You've already allowed send downs to do them which is going to contribute to TPE inflation. For those down for one send down season, that's +15. That doesn't even begin to cover players like Randleman sent down for 3 years (+45 TPE). Increasing the cap to 20 inflated those numbers to where a one year send down is seeing +25 more TPE than before, and a Randleman is seeing +65 TPE, which could factor greatly into potential inflation which we don't want to see after changing the scale.

LW - Rainbow Dash - Updates
[img=0x0]https://i.imgur.com/eM6YKiW.gif[/img]
Rainbow Dash Fan S24-Present
SHL Commissioner S34-S52
New England Wolfpack GM S30-S40
Montreal Milita Co-GM S26-S29

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 03:31 PM
I pretty much skimmed your post tbh, but I had two thoughts based on what I read.

1. How much did people outside of the SMJHL pay attention to these? Hell, I'm a GM and I didn't even read a single one. Is there any way to possibly get more reach beyond those writing them?

2. I think you need to be careful about raising the cap. You've already allowed send downs to do them which is going to contribute to TPE inflation. For those down for one send down season, that's +15. That doesn't even begin to cover players like Randleman sent down for 3 years (+45 TPE). Increasing the cap to 20 inflated those numbers to where a one year send down is seeing +25 more TPE than before, and a Randleman is seeing +65 TPE, which could factor greatly into potential inflation which we don't want to see after changing the scale.

I don't know. It sucks, but I have no clue. I think implementing this system in the SHL might help a little bit, and also solve the answer to #2. I'm assuming no one looks at them based off historical bias and, once they read some, would be more interested in the statistical analysis or podcasts produced from this. Again, it's my hope this becomes a league-wide thing.

I don't think you understand what I mean by TPE inflation. Instituting it league wide would make the probably 10x worse. TPE inflation would happen if we increased the number of available opportunities/the amount of TPE available. Making this a league wide thing would make it so that (let's say in a ten year career) you're earning 150 to 200 TPE more than you were before. It completely defeats the purpose of the new build scale. Having send downs do them already risks moving closer in that direction, and increasing the cap/making it league-wide totally blows up TPE levels.

<a href='index.php?showuser=1322' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-45'>mpc</a>

LW - Rainbow Dash - Updates
[img=0x0]https://i.imgur.com/eM6YKiW.gif[/img]
Rainbow Dash Fan S24-Present
SHL Commissioner S34-S52
New England Wolfpack GM S30-S40
Montreal Milita Co-GM S26-S29

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 04:25 PM
I don't think you understand what I mean by TPE inflation. Instituting it league wide would make the probably 10x worse. TPE inflation would happen if we increased the number of available opportunities/the amount of TPE available. Making this a league wide thing would make it so that (let's say in a ten year career) you're earning 150 to 200 TPE more than you were before. It completely defeats the purpose of the new build scale. Having send downs do them already risks moving closer in that direction, and increasing the cap/making it league-wide totally blows up TPE levels.

<a href='index.php?showuser=1322' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-45'>mpc</a>

Also true, didn't really think about it like that. So is having send-downs do PGS too much of an advantage or can that stay?

Originally posted by mpc@Jun 16 2016, 05:33 PM


Also true, didn't really think about it like that. So is having send-downs do PGS too much of an advantage or can that stay?

You'd want to talk to more people than just me. It becomes an issue when you have like 3, 4, 5 year SMJHLers, but at the same time are those people really doing PGS/earning TPE anyway (except for people like Baller)

LW - Rainbow Dash - Updates
[img=0x0]https://i.imgur.com/eM6YKiW.gif[/img]
Rainbow Dash Fan S24-Present
SHL Commissioner S34-S52
New England Wolfpack GM S30-S40
Montreal Milita Co-GM S26-S29

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 04:35 PM


You'd want to talk to more people than just me. It becomes an issue when you have like 3, 4, 5 year SMJHLers, but at the same time are those people really doing PGS/earning TPE anyway (except for people like Baller)

I'd argue it doesn't affect the build THAT much, but does help some. Let's say it's a 5 year SMJHLer. That's 75 TPE, but that happens what, 1 time per 10 seasons? Even with more 3 year send-downs, it's 45 TPE extra, doesn't kill anyone, not THAT big a difference.

This draft class is a lot larger than last seasons, I'm sure that has something to do with it. It's cool to see more of these getting done but back in the day (s20 :lol it was nearly impossible to get these and they weren't as tedious and time consuming.

Originally posted by Toonces@Jun 16 2016, 04:40 PM
This draft class is a lot larger than last seasons, I'm sure that has something to do with it. It's cool to see more of these getting done but back in the day (s20 :lol it was nearly impossible to get these and they weren't as tedious and time consuming.

Also fair, it's judging between a summer and spring draft class, and we're not done yet for S29.

What part of the new PGS format is tedious, <a href='index.php?showuser=1290' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-10'>Toonces</a>?

Personally I'd say either allow send downs to do them or increase the cap, but don't do both.

LW - Rainbow Dash - Updates
[img=0x0]https://i.imgur.com/eM6YKiW.gif[/img]
Rainbow Dash Fan S24-Present
SHL Commissioner S34-S52
New England Wolfpack GM S30-S40
Montreal Milita Co-GM S26-S29

The writer lacks freedom.

You have groups in which requirements are to be met in order to gain the full payout.

People should be able to be as creative as they want to be and not be forced to add something in that they may not have planned to do.

Originally posted by Eggy216@Jun 16 2016, 04:44 PM
Personally I'd say either allow send downs to do them or increase the cap, but don't do both.

Then I'd say increase the cap, don't let send-downs do it. That gives all rookies an equal chance to get a larger TPE without inflating it. +5 TPE difference won't hurt anyone.

Originally posted by Toonces@Jun 16 2016, 04:46 PM
The writer lacks freedom.

You have groups in which requirements are to be met in order to gain the full payout.

People should be able to be as creative as they want to be and not be forced to add something in that they may not have planned to do.

So maybe just make it you have to choose 3 from the list instead of 1 from 3 groups to allow for more freedom? The other side of this is we do need there to be a level of complexity to make the TPE worth the trouble.

Originally posted by mpc@Jun 16 2016, 05:47 PM


Then I'd say increase the cap, don't let send-downs do it. That gives all rookies an equal chance to get a larger TPE without inflating it. +5 TPE difference won't hurt anyone.

Do +6. 21 would be 7 PGS @ 3 TPE each.

LW - Rainbow Dash - Updates
[img=0x0]https://i.imgur.com/eM6YKiW.gif[/img]
Rainbow Dash Fan S24-Present
SHL Commissioner S34-S52
New England Wolfpack GM S30-S40
Montreal Milita Co-GM S26-S29