|
Post by leafs on Oct 24, 2011 20:10:00 GMT -5
I understand, but I've also seen every discussion degrade into a flame war and I'd rather just let the sim do it's thing than open it up to allowing teams to argue over ratings. if we could get a civilized vote on the message board going would it be possible to look into some type of challenge system? if not I'll live and move on but just figured I would ask
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Oct 25, 2011 0:00:14 GMT -5
Honestly, I'm not really interested in it at all right now.
|
|
|
Post by Capitals on Oct 25, 2011 7:01:39 GMT -5
I am ok w/ the rerates. Some went up, some down, some didnt move. Nothing we can do about it.
|
|
|
Post by Avs on Oct 25, 2011 14:24:43 GMT -5
Anyone else notice that just about every players DI rating went down due to the number of penalties last year?
|
|
|
Post by NJDevils on Oct 25, 2011 14:39:20 GMT -5
I'm really happy with my rerates, especially on defense. Looks like I'm not going to have to go crazy trying to find a top d-man since Martin and Volchenkov got nice bumps, as did Greene.
A little pissy about Knuble, but it looks like his old spot on the 2nd line RW might be my only main spot to fill. These rerates put me in a much better position then I expected.
|
|
|
Post by Avs on Oct 26, 2011 2:38:11 GMT -5
Yeah I would have kept Martin at those ratings.
|
|
|
Post by sensgm on Oct 26, 2011 4:36:18 GMT -5
I don't really want to get to involved in discussions about if well performing players should get re-rates etc... and I know Nick doesn't really like the idea of allowing performance re-rates! But maybe a solution to keep everyone a little happier would be what I suggested before. Which was:-
To allow teams to submit one player who they believe has received an unfair re-rate (e.g. their stats have dropped when they have played well) and for that player to have his stats reverted back to what they were the previous next. So the player's stats would not have gone up or down, they would have stayed the same as the previous season.
So in essence each team can protect one well performing player from dropping, but they would not have improved either.
Its just an idea... Personally I think introducing such a rule would be a good compromise for everyone... but if Nick does not want to go with it I don't mind I was merely giving a suggestion!
Overall i'm satisfied with how my re-rates turned out! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Capitals on Oct 26, 2011 8:23:01 GMT -5
I actually like that idea Ottawa. It is a fair rule for all. You get to protect one guy so their ratings do not drop but they also do not increase. I think thats fair.
Ultimately the call is up to Nick though.
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Oct 26, 2011 9:23:11 GMT -5
While Ottawa brings up a fair point, it would be a time consuming one. If each team exercises this, that would mean that I'd have to manually edit 60 players every end of the season.
|
|
|
Post by sensgm on Oct 26, 2011 11:28:28 GMT -5
60? Don't you mean 30?
|
|