Lidas Rosters 2009/10 - Mistakes/Omissions/Tweaks/Etc

bebl · Post by **bebl** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 3:00 pm

who is doing these finland national team u20 rosters? alex rönning has played for sweden so he can't play for team finland

bebl · Post by **bebl** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:02 pm

henrik karlsson have done deal with dinamo riga but in game he plays for san jose sharks

axwel3221 · Post by **axwel3221** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:40 pm

I can't actually tell you what is the number, but Dustin Byfuglien's movement attribute was highly underrated in at least 2.1 release, watching him at the playoffs, he moves smooth as hell for a 250 pounds.

Loner · Post by **Loner** » Sat Jun 19, 2010 6:00 pm

Danny wrote:We might be going a bit too far with adjusting the players attributes. 90% of the people come into this thread to post that players XY of their favourite team are underrated. By the time the next update is released every team is gonna have a bunch of Orrs and Gretzkys. One good season or one good playoff run like in Halak's case should really not be the foundation for any attribute changes, especially if said player is already 25 or older and this one good season might just be his career year. Players are better rated on their average rather than peak. This isn't really a criticism of your work Lidas and I'm not really in a position to tell you what to do but I'd suggest to be extremely careful changing player attributes. I'd only change it if a player was totally off, whether somebody deserves a 15 or 17 in passing depends too much on subjective perception.

I'm aware that a good season don't make a players but in Halak's case I can argue that he performs at every level he's been, his progression is constant and his excellent work ethics should make him at least a low tier starting goaltender, I think he underperformed most of the time in EHM. His attributes are ok right now, I think he only need some adjustment. His rebound control is definitely too high, his strength is positioning and recovery should be higher(I actually think that Price attributes should be lower for these 2)

In the case of Subban, he's probably what the most elite potential prospect that Montreal have. He never become one in EHM, or even near elites status.

A big thanks for you Lidas, you're the main reason for me why EHM is still alive.

wildiowafan · Post by **wildiowafan** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Loner wrote:
Danny wrote:We might be going a bit too far with adjusting the players attributes. 90% of the people come into this thread to post that players XY of their favourite team are underrated. By the time the next update is released every team is gonna have a bunch of Orrs and Gretzkys. One good season or one good playoff run like in Halak's case should really not be the foundation for any attribute changes, especially if said player is already 25 or older and this one good season might just be his career year. Players are better rated on their average rather than peak. This isn't really a criticism of your work Lidas and I'm not really in a position to tell you what to do but I'd suggest to be extremely careful changing player attributes. I'd only change it if a player was totally off, whether somebody deserves a 15 or 17 in passing depends too much on subjective perception.
I'm aware that a good season don't make a players but in Halak's case I can argue that he performs at every level he's been, his progression is constant and his excellent work ethics should make him at least a low tier starting goaltender, I think he underperformed most of the time in EHM. His attributes are ok right now, I think he only need some adjustment. His rebound control is definitely too high, his strength is positioning and recovery should be higher(I actually think that Price attributes should be lower for these 2)

In the case of Subban, he's probably what the most elite potential prospect that Montreal have. He never become one in EHM, or even near elites status.

A big thanks for you Lidas, you're the main reason for me why EHM is still alive.

I'd actually disagree on lowering Price's stats. He actually had a pretty good season, Halak just had a better one. Price also didn't get the support in his games. His starting ratings are fine imho, and most agree he still has the same potential in real life as he does in the game.

wildiowafan · Post by **wildiowafan** » Sun Jun 20, 2010 11:44 pm

Ok, I want to bring up a topic that I know has been discussed and shot down several times. I don't think it was as big a deal in the past, but we are now reaching season 4 and I believe it is time to shift and update the players stats, as well as updating the player info to accurately represent rookies and such. I also believe that while doing this the draft years should also be shifted, this piling on top of the 2006 draft has reached its limit.

I know there are those that will argue its a lot of work for little benefit, but I disagree. In year 1 or 2 and even this year it may have been, but starting with next years update there will be 4 years worth of stats missing from players. In addition seeing 4 year veterans still eligible for the calder takes away from the game in my view.

Now having said that, I'm not laying this out as "you do this." I am very willing to do the grunt work of entering the data, for NHL players and prospects at least. I've actually been working on updating 2.3 in this regard for my own use. The work of entering the data takes time, but it isn't difficult. And, given that the next data won't be released for at least 4 months there is plenty of time to get it done.

I hope lidas and those working on the data will seriously consider my offer to help and see that it really is time to make this jump.

Valkoon · Post by **Valkoon** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:55 pm

Can a Hawks fan or someone that watches Jonathan Toews on a regular basis give me more accurate ratings? He's ok in 2.3 but obviously he should be much better. I think I made his potential too good at 195 but it was too low before at (i believe 165).
The only real stat I made low is aggression so if someone can give me some of his week and strong points I can make him more human ( and maybe Lidas can update in the future). Thanks!

tksolway · Post by **tksolway** » Thu Jun 24, 2010 11:38 pm

bruins72 wrote:
I like this. I remember for last year's update when Lidas had us researching prospects, he had us using Hockey's Future and their grade system for PAs. We used this as a guide...

I would love to see more variance in the prospect levels as well, Here’s my vision

10.0A -> 200
10.0B -> -10
10.0C -> -10
10.0D -> -10/-9
9.5A -> 190
9.5B -> -10
9.5C -> -10/-9
9.5D -> -15
9.0A -> 180
9.0B -> -9
9.0C -> -9
9.0D -> -15
8.5A -> 170
8.5B -> -9
8.5C -> -9/-8
8.5D -> -14
8.0A -> 160
8.0B -> -8
8.0C -> -8
8.0D -> -14
7.5A -> 150
7.5B -> -8
7.5C -> -8/-7
7.5D -> -13
7.0A -> 140
7.0B -> -7
7.0C -> -7
7.0D -> -13
6.5A -> 130
6.5B -> -7
6.5C -> -7/-6
6.5D -> -13
6.0A -> 120
6.0B -> -6
6.0C -> -6
6.0D -> -13
5.5A -> 110
5.5B -> -6
5.5C -> -6/-5
5.5D -> -12
5.0A -> 100
5.0B -> -5
5.0C -> -5
5.0D -> -12

This gives some uncertainty, as well as some certainty. There’s nothing worse than drafting a Taylor Hall and getting a 150 player. Meanwhile it would be nice to see some more randomization from game to game with the wildcards. I think it fits with real life as well. As an Oiler fan, I will use an example I know. Look at Linus Omark, he has a rating of 7.5D. He would be -13 in the game. I think this is a good way to do it since he’s an uncertain talent, meanwhile we pretty much know what we’ve got with MPS and Eberle or at least their ranges, making the more tightly bound randomization a good thing.

Let me know what you guys think.

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 1:21 pm

Interesting ratings. I'd be VERY reluctant to give any player a 200 PA though. I'd even be reluctant to give a player a 190. IMO, there should be a very small handful of players in the league that get PA's in that range. Maybe Crosby and Ovechkin. I think that's where I'd stop. I think too many players have ratings that are too high.

tksolway · Post by **tksolway** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:21 pm

bruins72 wrote:Interesting ratings. I'd be VERY reluctant to give any player a 200 PA though. I'd even be reluctant to give a player a 190. IMO, there should be a very small handful of players in the league that get PA's in that range. Maybe Crosby and Ovechkin. I think that's where I'd stop. I think too many players have ratings that are too high.

I totally agree, when was the last time Hockey's future rated someone a 10A, or even a 9.5A. Heck if I remember correctly, Tavares was only a 9C. I think we would only see ratings like that through Hockey's future if another Crosby came around, so I think it will work if we base the ratings off of Hockey's Future.

bruins72 · Post by **bruins72** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:36 pm

Yeah, I guess you're right in regards to HF. I guess my comment about seeing too many players in the 190-200 CA range was more about the non-prospect players (guys already in the NHL).

empach · Post by **empach** » Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:19 pm

Yeah if we did switch to this system, and it's certainly interesting, and we kept using HF for the ratings we won't have to worry about those 10A and 9.5A as HF reserves those ratings for Wayne Gretzky level talent. And if HF ever did use that we could always make a judgement call and round down.

Post by **Manimal** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 1:11 am

rfroese wrote: I find it quite annoying how the teams whose AHL affiliates are relegated into the ECHL constantly are releasing players as they don't have room on their roster.

I might have found a solution to this problem. I'm testing at the moment, hoping for success

bestrafer7 · Post by **bestrafer7** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 3:03 pm

tksolway wrote:
bruins72 wrote:
I like this. I remember for last year's update when Lidas had us researching prospects, he had us using Hockey's Future and their grade system for PAs. We used this as a guide...
I would love to see more variance in the prospect levels as well, Here’s my vision

This gives some uncertainty, as well as some certainty. There’s nothing worse than drafting a Taylor Hall and getting a 150 player. Meanwhile it would be nice to see some more randomization from game to game with the wildcards. I think it fits with real life as well. As an Oiler fan, I will use an example I know. Look at Linus Omark, he has a rating of 7.5D. He would be -13 in the game. I think this is a good way to do it since he’s an uncertain talent, meanwhile we pretty much know what we’ve got with MPS and Eberle or at least their ranges, making the more tightly bound randomization a good thing.

Let me know what you guys think.

I like the idea of making a set ranking system, but Hockey's Future is not always the best player grading website as it takes them quite some time to rate lesser known prospects and most European players. If you were to combine a few different reference sites and make a combined rating it would make more sense and would be just as consistent as if you were to use just Hockey's Future. Sites like Hockey's Future and Elite Prospects are good reference points for prospects.

wildiowafan · Post by **wildiowafan** » Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:58 am

Minnesota Wild Positional updates (In order of what they are most likely to play)

Pierre-Marc Bouchard RW/LW/C
Guillaume Latendrese LW/RW
Chuck Kobasew LW/RW

Post by **archibalduk** » Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:31 pm

bestrafer7 wrote:
tksolway wrote:
bruins72 wrote:
I like this. I remember for last year's update when Lidas had us researching prospects, he had us using Hockey's Future and their grade system for PAs. We used this as a guide...
I would love to see more variance in the prospect levels as well, Here’s my vision

This gives some uncertainty, as well as some certainty. There’s nothing worse than drafting a Taylor Hall and getting a 150 player. Meanwhile it would be nice to see some more randomization from game to game with the wildcards. I think it fits with real life as well. As an Oiler fan, I will use an example I know. Look at Linus Omark, he has a rating of 7.5D. He would be -13 in the game. I think this is a good way to do it since he’s an uncertain talent, meanwhile we pretty much know what we’ve got with MPS and Eberle or at least their ranges, making the more tightly bound randomization a good thing.

Let me know what you guys think.
I like the idea of making a set ranking system, but Hockey's Future is not always the best player grading website as it takes them quite some time to rate lesser known prospects and most European players. If you were to combine a few different reference sites and make a combined rating it would make more sense and would be just as consistent as if you were to use just Hockey's Future. Sites like Hockey's Future and Elite Prospects are good reference points for prospects.

I don't think it's possible to have the "perfect" prospects rating system from a website. With players so early in their career and development, it is impossible to say how good a player is going to be. I guess it's only really when they're reaching towards their mid-twenties that you can accurately say how good a player is or will be.

For this reason, I don't think it would matter too much whether we use just Hockey's Future or just Elite Prospects or both - so long as we have some reasonably well respected source for prospect ratings. I think when using these rating systems we need to input them into the EHM database so that there is a random element to their potential. There is no guarantee that any player will reach the potential indicated by the Hockey Future's rating, etc. Therefore, I think we should simply use the negative PA ratings so that it is not definite that Player X will reach a set PA. This will introduce more variety to the game. A problem we have in the Challenges is that users tend to bring in the same players each time. By using negative PA ratings then there's no guarantee that Player X will be a star/poor every time.

leafsnation · Post by **leafsnation** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:45 pm

Here's a link to an article on Montreal Canadiens personnel changes...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=328650

Post by **Primis** » Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:58 pm

Can we please, please, PLEASE get Trent Daavettila into the game now?

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=41053

I know he started out with basically a cup-o-coffee in the IHL 2.0 late season and playoffs, but he turned aroudn and played 13 AHL games last year with Adirondack and 2 more with Grand Rapids. Nearly a point-a-game player in the ECHL last season. Re-signed with ECHL Kalamazoo this season, for now anyways. I'd imagine he'll be seeing AHL time again this coming season if he stays healthy.

I've searched the forum and can't even find his name being mentioned, and I know he's not in the last couple of roster updates.

Secondly, can we get Riley Gill in, former Western Michigan Bronco goalie who has now graduated. Assuming he signs/latches on somewhere anyways...

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=31216

He set a bunch of goalie records while at WMU and still was never in the DB it seems.

Post by **Manimal** » Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:05 pm

Primis wrote:Can we please, please, PLEASE get Trent Daavettila into the game now?

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=41053

I know he started out with basically a cup-o-coffee in the IHL 2.0 late season and playoffs, but he turned aroudn and played 13 AHL games last year with Adirondack and 2 more with Grand Rapids. Nearly a point-a-game player in the ECHL last season. Re-signed with ECHL Kalamazoo this season, for now anyways. I'd imagine he'll be seeing AHL time again this coming season if he stays healthy.

I've searched the forum and can't even find his name being mentioned, and I know he's not in the last couple of roster updates.

Secondly, can we get Riley Gill in, former Western Michigan Bronco goalie who has now graduated. Assuming he signs/latches on somewhere anyways...

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=31216

He set a bunch of goalie records while at WMU and still was never in the DB it seems.

Yeah, Daavettila will be in the next update, Gill too if he signs somewhere

DJP19 · Post by **DJP19** » Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:49 am

Dont really know where to put this but when will the 2010-2011 database be out? Any ideas?

Post by **Primis** » Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:58 am

Manimal wrote:Yeah, Daavettila will be in the next update, Gill too if he signs somewhere

Excellent news. Thanks.

Post by **archibalduk** » Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:31 am

DJP19 wrote:Dont really know where to put this but when will the 2010-2011 database be out? Any ideas?

Here is the best place to discuss it: http://www.ehmtheblueline.com/forums/vi ... php?t=5672

To answer your question, it's ultimately just one person (Lidas) who can make all of the edits to the database and so nobody can really give a release date per se. It's more a case of when it's done it's done. If an editor existed that allowed multiple users to work on the same database then it could be done a lot quicker and it would be more realistic to give an estimated release date.

However, in previous years the update has been released after the beginning of the season - around about November.

Beukeboom · Post by **Beukeboom** » Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:20 pm

I just wanted to say i really like the downgrading of players and talent while making a lot of talent as random as possible policy that Lidas seem to do altely, game is a lot more fun, when there are more alte round finds and surprises and the league actually has a place for 3rd line talent. I think this should even go much further because still 4th line talent for example is worth next to nothing. But Lida is on the right way. Also superstars should get more weaknesses , why cant a superstar have a serious weakness in some spots? I still superstars a re still overrated. No one is perfect, but with right training in EHM nearly all 20 players are still possible.
Would be nice to actually have to cope with defensive liabilities etc. of stars.

Post by **Primis** » Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:12 pm

Forgive me if this has been mentioned already somewhere, but I did a run-through earlier and didn't see it.

The ECHL Kalamazoo Wings effectively "own" Wings Stadium.

http://www.wingsstadium.com/news/2010/08-03_S2.htm

Stadium Management Company owns both the Wings Stadium Complex and the Kalamazoo Wings hockey team.

There's more to it than simply that, but it's a lot to get into to try and explain and trace everything. At any rate, that's off a press release from earlier this month on the Wings Stadium website.

As state din the article they also now own the S2 (formerly TwinStar) arena west of Wings Stadium, which is probably going to be used as a "back up" facility for practices and such. It's currently where the West Michigan Hounds of the NLHL reside. I'm not sure how the "back up" facilities work in the game as I've never seen them used, but I know the option is in the DB as I've seen it in the editor.

Post by **Manimal** » Tue Aug 31, 2010 11:17 pm

Primis wrote:Forgive me if this has been mentioned already somewhere, but I did a run-through earlier and didn't see it.

The ECHL Kalamazoo Wings effectively "own" Wings Stadium.

http://www.wingsstadium.com/news/2010/08-03_S2.htm

Stadium Management Company owns both the Wings Stadium Complex and the Kalamazoo Wings hockey team.
There's more to it than simply that, but it's a lot to get into to try and explain and trace everything. At any rate, that's off a press release from earlier this month on the Wings Stadium website.

As state din the article they also now own the S2 (formerly TwinStar) arena west of Wings Stadium, which is probably going to be used as a "back up" facility for practices and such. It's currently where the West Michigan Hounds of the NLHL reside. I'm not sure how the "back up" facilities work in the game as I've never seen them used, but I know the option is in the DB as I've seen it in the editor.

Thanks for that info! It will be added