Login

charlieconway · 09-12-2019, 02:38 PM

Unfortunately, some of the most productive players in the SMJHL belong to users that are inactive. Since IAs aren't eligible for awards, you're left with the natural third or fourth choice for mvp winning it, for example.
There's also a common situation where inactive players are getting ice time over active players, often rookies.

My suggestion:

A -40 total attribute penalty to players who don't post in a check-in thread before the season.

For example:

[Image: ZuqBq2I.jpg]

There would be a -5 stat penalty that gets applied to eight of the most globally important attributes for skaters. I'd imagine it would be similar for goalies, but I'm less familiar with what attributes are important for them so I'm not gonna try my hand at it right now.
If you're looking for a role-playing explanation for this, think of it as players that aren't putting their all into training and seeing their on-ice efforts deteriorate because of it.

A player would be free to remove the penalty any time just by updating during the season, therefore only hitting those that are truly inactive.

With any luck, we'd be left with more actives (and rookies at that) at the top of the leaderboards every season.

.bojo · 09-12-2019, 02:50 PM

i like this

crutch · 09-12-2019, 02:51 PM

actually not a bad idea

dmills3 · 09-12-2019, 03:29 PM

I like this, but I feel it should only apply to people above a certain TPE point. Say like anyone over 300 or 275 TPE. Anything below that and it would just make 3rd and 4th lines legit shitshows

ontanis · 09-12-2019, 03:37 PM

Yup. I like the idea! Really like the role-playing touch added. Would really fit into some of the real life narratives, like 1OAs becoming busts, i like that.

ml002 · 09-12-2019, 04:02 PM

dis is good idea goes with the theme of what Juniors is supposed to be

Credit to Copenhagen, Wasty, FlappyGiraffe, InciteHysteria, and caltroit_red_flames
[Image: MM4nqx6.png]

Eggy216 · 09-12-2019, 04:04 PM

***luke*** · 09-12-2019, 04:06 PM

This makes sense actually

***golden_apricot*** · 09-12-2019, 04:10 PM

09-12-2019, 03:29 PMdmills3 Wrote: I like this, but I feel it should only apply to people above a certain TPE point. Say like anyone over 300 or 275 TPE. Anything below that and it would just make 3rd and 4th lines legit shitshows

What if it scaled vs total TPE?

dmills3 · 09-12-2019, 04:13 PM

09-12-2019, 04:10 PMgolden_apricot Wrote:
09-12-2019, 03:29 PMdmills3 Wrote: I like this, but I feel it should only apply to people above a certain TPE point. Say like anyone over 300 or 275 TPE. Anything below that and it would just make 3rd and 4th lines legit shitshows

What if it scaled vs total TPE?

Absolutely

ArGarBarGar · 09-12-2019, 04:14 PM

SMJHL GMs who put inactives above actives don't understand the purpose of the league, imo.

Also I don't hate this.

Alonzo Garbanzo Final Tallies (Among Defensemen):
2nd in Goals (208), All-Time Assists Leader (765)*, All-Time Points Leader (973), 3rd in Hits (2587), All-Time Blocked Shots Leader (1882)*
*All-Time Leader Among All Skaters
Player Profile | Update Thread
[Image: IeEV7Iv.png]

uhh · 09-12-2019, 04:19 PM

Cosigned

Rublic · 09-12-2019, 04:25 PM

I lost an award to an inactive :S

Sean · 09-12-2019, 04:30 PM

EDM All-Time Leader in Goals, Assists and Points

BDonini · 09-12-2019, 04:38 PM

09-12-2019, 04:10 PMgolden_apricot Wrote:
09-12-2019, 03:29 PMdmills3 Wrote: I like this, but I feel it should only apply to people above a certain TPE point. Say like anyone over 300 or 275 TPE. Anything below that and it would just make 3rd and 4th lines legit shitshows

What if it scaled vs total TPE?

Still not a great idea...it's difficult to see it in Reddit seasons because most teams end up with many active or semi active rookies but as those players go up or go IA and we go through a few smaller drafts there will be some teams who need IA's just to fill their roster. If this applied to capped IA players it could possibly end up working.

Also need to take the new upcoming budget into account, players in the 201-350 TPE range need to be paid more than IA players in the 155-200 range...taking their attributes down would just create a situation where teams are paying more for players of the same level as players in the lower salary bracket so adjustments would need to be made there.

Finally, it would have to be a certain amount of TPE removed rather than a certain number of attributes since removing attributes affects players disproportionately. A player with a lot of stats in the 70s would be losing much more TPE than a player with most stats in the 60s if we're directly removing attributes.

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us