Eastside's Hockey Elite Collide

So, here's a quick question for you guys. With vacant teams, what if I just resigned the GM and let the CPU run the team? Obviously, as we've seen with fastsims, the CPU sometimes has trouble with developing players. I also don't know what caliber of lines a computer-controlled team will put together on a regular basis, although, it's not like it'd be different from just auto-lining.

This way, there's no concerns of collusion or tampering from one of us three simmers in regards to orphaned teams. I have no problem with just upkeeping the rosters better for next season than I did this past season, but then I wouldn't have to remember or keep track.

Just a question. Looking for thoughts and opinions.

why not pending on how many teams are open see if theres anyone(gm's) who has the extra time to pamper those teams so that there not hurt by auto? Obviously trading wouldn't be allowed. just a thought

I'm open to that as well. One less thing for you and the staff to do. (Except when the caretaker plays against the orphans.)

You should keep it the way it is now and act in best interest for those teams.
But to make it easier on you, you could only follow instructions given to you from everyone else. Of course they'd have to make some sort of sense.

For example, this season, Patrice Bergeron missed a lot of game action as a healthy scratch following his injury.
I could've sent you a PM asking for Bergy to be reinserted to the lineup which would've made sense.

For sure I wouldn't PM you about this kind of situation if it involved one of my rivals, but to make it fair, everyone else could.


You probably just set the lines, and when people ask for some sort of changes, you make them if you think it makes sense.
You get the final call, but you don't have to always be on the lookout.

I just don't like CPU teams.

The only issue that I have with allowing others to run teams, no matter how trustworthy they are, is that they can "accidentally" forget to put the starting goaltender back in or activate the top line C who is DTD when they or a team whose draft pick they own is playing them. I'll readily admit that there were several occasions where I felt that I should have put Kari Lehtonen back in for STL. Or I should have swapped out a starting goaltender so that the backup didn't play 15 straight games to follow the goalie games played rule. I didn't do those things for various reasons. Most of which, I didn't want to make the decision to put Lehtonen back in and have that GM call me out for it. It wasn't like STL was going to catch me in the division, so it had nothing to do with that. But, when STL went in the tank, I should have put Lehtonen back in.

What it comes down to is this. Let's say STL is orphaned and I play Niitymaki against Dallas because STL should win no matter who is in net. What would the actual GM have done? Play Lehtonen to try and ensure two points? Is it fair to Dallas's GM (pretend they have one) for me to make the decision to play the backup against them when they're playing for ping pong balls?

Or a better example. Let's say it's a STL v. NSH game where STL is in 11th and NSH is in 8th. Is it fair for me to determine what starting goaltender to play and have it directly affect the race? ANA, in 9th place, is pissed because I decided to play Niitymaki.

Basically, what I'm saying is that it gives me (or another GM) a lot of discretion that may or may not have a fair result. No matter what format I play the backup for his 15 games, someone's going to get screwed. If I alternate goalies over the first 30 games, somebody might get the backup 4 times and not see the starter and vice versa.

I also see the issues with a CPU-controlled team. Ideally, we'll have 30 quality GMs by next September and this won't be an issue, but I don't see that happening.

So, what's better? My discretion or the CPUs?

You're discretion absolutely 100 % over the CPU. Not only do they make retarded line-ups and roster decisions but they also mess with the training.

I CPU'ed one season so I could quickly look at something at the end of the year and they had Evgeny Kuznetsov in the farm.

I would prefer committee members handle out-of-conference orphans. I suppose other GMs could be trusted as well if they really want to but there are possible conflicts of interest.

CPU management is just terrible at the minimum because they sign contracts and extensions which you'd have to reverse regularly.

SharksGM wrote:CPU management is just terrible at the minimum because they sign contracts and extensions which you'd have to reverse regularly.

This is an excellent point and pretty much seals the deal. I don't want to have to reverse a lot of things.

As part of our EHEC CBA talks this summer, we will establish guidelines for orphaned teams so that everybody knows how things will be handled.

Great.

As far as the goalie starts thing goes, you could always just do a random number generator to see who starts. (Max games for starter is 67, which is 81.7% of all games. So maybe 80-20 for G1-G2.)