CPHL Currency Analysis - Update - Dec 2015

[Swayze11]

I am not saying it makes your team better in the sim. I know for many GMs, results are such a minor factor in this league - it is about trading. When 5 teams control a significant portion of the wealth, it limits trading partners for the lower teams. That is all this data proves.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Swayze11

I am not saying it makes your team better in the sim. I know for many GMs, results are such a minor factor in this league - it is about trading. When 5 teams control a significant portion of the wealth, it limits trading partners for the lower teams. That is all this data proves.

Weird. I think the results are the main thing. I guess I can understand why some GMs would be happy running a team with players they like and finishing 30th, but I think that is rare. Most of us want to win the cup.

[Swayze11]

Its a secondary factor to the game. I know the most fun I have is trading, drafting, etc. Obviously I care about results but the results are secondary to me for enjoyment in this game.

[TurdFerguson]

I applaud Hesla for his efforts in this exercise. It something incredibly hard to do and never perfect.

with that in mind, the biggest thing that jumps out at me is that a) RFA vs UFA status are not factored in at all b) there is not enough value differentiation within youth.

couple examples.
Vorachek = Doan value wise (2). one is 25 years old and 77ov. the other is 38 and 70ov. This leads to a misrepresentation of value as, in this case, Vorachek has significantly more value then doan - probably by a factor of 3 or 4. This would make teams filled with playable soon to be retied players look as strong as a team filled with pre 25 rated players. we all know how that value really looks.

Risotlainen should be in the echl right now but i signed him because hes playable at 74. I took a 1 point value hit for doing this, when in reality i probably gained value. as a result, teams forced or choosing to sign players early because of depth are taking a ratings hit for this when in reality the value likely doesn't change often.

not picking on this, as i said its incredibly hard to do and impossible to get perfect. I think its amazing that someone took a stab at it. My overall observation is that high-performing youth are not valued as highly as they are in actual trades. Also, value needs a larger range then 1-3 as i don't feel there is enough room on the spectrum to factor in things like RFA vs UFA vs OLD or RFA 4th line kid vs RFA non-all star (or all-star for that matter).

I'd also point out that there should be zero correlation between asset value and sim success. We all know these are two totally different things (for some reason). Strong value team <> strong sim team..which is both good and bad but certainly allows people to play the game very differently.

/2 cents

[Knut]

Originally Posted by Slava

Sure, sim luck is one factor, but there is no correlation between winning sim games and having this "currency score". This is confirmation bias in action, where we all assume that having these pieces makes your team better, but the evidence is spotty at best.

The Currency of the league is young guys and first rounders. That is why it is weighted the way it is. High Currency teams could have a tonne of young up and coming talent, and very little at the NHL level. Guys on cheap ELC contracts, top draft picks and elite players garner the best returns. It is not supposed to be a reflection of the standings. It is a reflection of the amount of assets a team has to make moves with.

Jagr gets a 1 because he can be dealt at the deadline for the equivalent of a 2nd round pick (which is also a 1).

Non-lottery firsts are worth 2 points, but if you draft smart then you can pick up top 25 prospects (worth 3) and increase the currency score.

A way to lose the currency is to wait to long to trade players. Take Spezza for example... He was worth 3 5 seasons ago, is now a 2 and once he becomes a high contract UFA in his late 30's he would be worth a 1. Pat should have moved him 5 seasons ago when his value was highest.

I should really create a 4 categeory though for guys like Crosby, McDavid and lottery picks.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by TurdFerguson

I applaud Hesla for his efforts in this exercise. It something incredibly hard to do and never perfect.

with that in mind, the biggest thing that jumps out at me is that a) RFA vs UFA status are not factored in at all b) there is not enough value differentiation within youth.

couple examples.
Vorachek = Doan value wise (2). one is 25 years old and 77ov. the other is 38 and 70ov. This leads to a misrepresentation of value as, in this case, Vorachek has significantly more value then doan - probably by a factor of 3 or 4. This would make teams filled with playable soon to be retied players look as strong as a team filled with pre 25 rated players. we all know how that value really looks.

Risotlainen should be in the echl right now but i signed him because hes playable at 74. I took a 1 point value hit for doing this, when in reality i probably gained value. as a result, teams forced or choosing to sign players early because of depth are taking a ratings hit for this when in reality the value likely doesn't change often.

not picking on this, as i said its incredibly hard to do and impossible to get perfect. I think its amazing that someone took a stab at it. My overall observation is that high-performing youth are not valued as highly as they are in actual trades. Also, value needs a larger range then 1-3 as i don't feel there is enough room on the spectrum to factor in things like RFA vs UFA vs OLD or RFA 4th line kid vs RFA non-all star (or all-star for that matter).

I'd also point out that there should be zero correlation between asset value and sim success. We all know these are two totally different things (for some reason). Strong value team <> strong sim team..which is both good and bad but certainly allows people to play the game very differently.

/2 cents

I factor in contracts a bit with UFAs. I struggled with Voracek, but he is having such a crappy NHL season that i think his value drops a bit. Doan probably should have been a 1 .

If we upped the value of youth it would actually make the graph more dramatically different.

I want to up the value range (1 to 5 maybe) but i wanted this one the same as the last for comparison purposes.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Hesla

I am very curious with the big crunch Grant is going to feel this offseason. I think he has 8 Guys coming off of his ECHL needing AHL contracts. That means he has 8 guys that have to move out of the AHL/CPHL. Teams should start circling now.

Yup. This was something I was already aware of - anticipating hard decisions next season. I'll have to move out some quality guys. A sub-set of those ECHLers will actually need to go on the main roster so it won't just be AHL prospects moving out, but CPHL players. On D alone I'm going to have to move someone really good. Jones needs a spot and I have EK, Faulk, Klingberg, Reily, Lindholm and Dekeyser. One of those guys will have to go.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by Swayze11

Its a secondary factor to the game. I know the most fun I have is trading, drafting, etc. Obviously I care about results but the results are secondary to me for enjoyment in this game.

I think this is an important point. People enjoy the game for different reasons. For some it is all about trading. For others it is about seeking out and finding sim chemistry - and winning in the sim. For others a balance of both. This alone makes it challening when considering the core rules of the league.

[Hanna Sniper]

I am one that absolutely dreads the trading process. I like trading but negotiating part of the game makes me want to quit on more then a few occasions... seriously close. It's not just a league thing, I don't do very well with salesman and am much happier soul paying suggested retail price on anything I'm purchasing

manipulating the sim is my greatest enjoyment of the game (even the frustration of loosing is enjoyable)

[SportsJunky]

I think it's very easy to come across as obnoxious or dismissive in trade negotiations. I've probably done it myself although I try not to. I just had a GM turn down a trade offer I made and he did it in a nice way but to myself I'm thinking "geez, and I thought I was over paying with that offer". Hard not to feel like a dummy sometimes. I always try to thank them and keep it amicable so that we can try again sometime down the road possibly.