GM Rant

[Flickered Flame]

Okay, so I know it has been discussed before but I wanted to bring it up once again.

If a fellow gm makes an offer, any offer and whether via email, pm, or over msn, it is common courtsey to respond. I know I don't always make great offers, but regardless I would still like a response. I have just sat around since Friday waiting for a response from another gm. Would the deal put me over the top...hell no but the point is I am trying to play this little game that we have happening here and it pisses me right off when I can't even get a yes or a no from another person playing the game. As I mentioned in my other thread, I don't care if you don't want to make the trade, it won't hurt my feelings if you say no but at least get back to me and say no.

I think the real issue for me with this one is that the response I got from my offer on Friday was that it was something this gm would consider.

Just respond to all offers, thanks.

Rant over.

[JiriHrdina]

Yup. Any GM that does this WILL be fired in the off-season. Show respect for your fellow GMs and take the time to respond. No excuse and no tolerance for this.

[KevanGuy]

I feel like adding to the rant thread...this deadline SUCKED!

[JiriHrdina]

What sucked was my boss calling me at 10 and telling me to meet him at the office, taking me off MSN the deadline passed.

Now THAT sucked.

'Course didn't feel comfortable telling him "sorry boss I can't meet you at the office because its deadline day in my fantasy league...you know the one that you catch me on all the time during office hours".

[MJK]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

What sucked was my boss calling me at 10 and telling me to meet him at the office, taking me off MSN the deadline passed.

Now THAT sucked.

'Course didn't feel comfortable telling him "sorry boss I can't meet you at the office because its deadline day in my fantasy league...you know the one that you catch me on all the time during office hours".

You need to get your priorities straight!

[flambers]

Originally Posted by KevanGuy

I feel like adding to the rant thread...this deadline SUCKED!

I agree, one of the worst deadlines that I can remember in CPHL.

[Sylvanfan]

Well the longer GM's have been around, the less likely they are to make deals. Lets face it we have a lot of GM's who are on their 2nd-3rd year with their team and they are trying to build something. As a result the trading slows down a bit. Because a majority of the trades in the past have been experience GM's robbing the new guys blind. Fewer new GM's to rob blind = less trades.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Well the longer GM's have been around, the less likely they are to make deals. Lets face it we have a lot of GM's who are on their 2nd-3rd year with their team and they are trying to build something. As a result the trading slows down a bit. Because a majority of the trades in the past have been experience GM's robbing the new guys blind. Fewer new GM's to rob blind = less trades.

Not to sure, I have been around for 4 Season ..... each year the Rangers are very active.... I make good trades and I made really bad trades....one of my worst was with Cheese.... but the Rangers have made the Playoffs every year.......

This year I made around 50 trades or so (full year).

I find some teams love to trade others do not.........

[looooob]

Originally Posted by flambers

Not to sure, I have been around for 4 Season ..... each year the Rangers are very active.... I make good trades and I made really bad trades....one of my worst was with Cheese.... but the Rangers have made the Playoffs every year.......

This year I made around 50 trades or so (full year).

I find some teams love to trade others do not.........

that's true, but in the earlier days of this league there were always alot of GMs that weren't expecting to be around for the long haul, or didn't think in that way, so made alot of sell the farm type of deals

now with almost everyone having a committment to the league, even the guys who like to trade alot, still do so with the future at least partly in mind

an added focus this year, was in our conference at least, the 8 playoff teams have been set forever...so you had very few bubble teams looking to 'go for it'

I tried to move my pending UFAs and make other deals that made sense, but for the most part people wanted my good young players...I'm out of the playoffs...why trade them, now?

[flambers]

Originally Posted by looooob

that's true, but in the earlier days of this league there were always alot of GMs that weren't expecting to be around for the long haul, or didn't think in that way, so made alot of sell the farm type of deals

now with almost everyone having a committment to the league, even the guys who like to trade alot, still do so with the future at least partly in mind

an added focus this year, was in our conference at least, the 8 playoff teams have been set forever...so you had very few bubble teams looking to 'go for it'

I tried to move my pending UFAs and make other deals that made sense, but for the most part people wanted my good young players...I'm out of the playoffs...why trade them, now?

I hope the activity can pick up again next season, as its a key element for this league.

Especially with the SIM I find all a team needs to do is to make a trade or two (or ten... ) and you never know if the new player will click with the SIM. Sometimes thats the difference from winning or losing....

[JiriHrdina]

I think the point about long-term GMs is a good one, and ultimately having GMs stick around longer can only be a good thing.

I do think there are some other factors though that limit movement, including
- ratings are clumped. Teams didn't have a need for Jan Hrdina (for instance) because pretty much everyone has guys like that on their fourth line already
- UFA status. Guys that are pending UFAs don't have great value and are difficult to move.
- Lots of teams rebuilding.

I think the league always should have a mix of Gms in terms of trade activity. Having a league full of rampant traders would kinda suck too. The questions that must be posed are....are teams open to even talking deal? If not why? Is it an issue with that GM? Or are there rules/situations in place that are discouraging trade discussion?

[looooob]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I do think there are some other factors though that limit movement, including
- ratings are clumped. Teams didn't have a need for Jan Hrdina (for instance) because pretty much everyone has guys like that on their fourth line already
?

I think this is a good point...(not the Hrdina part, I never really expected to move him, although depth for the playoffs, especially when the guys salary is paid, always a good thing, but i digress...)

the ratings clumping is an issue moving forward

seems like most new players that show up on the scene get a 69-71 OV...whereas guys (and I'll use some of my own players for example purposes like Pratt and Taylor who are veterans with multiple stanley cup rings (and yes I know Taylor is a clown) are still stuck at 70 or 71 ov rankings themselves)

seems like (usually rightly so) once a veteran player gets an OV score it doesn't change much (other than slowly goes down usually correctly so), so you have established NHL veterans sitting at 70 OVs and now bubble/cup of coffee guys show up and are 70 OVs also

I think that if this could be fixed somehow (and I'm not really sure how) it might enhance dealing (or maybe it won't, I dunno)

[HelloHockeyFans]

I agree with the sentiment that the current crop of GMs are in for the long-haul and are trying to stick to a plan.

Personally, there are a group of GMs I usually go to first if I'm trying to move some one. Reason being that in the past, these are the GMs who I've felt were looking for a deal that would help both clubs... and I know for certain I'm not the only GM who feels this way.

Some teams, I never talk to when I'm looking to deal. Sometimes, because my habit is to always look at a team's roster beforehand and come up with some sort of offer before talking to them, and in this process, find that there isn't a fit that I see... and sometimes, because frankly, the offers I've received from them in the past are insulting.

In general though, I thought the deadline action was adequate. Maybe not as much as in the past, but for the high seeds already in the playoffs who have found something that works, why fix it if it isn't broke? As mentioned, SIM chemistry is a pretty funny thing, and slight tweaks to a roster can really mess that up real good. So the chemistry thing works both ways.

[Mango]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I think the league always should have a mix of Gms in terms of trade activity. Having a league full of rampant traders would kinda suck too. The questions that must be posed are....are teams open to even talking deal? If not why? Is it an issue with that GM? Or are there rules/situations in place that are discouraging trade discussion?

Although I'll admit I've never been a huge trader, I have other philosophies that I try to build around. I've always thought chemistry is a huge part of having a successful team. KG and I were talking last night and he mentioned that I had an odd selection of players on my team. It's true.

I'm always willing to discuss trades but my reactions stem from the way I'm approach. For instance, asking for one of my better players and offering to send me 3 duds and 1 draft picks out of the blue isn't going to be received well. I try to have my tradeblock updated on a frequent basis and hopefully from there, trade talk can be generated. I don't mind if a GM asks about a player not on my tradeblock, but I think it is common curiosity to drop the discussion if the one GM says that player isn't available at that time. I think there has to be more dedication spent on updating the tradeblock and/or posting about player movement.

One thing I really liked was the GMs who got involved on the trading deadline with their posts. I loved Protto's blog idea and thought it got everyone posting. Great stuff!

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by looooob

I think that if this could be fixed somehow (and I'm not really sure how) it might enhance dealing (or maybe it won't, I dunno)

Basically there is need to spread the ratings out. Move the top end up, move the bottom end down, and spread out the middle.

The solution is actually really straightforward. Implementation of that solution though would be a pretty big task.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Mango

I think there has to be more dedication spent on updating the tradeblock and/or posting about player movement.

One thing I really liked was the GMs who got involved on the trading deadline with their posts. I loved Protto's blog idea and thought it got everyone posting. Great stuff!

Great points. One of the simple things that Dave does all the time that has made him a good Gm is he lets the entire league knows when he is dealing a guy - and then he lets them know again.

Is it shameless promotion of his own players? You're darn right. But it sure does stimulate trade.

I loved the blogs too - great idea on deadline day.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Basically there is need to spread the ratings out. Move the top end up, move the bottom end down, and spread out the middle.

The solution is actually really straightforward. Implementation of that solution though would be a pretty big task.

Yeah right now our range for all intensive purposes is about 10 OV points Everyone seems to be clumped from 70 to 80 with a few superstar types being above 80. I think the top end is okay as is, but the bottom end needs to be looked at? Perhaps it needs to be expanded to like 15 sot that the low end roster guys are 65 and most AHL'ers are 60.

Like you say easy theory to devise....but a lot of work to implement.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Mango

One thing I really liked was the GMs who got involved on the trading deadline with their posts. I loved Protto's blog idea and thought it got everyone posting. Great stuff!

yah I second that, I really liked to read the BLOGs that was a great idea....

[flambers]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Basically there is need to spread the ratings out. Move the top end up, move the bottom end down, and spread out the middle.

The solution is actually really straightforward. Implementation of that solution though would be a pretty big task.

The other item to consider is do the OV's matter at all...... . Some of the internet site have people that claim OV's are missleading and do very little.

Its the individual attributes that really count....

No idea if this theory is true or not....

[Sample00]

prottotype's head from all the accolades