Alphasim Hockey le jeu de hockey simulé sur le Web

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Once again Mr Sea Monster (Is this better Bob?) picks one issue to make a stand on while ignoring all other points presented.
I should mention that it's laughable for you to be playing the "you're mean" card, for about 5 or so seasons you've acted like a cocky, arogant demeaning ass, spouting how great your team is and how terrible other teams are. Now you are in a league where The Gamblers, Rollers, Finesse, Hitmen and Wolves have 2 cups and the Bonecrushers, Hounds and Eagles franchises have 1. Perhaps this fact has curbed your arrogance? If so, It's about time you realized where in the food chain your Franchise resides.
Now back to the topic at hand. You indeed have not said in plain terms that the Free Agents were not superstars, but I feel you've implied it. How so you ask? by creating a list of NHLers' who cannot be considered Superstars by todays standards. (exluding Nasland and perhaps Hossa)and comparing them to the Free Agents that we see on a yearly basis, who are clearly Superstars.
To further the point of unrealism Naslund (2 years) and Hossa (1 year) are going to be rentals used likely for a year or two only. Even you must agree that these real life scenarios you refer to are much different than the Late 20 early 30 year olds in Alphasim that become mainstays of our teams for several seasons to come.

That is all..... for now WHAT SAY YOU?
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED???
P.S. Well done with the ethics committee coment directed at Finesse, I actually laughed very hard at that one.

Inscrit : 21/02/2008 16:05:27 Messages : 448 Lieu : M Hors ligne

It's somewhat entertaining to see people bickering like that, but this is really going nowhere fast...

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 11/08/2008 23:29:24

Thank you, Gambler, for owning up to your mistake. Not that I expect it to matter, but I think better of you for it.

While you may have thought it equitably suggesting as you explained, you went beyond to phrase your comments in such a way suggesting you were actually quoting me, meanwhile I was arguing the exact opposite.

If you think Sundin and the like aren't superstars, then this is where you should have started, as our dispute is not that the available free agents are not superstars, but that Sundin and company are not superstars. And your thoughts to this end are fair enough, but open for debate. On the other hand, the fact - I did not suggest our free agents were not superstars - is not open for debate, simply because it didn't happen.

Gambler aside, I'm unable to acknowledge any Finesse points until he comes to his senses, too. The basis of his argument is too ridiculous in that it doesn't represent my comments in any form.

As for me choosing "one issue to make a stand on while ignoring all other points presented," this is how a well managed argument plays out. To get from point A to point B, point A needs to be based in reality first, and if its not, then there's no point in addressing point B yet.

As such, for the Gambler having just addressed "point A," noting that his statement of me was false, I can now further enter the discussion with him.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 02:18:04 Messages : 392 Lieu : Vancouver Hors ligne

First, we need to be realistic and understand that - unless a huge number of new customers appear out of nowhere, ones dumping new and huge money into Alphasim - there will always be issues with Sportegy being unrealistic in comparison to the NHL.

And I'm not sure if we actually want Sportegy to be just like the NHL. How would you like it if your 28-year-old superstar goalie had a career ending injury after spending $300,000 on his training? This is not desirable, I think.

While most of us can probably agree that the NHL is the best model for Sportegy to follow, developing the sim to reach exact likeness with the NHL is impossible. The task to adjust this sim to a likeness merely somewhat close to the NHL would be huge and super enormous.

For starters, just consider the fact that we play in leagues of 12 teams, rather than 30. This is a major reason why things can't just be thought of in terms of NHLism. The amount of star free agents on the NHL market every year is probably something like 3 stars for every 30 teams, or 1 to 10 in more simple terms. To reach NHLism with a 12 team league, that might mean one or two star free agents each season. So perhaps we'd need to limit the number of these top stars (and maybe we should even want larger leagues). Perhaps there could be a few additional free agents rated and released more at par with second, third or fourth liners. And it would definitely help to release them all at the beginning of the season.

But where does this fit in when the development budget is so very limited. All considered, I think what we have now is reasonable.

There were 264 teams in 22 Sportegy leagues last season, perhaps not quite equalling the $5544 entree-fee value (based on 264 teams x $21 entree fee = $5544). This amount of money is about enough for one employee and some overhead.

Sportegy simply cannot react to every call for change because the budget for development is so limited. For Finesse to threaten to leave Sportegy unless Bob meets Finesse's demands, well that's just Finesse being ignorant, yet again.

Finesse wrote: ". . .if you don't make some sort of change, you will need even more people for your english superstar league. I will probably quit. . ."

I should point out that Bob and others are wrong to think that our International League is a superstar English league. By clicking on the “Other levels” link in the link panel to the left, you’ll see that it is merely a professional league. There are no English superstar leagues in Sportegy. As such, if the simulator is truly set to release free agents according to league levels, then the Top 1 leagues should have actually received much better free agents than us.

This raises a question: What’s stopping a rookie team from joining a superstar league? Nothing that I know of, which means a rookie team could easily buy a few free agents while entered in a top league, and then pick up the first overall draft pick, too, then reenter a rookie league and then develop an undeserved wining record. This is not ideal.

If this is possible, then I suggest we need to put some sort of technical barrier in place, such as not letting rookie or intermediate level teams join superstar leagues. It shouldn't be such a worry with the middle levels, but for a rookie team going all the way up to get superstar free agents and go on next season to maintain rookie's status, that doesn't seem fair, as it would almost certainly lead to winning the cup and earning free seasons.

I'm sure 9999 is right when he says that no superstars have emerged from Sportegy's free agent pool, in terms of the player it would take to deserve a top spot in one of the superstar leagues, which is a rating that every team has the potential to obtain after just four consecutive seasons ranked in the top six. In comparison to a professional league, however, a 550 point player would at least be worthy of "star" status, if not "super" star status. For some meaningful semantics, I'll suggest that "superstar" is a term more fitting a player who is at or has the potential to be an 800+point player, or there about, at some point in his career.

For a young player to be like Sid is in the NHL, it would mean offering a 700-point, 18-year old into the draftee ranks, which would probably mean a 1500 point player in his prime. And if that's the case, its ridiculously out of whack. If there were youth like Sid the Kid, then it would make sense to put an overall cap on total skill points at 1000 or so, allowing that while the 18-year-old phenom can play like a superstar from the start of his career, and continue to do so for the next 22 years or so, he'll never be capable of training beyond the 1000-skill-point mark, and perhaps even make a 500-skill-point mark for each individual skill, because a 1000-point-hands guy with no toughness or checking is unrealistic.

As for the Bitch league free agent goalie being the most talented of his league, this can happen in the NHL, too.

For example, there's the potential for Vancouver Canucks superstar goalie Roberto Luongo to choose to leave via free agency right when he's in his prime. Many consider him the best goalie in the world, never mind merely a superstar. In 2010 he is set to become a free agent. If he doesn't think the Canucks are right for him, then he'll walk. In which case, the best goalie in the world will be a free agent signing, and the lucky team will not be losing any draft picks to sign him.

Hossa, a 100-point-player in the NHL, is in his prime and just signed a $7.4m, one-year contract via free agency, and he turned down a multi-year, $9m contract offer from the Edmonton Oilers to do so. Next year, he's set to become a free agent in his prime yet again.

Gambler wrote: "Sea Loser, there is no rebutting that our teams are not good enough to have these Free Agents not make a huge impact."

I can rebut easily, in terms of how we use the word huge. Of this year’s free agents, all of them are either second, third or fourth line players to my team. I will suggest that it would take a first line player to warrant the “huge” designation.

166-155-216-28=565, Age 29, D = fits on my second defencive pairing
125-296-55-25=501, Age 27, W = fits as a good spare
300-150-141-30=621, Age 32, W = fits on my second line, relief player for powerplay
227-160-139-30=556, Age 29, W = fits on my third line
295-119-130-30=574, Age 32, C = fits on my second line, relief player for powerplay

Gambler wrote: “Once again Mr Sea Monster (Is this better Bob?) picks one issue to make a stand on while ignoring all other points presented.”

Do you comprehend how much time it would take to react to everything you spout, especially while most of it is based on fabricated issues? I never have a problem debating or discussing a topic if people are presenting their points with at least some sense of rationality, as you can see with this post addressing every point I could find of Gamblers, but only after he had cleared his argument of the idiocy. Before coming to his senses, his argument wasn’t even based on fallacy or subjectivism; it was even more perverted being based on fabricated comments, which is something akin to slander, defamation or libel. How could I possibly proceed in a setting of this nature? It would have been ridiculous for me to try to rationalize with someone proposing ridiculous arguments.

And for me playing the “mean card,” as you’d like to call it. Did you read some of that stuff? Take a look at our league forum; you’ll notice that Finesse has since edited his swearing out of it. It was the work of a mean, mean bully.

This didn’t upset me or make me feel like less of a human or want to cry, so I’m not suggesting I had any “poor me” issues with the mean posting. For my purposes, the fact that there were people being mean helped point out that they were also being more emotional than rational, which made it pointless to discuss much.

For sure I’ve been as cocky and arrogant as you point out, but who does this hurt? Only me when I fall from my high spot. I do this because it adds a fun edge to the game, where my opponents try that much harder and enjoy it that much more when they beat me, or hate it that much more when I win and get to pomp myself up. You can’t deny that this is the basis for the strongest and most meaningful rivalries that we’ve had in our leagues, and I think this added to our playing experience rather than subtracted from it.

After all, what forum ever said it was against the rules to be pompous? Everyone likes to see the fool; none like to be the fool. I’m doing the favour, taking one for the team, and being that fool. I enjoy it. On the other hand, it’s routine to see warnings against people being mean on forums. Again, the point is that mean people suck no matter how you look at it.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Deka, I shall state facts on this one, tell me what you think.
On paper you have the strongest looking team. All 5 of this years Free Agents would start for your team this year (the 297 checking winger included). The only reason some of these players wouldn't be playing on your first 2 lines is that your top lines already contain some Free Agents from other years...... Your #1 and #2 Centers, #3 and #5 Wingers and your #1 and #3 best Defensemen are all Free Agents from previous years.
If you had somehow landed all 5 of the Free Agents from this year (Bonecrushers bought 4).... Your Top 3 Centers, 3 of your top 4 D-men and 5 of your starting 8 wingers would all be Free Agents. Of your starting skaters 11 would be from Free Agency and 7 would not.
It astonishes me how you could possibly dispute that these Free Agents do make a "HUGE" impact on our teams.
This example is of your team, the most talented team in the league, so multiply the impact ten fold for most other teams in the league.
I did say "our teams" meaning our league, but I decided to apply it to your team as well since the impact on the Monz is also "HUGE"

Hope you have lots of smoke and mirrors for this one...... I have no idea what you could possibly say to comeback against facts.
But you'll try and the attempt will be fun to watch

Inscrit : 25/02/2008 09:57:50 Messages : 199 Lieu : LEVIS Hors ligne

it has to stay like that . its like reality . good players will be free agents . it make think some people about over training and spent too much on it .

but there is a lot to say about it ?

i hope a lot of people will respectly give their opinion or maybe bob will may do a servey on it .

it may be the most important issue this season especially that there is two waves

This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 13/08/2008 03:46:34

Okay, Gambler. Of course you'd have no idea, otherwise you'd have understood why not to write as such.

Yes, I do have the strongest team.

No, the 27-year-old, 501-point, free agent checking winger would not start on my team, but he would play as the spare, as I already said, stepping in on the penalty kill. He would sub into the lineup when my starters show fatigue. At 27, he's already passed the age limit I set for my youth-training program, and as such would not elevate his game far beyond his 500 points. With him entering my team at age 27 with 500 points, he'd always be a spare and potential trade bait. And I already have two defencive specialists on the wing, and have no room for another with my general team philosphy of dressing three scoring lines and one checking line.

If I played this free agent, it'd mean sitting out 485-point Atlanticus, who has better hands and toughness to fit on the fourth line. If you look at my team, you'll have a hard time finding a roster player below 100 toughness, and this free agent has 55. I think it's essential for my players to have a certain minimum level of toughness to be able to own the puck, and I have my team playing a puck posession style. Alternatively, I'd need to sit out my 23-year-old, 475-point Jörmungandr, a player who has so much potential, he desevers at least eight minutes of ice time every game to earn his exp point.

Yes, my no.1 centre is a free agent.

No, my no.2 centre is not a free agent. You're talking about my number 5 centre, 39-year-old Jiante, I'm sure. If you look back, you'll notice he has not started a game this season, and will not. He plays as a defencive specialst only, because he doesn't have the hands to crack my lineup.

Yes, both my no.3&5 wingers were free agents.

What if I had somehow landed all 5 of the free agents? This is not even a realistic senario, so I can't follow you here.

First off, the Bonecrushers obviously have been saving for seasons and seasons to get this much cash. What was it? $60K, $60K, $60K and $75K? That's $255K. No team with that much to blow has any significant number of previous free agents, nor do they have much to show for trained youth.

And this is another strategy just as is training your own players. We can all make our own choices, and lets see who's able to sustain the better team over the long haul. There shouldn't be one single way to the end, otherwise that'd make this sim boring. I think the fact that some teams can do as the BC did is a great thing. It adds character to our ranks, as such that we aren't all from the same cookie-cutter mould.

With the amazing young talent I have, I simply can't make big plays like BC for all or most of the free agents. I dare you to find a team out there who has 11 free agents on it. This is just ridiculous.

As for second liners and down, their additions can't be considered huge for me. I explained myself here already. None of these secondary-scoring-type guys are huge to my team. Had there been a 620 point d-man, this would have been huge. But there wasn't.

But what's it matter anyway? It's a meaningless point if you're trying to pose it as a representation of reality. In reality, free agents provide huge upside to a number of teams every year in the NHL.

In short, your reasoning lacks a sense of reality. If making this game more realistic is the ideal we are hoping to attain, your reasoning would remove us from that path.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 02:18:04 Messages : 392 Lieu : Vancouver Hors ligne

If you want to see something unreal, check out the trade between the Finesse and the Assault.

Assault give the following players:
Pos Name N/A? Age Hand Check Tough Exp. Talents Games Goals Assists +/- WinF
W T. Lutter Traded 36 150 172 71 40 433 0 0 0 0 0
Drft Draft Pick #2Bonecrushers Traded 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
G G. Gonzaga Traded 32 189 81 81 30 381 0 0 0 0 0
Drft Draft Pick #249ers Traded 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Finesse give the following players:
Pos Name N/A? Age Hand Check Tough Exp. Talents Games Goals Assists +/- WinF
G Marty Turco Traded 35 268 118 127 30 543 2 4 1 0 0
Drft Draft Pick #2Finesse Traded 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

This is a trade that imbalances the league. The goalie from Finesse is worth much more than what is being offered, which is basically one 2nd round pick (the other coming from Finesse cancels out one of those from Assault) and two useless veterans. Neither of these two veterans will even be able to make the Finesse lineup, nevermind the line up of even the worst team in our league.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

I had been talking to Ryan (Finesse GM) Leading up to this trade and I think this is actually a fair trade.
Turco is old and his stock will only lower starting next year.
Assault were only team in a position to aquire Turco.
In a couple of years The Assault's goalie will be better than Turco, so this is a 2 or 3 year rental for the Assault.
The main reason I think this trade is fair is that I would accept it from either side, that's reason enough for me.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

By the way, I can barely believe my eyes..... Pot....... meet Kettle, you aquired the 1st overall pick for similar type veterans and an 18 yr old. Did I mention you recieved the 1st overall pick? I'd be happier if the trade didn't go through, but I'm not selfish enough to protest a fair trade just because it improves one team without crippling the other.

Inscrit : 12/05/2008 23:36:01 Messages : 8 Lieu : Midland Hors ligne

to monster: of this season you have offered me mulitple veterans that can barely enter the lineup for my awesome nineteen year old and 12 to 14 versions of same thing. you think I should go along with that but you are thinking this trade is not fair???????? 49er tried exact same technique many time. im new owner but i dont believe why all the teams seem to fight so much all teams hate and fight with gamblers and monster and finesse all trades that have gambler monster and finesse in always get protested so i think protest is nothing to do with me

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 16/08/2008 01:26:14

I can understand why you might think this trade is reasonable, but I don't think you've done your homework as to player values.

In other words, you might think it reasonable because you haven't done your homework.

35-year-old Turco's stats are now 268-118-127-30=543
At age 36 Turco will be 268-118-114-40=540
At age 37 Turco will be 241-118-102-40=501
At age 38 Turco will be 216-118-92-40=466
At age 39 Turco will be 194-106-83-40=423

This is based on the rules and improvements stated in Sportegy's guiding pages.

Sure enough, he's on the decline, but to throw out one of our league's top goalies to the competition for players who can't even support your lineup, this is not only foolish, it upsets the league's balance.

As for what the Finesse are getting in return,

36-year-old, 433 point Lutter would be on waivers if there was anymore time to put him there. He won't bring any trade value next year, and he wouldn't even deserve a spot on the lineup of our league's worst team this year.

32-year-old, 381 point Ganzaga is the same. No team in our league could play this guy if they honestly wanted to win games. His trade value is nil, so there's no reason the Finesse should honestly want to keep him around next year, never mind this year. Even five seasons from now, Turco will still be the better goalie, and Ganzaga will be even more useless.

The team's are each offering similar 2nd round draft pick, so these virtually cancel each other out. The extra draft pick from Assault, which comes originally from the league's worst team, will only ever be a fourth line plug, at best. Because of his limited potential, Finesse will have a hard time rationalizing him as being valuable enough to ever sink a dime into his individual training, and so he'll be eternally bunk. And by the time he's old enough to play any meaningful minutes, Finesse's team will be that much more advanced, and fourth line players will need to meet that much of a higher standard, which will make him that much less useful.

This trade essentially gives the Finesse liabilities, not assets. At the same time, it gives the Assault a number one goalie for the next four seasons to come.

How is that an equitable trade? Explain this to me, because I can't just take your word for it, I've done the math to prove your theories wrong.

On the other hand, if Finesse had kept Turco, he would have had a great back up for a few more seasons, and a decent one for a couple more. For the Finesse, Turco only plays as a backup because he shares the pipes with with a good 26-year-old. Despite this, Turco is still the more skilled goalie of the two. All the while having a strong 1-2 tandem, if Finesse could draft/trade for a decent prospect goalie, Turco would allow him four or five seasons to let his young one stay in the minors, earning free exp points, while not having to bring him up too early for lack of a decent netminder. The value in this is huge, considering it takes sooooo much money to train goalies.

Why sacrifice years of stability in net for a weak draft pick?

This makes no sense at all.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 16/08/2008 01:37:03

How can you say my trade for the 49ers draft pick was just as bad?

Here it is:
Monster give the following players:
Pos Name N/A? Age Hand Check Tough Exp. Talents
D Dorsal Odontoceti 32 126 175 115 30 446
W Kriller Orcaan 31 142 136 120 30 428
D Nautilus Nightmare 36 149 156 86 40 431
D Leviathan Traded 18 43 24 24 5 96
Drft Draft Pick #2Monste
49ers give $20,000 and:
Drft Draft Pick #149ers

Two players in their prime (players who are currently the third and fifth best players on his team), a former first round draft pick in the 18-year-old, a second round pick for this season, and a veteran defenceman who had 10 points in 11 games.

One thing is for sure, you guys are not exactly good at weighing the value of deals.

Inscrit : 23/02/2008 18:07:34 Messages : 247 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Deka: I don't disagree with you entirely about the Turco trade.... If I were Finesse I would have not added in my 2nd rounder and would have asked for some money.
However, Finesse is receiveing an extra pick and Defensive wingers are not very common and that Lutter guy could play periodically on most teams because of his defensive ability. (maybe not on your team because you like to compete for the "stats on paper cup" instead of the actual alphasim cup.)

As for your trade with 49ers trade: Who the hell cares if he added the 3rd and 5th best skaters on his team he's still in dead last and those players don't improve his chances of ANYTHING.
Overall summary is this: Finesse trade weakens their backup goalie situation(debatable to what degree) while getting an extra pick and a below average defensive winger.
Your trade with 49ers gives you a top pick, likely the 1st overall pick while you gave players who would otherwise be on waivers in the very near future. The 49ers recieved a few players that will be of no value while the team as a whole is rebuilding, and they now have no 1st round pick and 20K less to rebuild with, and you threw in your 2nd round pick from last year.

Can't wait for you to tell me where I'm wrong on this one.

Inscrit : 26/02/2008 14:03:22 Messages : 148 Lieu : London Hors ligne

Deka, I can see you made some valid points about the Turco trade. But you can't argue that I'm getting 2 decent draft picks, not great but decent.

However, I don't agree with you defending your 49er's trade. You gave him players that are garbage to any team other than his. He needs to rebuild and train draft picks. From a 49ers standpoint, the draft pick that they traded you would be his franchise player for 15 years. He could've bought the players he is getting off of waivers this year or next. There are plenty of decent players that have lower amounts of talent points on waivers. He does not need to trade away 20k and his lottery pick for waiver players.

It's too bad that you feel ripping teams off is fair, there is no way you can spin that trade to be fair. Comparing the players you traded to his team players is ridiculous because his team absolutely blows, and his team weakness increases the value of their 1st overall pick because they desperately need to rebuild. Compare those players to other players in the league. They are shit.

Remember the Jets when they were trading their first round picks away for decent talent to try and win the cup. Well they didn't win the cup and it hurt them for a while. Now Luke has learned how to train young players and is on his way to having a competitive team. How can you argue that the 49ers trading his 1st round pick away for those players you sent him in return improves his team? It's simple, you can't.

I wouldn't be surprised if you are controlling the 49ers, it would be like when you robbed your other team in your first season with the Sea Monster, getting money and draft picks for garbage. Your team would be a lot worse if the commissioner wasn't asleep at the wheel and vetoed these horrible trades.