Help! I need advice for my team/roster (Official Thread)

[Moses Doughty]

Id think about putting one of your second pairing D on the third to balance it out. And are those your top 6 guys according to team report?

[Wroom]

I need a little help with my D-Men. I'm in season 3, not sure what version# of Lidas I'm using although I know it was the rosters that were offered after the real life 2009 draft (Tavares Draft)

Anyway, I'm playing as the NYI and have DiPietro/Nittymaki as my goaltenders.

My defense

Duncan Keith // Mike Green
Bryan Allen // Mark Streit
Andrew MacDonald // Dimitri Kulikov

Extra: Mark Eaton

I would like some suggestions on how I can maximize the potential of this defense where I can win games without having that dreaded 3rd period collapse that seems to haunt this team.

The only players I have in Bridgeport that may be ready to step in are Ryan Wilson, Travis Hamonic, Dustin Kohn (although my board hates him for some reason) and PK Subban

Thanks in advance.

Find a formula of this:

Best guys on the first pair.
One defensive(LD) and one offensive(RD) on each pair.
Balanced pairs(3-6).


In most games, Ryan Wilson should be good enough to make the team(as an offensive d-man).

[umwoz]

Figured I would post this here, since my last thread was closed.

One question, how do you guys get the best performance out of your players?

Reason I ask, is because I had Derek Roy on my Buffalo Sabres. Roy's scouting report continually slated him as a franchise forward, however I never had him consistently over an 8.0 Rating, ever, and he was never over a PPG In fact, the only player I could keep over an 8.0 was Ryan Kesler.(And Miller, but he sort of does that on his own Smile )

I traded Derek Roy away, he needed a new contract, and wanted over 5.5 Million. I simply could not afford this, so I traded him away and slotted in a young promising prospect. 20 games later, I check on Roy and he is averaging an 8.64 with very average linemates, and has 32 points in that span.

Now, a similar situation with Zack Kassian. I trained him up very carefully, and after 3-4 years of doing so, I get the same scouting report, "Franchise Forward" however he is getting around 70 points per season. Good numbers, not "franchise" numbers. He wanted 6.25 per year, considering that was only .5M less than my true franchise forward, Kesler, It didn't seem right. Plus I had a 21 year old Rbert Durina who turned it up at the end of the previous season, making Kassian "expendable." I traded him away for a good group of prospects. Frustration has once again set in, I checked on him only to see he has 26 points in 18 games, averaging an 8.4(possibly inflated due to small sample size).

So back to my question, How can I get the best out of my players? Any and all tips are welcome, I am fairly new at this game, so if there are any tips you remember learning as you picked the game up, I would appreciate them.

Are unit/personal tactics a must? Because I like the Idea of staying on the GM side of things and conferring with my coaches about lines.

[tsuihkon]

I was hoping to talk about mostly about playoff tactics in another thread but it was locked for some reason.

This was the Thread

To sum up, I was wondering why my team sucked in playoffs and there were replies about shaking up tactics. Also I was wondering how come my opponents counter my tactics only in playoffs. Granted, I racked up a some losses also (finished second in the west with canucks).

First off all, I don't understand explanation that more games you play in a row against same opponent, better they counter the tactics. It is quite mind boggling explanation, just because coaches outsmart their opponents also on regular season, if there is a vulnerability in tactics. There was a example of this in Finnish league, when a team was employing man marking tactics, the other team went about it by smartly changing their positioning (I'm explaining this badly) so, that defending teams defense men ended up surfing near their own blue line. This move basically made the other coach look like an idiot.

Point of this is, that it should be possible to screw up your opponent in regular season matches as well. It just seems odd if other coaches get suddenly better when playoffs come around. If the solution to this is to change things around for just the sake of game forcing player to change things around, this isn't my game. I love football manager series, but I have never had to change things around just because nothing works for 4 games straight at all. Of course, I loose games, but I still have understanding what works and what doesn't work. I mean, if there are glaring problems in my tactics during matches, I see it and change it. In this game, I have no clue about how to design/custom tactics for my opponents.

What I'm trying to say is, that there are tactics that are more easy to counter and tactics that are more difficult to counter. If my opponent ALWAYS counters them, I don't really want to waste my time to this. It is a lot more harder to counter a really overly possessive tactic, where other team doesn't want to give up the puck and try to keep possession as much as possible than counter a tactic with a lot of dumping, tackling and rough housing. If the case is, that it doesn't matter what tactic you use, opponent automatically counters it ONLY in playoffs, it is quite stupid.

I'm not trying to get heat or anything like that, I'm just really interested if the game always plays like this. Otherwise, the game has been enjoyable, although, there are very little good hockey games on pc, which is quite sad. But I'm gonna stop ranting now!

[CeeBee]

I change up my tactics during the season as well. As far as I can tell teams get scouting reports and will counter your tactics if you don't tweak things a bit here and there. I don't change things every game but probably every 5 or 6 I'd say and I rarely make many changes or huge changes unless my team has started to play real bad and need a shake-up.

[harmonica]

I rarely change my tactics. When individual players have custom tactics based on their attributes then I don't see the need.

However, I have found that if you want to play allow a lower number of goals, that having 3 rotating tactics will help allow you to achieve that. It mostly has to do with breakouts and neutral zone stuff, your opponents will counter you. But if my team is playing well and winning, then let the other teams try and counter me and I will continue my game.

I also have defensive tactics for when I am up in the playoffs. I also shake up the lines to make them more defensive (moving third liners on to the first and second). Also giving more time to other low minutes players helps keep your big guns fresh.

Hidden attributes also play a role, your guys may just not be clutch performers.

[Richie Daggers Crime]

Point of this is, that it should be possible to screw up your opponent in regular season matches as well.

It is. I use alternating tactics (like was mentioned, mostly differing in breakout schemes) each time I play a team in the regular season as well.

It is quite mind boggling explanation, just because coaches outsmart their opponents also on regular season, if there is a vulnerability in tactics.

Things change a lot more in the regular season between games. You have lineup changes, injuries, opponent lineup changes, etc. Alternating tactics works in the regular season too (see above), but it's less of an issue because you rarely have everything the same the next time you play the opponent. Also, keep in mind that playoff games are generally more tightly contested and tactical than regular season games because of the stakes. Washington beat the piddle out of Montreal last year during the regular season, but lost the playoff series between the two. Washington kept playing the same way they played in the regular season, Montreal countered by bottling up the middle and collapsing on defense. Washington kept trying to pound away and lost.

There was a example of this in Finnish league, when a team was employing man marking tactics, the other team went about it by smartly changing their positioning (I'm explaining this badly) so, that defending teams defense men ended up surfing near their own blue line. This move basically made the other coach look like an idiot.

Well, think of it this way: Imagine if that idiot coach kept doing that same thing over and over again 6 games in a row... The tide of the series would probably turn against them.

If the solution to this is to change things around for just the sake of game forcing player to change things around, this isn't my game.

It's just counter tactics. I don't see how that's "just for the sake of the game". It's how hockey works.

If the case is, that it doesn't matter what tactic you use, opponent automatically counters it ONLY in playoffs, it is quite stupid.

But, that's not the case. A) opponents can certainly counter your tactics if you do the same thing over and over in the regular season and B) nobody "automatically" counters the tactics. They only do if you keep doing it again and again. It works that way in real hockey too.

Sorry, friend. Your rant comes off as sour grapes because you lost a few playoff series.

[tsuihkon]

Okay, I might not have hit the point I tried to hit. I have always had a idea in football manager games about my tactic and I started out with a "easier" tactic that I try to evolve into a better one, closer to my original idea. I'm trying this same approach in EHM 2007, but I can't comprehend the game at all. I'm not down with the idea that hockey works by changing tactics constantly. That ain't necessarily the case. Tactics, in my mind, should evolve to a certain idea, and keep evolving beyond that. The team that makes a lot of changes form game to game (I have, perhaps falsely, an idea that breakouts are a huge part of tactics), that should mean that player have difficulties to perform at their best level if fundamentals are being changed all the time.

My philosophy of hockey tactics are that a successful team should have a consistent tactical approach to their game, then they try to make the idea and reality meet and evolve it during the season. This has happened a lot in Finland, don't have idea of NHL, can't watch the darn games as much as I liked to because of the time difference. What I'm trying to say is, that success is found through consistency, patience and discipline rather than countering opponents tactics. One team in finnish league rose from bottom to the top by just keeping their "playbook" similar during the times they got hammered and finally performances got better and better, because players understood it better. Of course, their roster got better, but they never will have a best roster in the league, just because of the financial aspects, but they tried to make that difference up through tactical approach, and it worked. Everyone knows how they play, but still can't counter it to the extent of the example I had in my previous post.

I'm trying to duplicate that sort of a tactic in EHM, which is basically a ultraposessive tactic, where player don't give up the puck at all and attack using three different "rhythms". In their games, they might slow things to a halt by taking their time and trying to break through opponents neutral zone by patiently seeking out good passing lines. Or attack with a bit more speed, or just quick passing, all this depends on a situation. This kind of a tactic requires a lot of trial and error, but when it works, it's a thing of beauty and when it doesn't, it means lot of missed passes and breakaways for opponent . Can't explain this to a great detail because of the language barrier though.

Some tactics are also easier to teach to the players than others, which might mean that those tactics might not evolve as much as more difficult tactics. I'm not saying I'm the best tactician in the world, but I hope you guys catch my drift. This was the point that got me hooked to Football manager, but I'm more of a hockey fan than football, so I tried to apply my ideas to EHM. What I'm trying to find out is, does this kind of an approach even work in EHM?

EDIT: Lot of editing, my brain hurts...

[danzoeee]

Defense:

Weber Edler
Mara Visnovsky
Sutton Festerling

(i sent fowler to the junior team this year, bringing him up next)

Offense:

Parise Getzlaf Selänne
Ryan Carter Perry
Voros Koivu Parros
Jaffray Marchant Sexton

So i kinda got this deep 4th line, and quite a mix in the 3rd.. but what do you think about the 1st and 2nd line there? Should i play Ryan at the first or keep him at second line this year?

[Richie Daggers Crime]

Okay, I might not have hit the point I tried to hit.

I understand what your point is here. I think your minset works okay for the regular season, but less so for a playoff series. Understand that a 7 game series is a different beast and that it's definitely a tactical chess match between coaches. Teams switch it up in playoff series all the time. In fact, it's necessary to winning in the playoffs.

I think you're applying the soccer type mentality (one game at a time) to a hockey playoff system (7 game series) and that it's not really applicable.

[tsuihkon]

What I'm getting at here, is that I don't know how to switch them to get a better result. I do recycle lines if things ain't working, or change line matching, change hitting etc. It still to me, feels a bit like rock-paper-scissors and not a tactical contest if I just randomly change something hoping it to work. I just get the feeling that you click a change and then, it's all better for some weird reason and I just feel it's too random.

I just don't understand what I should change and when. I haven't found anything resembling assistant manager's feedback from FM in EHM. Maybe I have over looked something, but still, I don't like the idea of loosing and then just randomly changing breakouts or some other stuff. I should get a some hint why is this happening, on what areas my team is atrocious and why I get suddenly almost double amount of penalties. The playoffs started and it felt like the whole game suddenly changed without any info why. I don't mean to say that it should be easier, I just liked to have an idea why this is happening.

It's still feels like exaggeration that tactics that I used, quite successfully, in regular season are the drizzling Chelios in playoffs and even in the first game! If there was even a hint of this, I'd be pleased.

I still have to somewhat disagree about drastic tactical changes in playoffs, in my mind, it should be more of a risk, since your basically telling your players to play differently than they've done in the whole season. I don't see the logic of a coach saying "all right, last night our stuff didn't work, were gonna have completely different style of play tomorrow". I think players would be somewhat confused in the rink that night. This discussion is, of course, more of a irl hockey discussion, because it's extremely difficult to model this in a game and do good job at it.

[Richie Daggers Crime]

You keep exaggerating things. Nobody is saying "completely different system" or "drastic tactical changes" or "completely different style of play". Changing the way you do breakouts or enter the neutral zone isn't going to send professional hockey players into a state of mass confusion.

Teams switch tactics in the middle of a game and are absolutely fine with it. Ever watch a hockey game where a team with the lead going into the 3rd period, who had previously been playing an aggressive forecheck system, starts bottling up the neutral zone, collapsing on D and playing dump and chase? Sure you have, it happens all the time. Ever see a coach change up lines in the middle of a game or from game to game to mix things up and try to break a funk? Sure you have, it happens all the time. Ever see teams play different styles depending on who their opponent is? Absolutely you have, it happens all the time.

Also, there's shouldn't be anything "random" about making an adjustment. There should be some semblance of thought going into the process. People have mentioned breakouts and neutral zone breakouts. This isn't random, it's perfectly logical that an opponent can shift momentum by anticipating your breakouts. Maybe you need to switch up lines. No, there's no feedback system, but you can ask your coach for his recommended lines... see what he offers up. It may be different than what you're rolling and give you some food for thought. I keep 2 variations of the same tactic with some minor adjustments differentiating the two. I alternate them game to game. In that sense, you're absolutely right, it's not terribly realistic... but, like you said, it's a game and it's only replicating real life, so I'm willing to accept that the alternating tactics in the game represents the kind of adjustments that happen in real life. I can see where someone might not accept that, and that's the case, then maybe you're right and the game isn't for you.

Hockey does change in the playoffs in real life. It's why teams (like the Capitals or the Sharks) are criticized for having a good regular season but having a putrid playoff record. The Sharks are at the top of the league every year yet fail consistently come playoff time. Teams like Pittsburgh and Chicago were praised in their Cup winning years for being flexible and being adept at playing different "kinds" of hockey depending on their opponent and the situation. This is no different. Maybe your teams just aren't playoff teams? Do you have players with Cup rings? I find that if players win, they have an easier time replicating that success from year to year.

[tsuihkon]

Thanks for the replies, I got a lot better understanding of the game. What I've heard, it seems it's not what I'm looking for. I understand the point about slight tactical changes, but if there's no hint of any tactical changes, other than a scout report, then it's not perhaps my game. What I really enjoyed in FM is the level of feedback you get. I also liked to have a bit more depth in the game, if they had kept this game going and there would be a EHM 2011, it probably would be a lot better game. Just hate the fact, that there ain't really much to choose from in hockey games for pc. Not really bashing the game at all, it's not just something that hooks me.

Once more, thanks for the quick replies and keep this stuff alive!

[Wroom]

If I feel I'm in the lead and want to safe, or are under and need a change, I usually switch between no-line matching to line-matching.

[joneboy2000]

Any tips how i could get more realistic stats? I'm not playing this save anymore but when i start a new one i want the stats to be realistic....

Thanks in advance

[McQwak]

Do you use latest roster - Lidas 3.0? These stats are close to reality, imho. What's wrong with them? It depends on how you use each player.

[joneboy2000]

Yes i'm using Lidas 3.0 but come on, Horton & Lucic over 100 points?

[Tasku]

You have to remember that EHM 2007 came out in 2006, when the NHL had just implemented the no-hooking rule, previous season. Season 2004-05 was record high on goals scored, Crosby and Ovechkin both went over 100 points. It was expected that this trend would continue, and I think this explains partly some players getting "unrealistic" amounts of points.

Like McQwak said. It depends on how you use your players.

[joneboy2000]

You have to remember that EHM 2007 came out in 2006, when the NHL had just implemented the no-hooking rule, previous season. Season 2004-05 was record high on goals scored, Crosby and Ovechkin both went over 100 points. It was expected that this trend would continue, and I think this explains partly some players getting "unrealistic" amounts of points.

Like McQwak said. It depends on how you use your players.

That explains it... Thanks for the replies!

[joneboy2000]

Development question... Should i send Couturier back to the juniors, or keep him in my top 6?
I'm gonna tank again, so i don't mind about his attributes right now. Which option would be better for his development?

[Manimal]

Development question... Should i send Couturier back to the juniors, or keep him in my top 6?
I'm gonna tank again, so i don't mind about his attributes right now. Which option would be better for his development?

I would send him back to junior. He is better off playing for a succesful QMJHL team than losing with you guys.

[Panther23]

Development question... Should i send Couturier back to the juniors, or keep him in my top 6?
I'm gonna tank again, so i don't mind about his attributes right now. Which option would be better for his development?

I would send him back to his junior club, much better for both of you imho.

[RomaGoth]

Development question... Should i send Couturier back to the juniors, or keep him in my top 6?
I'm gonna tank again, so i don't mind about his attributes right now. Which option would be better for his development?

I would send him back to junior. He is better off playing for a succesful QMJHL team than losing with you guys.

Agreed.

[IslesEnforcer]

So John Tavares just finished his entry level deal, scored 98 points for my Islander team which just won the Stanley Cup. He wants 9 mil per and my board has no interest in paying that. I changed his value to the team from "hot prospect" to "key player" to "core' and he will not accept less than 9 mil per. I still retain his right but what do i do with him. Do I trade his rights or let him sit out?

[price31]

hey this is my current line up and roster in my 5th season.