EHM The Blue Line

OK folks, riddle me this....

Did a Coach's report on one of my minor league players.

The response was:

"Coach thinks player is a solid member of the team

He isn't the most talented of players on the team, we shouldn't be lookingot him as a future contributor"

What does this really mean? Does it mean he's a good minor leaguer, but won't make it in the bigs? This seems confusing.

I've also seen other types of mixed messages like this.

Thanks,

I've had it happen a few times.

I had called up a young D-man... not very skilled, but had great size, checking ability and a cannon slapshot... and my head coach (Ted Nolan) did not think he warranted being on the team. I'd tend to agree, but I had a personal soft spot for the guy and kept him up. He's been a No. 5-6 D-man the past 3 seasons, averaging about 25-30 points and he's not considered a 'solid member of the team.'

I think in your case, the player may have or may be performing to a certain level, perhaps exceeding expectations, so he might be a solid player, even if the coach isn't sold on him.

I believe your coaches evaluations weigh heavily on their stats at evaluating ability and potential. Like a scout the better these stats the more accurately they'll eval the player. I usually try to have a coach with these stats high, but if not I just rely on my scout and assistant GM's evals since both these peoples evaluating stats should always be high.

Keep in mind that those reports are made by a computer, not a real human, so don't be too surprised if it's sometimes confusing

Then coach reports are totally different from scout reports. They don't judge the player's abilities or potential, but rather how he performs on the ice with your team and under your tactics. That's how i ended with coaching reports telling me that Chris Dingman is an established key player on the team, while my scouts tell me he's a depth guy. He plays on my 3rd line and 1st PK unit, which makes him more of a depth guy. Then he records about 10-15 goals and 30 points per season, always lead the league in hits, always have a positive +/- while being opposed to opponent's top lines, wins most of his numerous fights, is always in the top-5 in the league penalty minutes, is always over 8.00 in average rating, and is often nominated for the Selke Trophy, and sometimes wins it. All of this shows how big his impact is on the team, reason why my coaches are talking about an established key player even if his place is clearly not on the first line.

On the other side, i have Jay Pandolfo. He's also considered as a 3rd liner by my scouts, but his average rating is always under 7, and his +/- is nearly always negative. My coaches are telling me he just doesn't have his place with the team.

Both Dingman and Pandolfo are rated as 3rd liners by my scouts, but coaches opinions are way different for both of them, and i totally agree with my coaches, reason why i'll never trade Dingman, while i'll let Pandolfo hit the FA market.

Now about your prospect, i think your coaches see him as a consistent player who mostly plays every night at his level of play, but is just not skilled enough to make the big team. But if he is with one of your affiliate teams, you'd better hear your scouts first, as your coaches are mostly judging the impact of the player on the team, and therefore can't judge wisely someone who doesn't play and train with them everyday.

At least, that's the way i understood it... Correct me if i'm wrong...

Thanks for the replies.

It looks like I need to scout the players and use the scout's reports, along with the coach's reports to have a complete picture.

I also look at the ratings myself and make a judgement.

I've had several coaches reports/scouts reports rank a player as marginal talent, when they've got "green" numbers (e.g. >16 (I think that's the number) rating) in multiple areas. On those, I typically ignore the reports and keep/trade for the player. I've been pretty successful with that strategy.

Also I've got an Asst. GM who has a different point of view than mine (As Retired Gen Colin Powell states - "If you have a yes man on your staff, one of you is redundant"), so that if we both agree, then I'm pretty sure that it's a good player for my team. I also rely on the Asst. GM on trades, if he thinks it's a good trade, then I'll strongly consider it. If he doesn't like the trade, then I'll reject the trade the majority of the time. I use the Asst. GM to narrow down my choices, especially when I offer a player to everyone and get 10-12 offers.

I'll continue to post other conflicting reports. Others can feel free to post them here also

With the Washington Capitals on te outside looking in at the playoffs, <player> is generating interest......

Right now, after 49 games, the Caps are in 1st place - 68 pts, the next closest teams are 62 & 61 pts.

Maybe by outside, they mean "far above the competition looking down upon them?"

Yeah, I don't think so either.

Shadd666 wrote:Keep in mind that those reports are made by a computer, not a real human, so don't be too surprised if it's sometimes confusing

I agree with Chris Dingman's the best role-player in EHM IMHO.

In my current game, Nolan Yonkman is my anchor 6th d-man for so many seasons. But he's averaging 8.00+ rating (and minimum 5 bodychecks per game) and Dave Tippett consider him as irremplacable member of the team and the trainers loves his work ethic and conditioning.

Not bad for somebody the scout rate as defensive 5th or 6th depth defenseman. That's why at the end of the season, he'll get any money he want for long term contract. I don't care, that's Tom Hicks money

I like those kind of report from the coaches, they prove that in EHM (as in RL) quality depth players are equally valuable (if not more Ihmo) than flashy sniper.

Hi guys, a bit off topics, but since there are discussion of role players,

How do you get your role players to average 8+? I am having serious trouble with mine. They are not hitting even if i set them to berserk aggressiveness. I am also giving them very decent ice time (10+ min including PK).

Ortmeyer, Sutherby, Betts, Chris Clark are all averaging close to 6 and have a low to very low morale most of the time.

In general..you don't. Cause they are not getting enough ice time to do so. Try rolling lines and you might get them to 7 or so. But if you put them on a higher line with more ice time..they will not play as well in general.

what i do every year is assign my best 2 scouts to scout my whole team including the trialists and signed players and i judge my players based on the general evaluations and i find it more effective than to judge them by listening to the coach reports.

e.g. rob niedermayer wont ever be good enough for your squad.
i mean comon he isnt the best player but he can do his thing.
and the general impressions mostly give a better and bigger picture of your player.

You need both coach and scouts reports to have an idea about the player. Your coaches may think Rob is not good enough for your squad just because you have so much better talent than him in your team. Or maybe do they think that he is not the kind of players who should perform well with the tactics you're using. Either, they judge players accordingly to various factors within the team, and obviously accordingly to their judging ability/potential skills...

On the other hand, scouts will give you a more neutral point of view. For example, "player X is a third line talent" means that this guy should be seen on the third line of a normally built NHL team (or whatever league you're playing in). But in excellent team, player X may just be a 4th liner or even a backup player because there's so much talent ahead of him. In weaker teams, player X may see some 2nd line icetime, due to the globaly poor talent in the squad.

Those opinions are complementary, as you can see. But they are just opinions, advices to help you making the right decisions. But in the end, you're the only guy who effectively make the decision, so your own judgement matters a lot too! But there is no numbered attribute in the game to evaluate how accurate your judgement is...

Shadd666 wrote:You need both coach and scouts reports to have an idea about the player. Your coaches may think Rob is not good enough for your squad just because you have so much better talent than him in your team. Or maybe do they think that he is not the kind of players who should perform well with the tactics you're using. Either, they judge players accordingly to various factors within the team, and obviously accordingly to their judging ability/potential skills...

Are you speculating about the tactics/overall talent thing? I don't think the AI has the intelligence to differentiate the tactics you're using. I pretty much only use my scout to check on potential, although the comparable player line sometimes means more then the line they think they'll end up on (3rd line Alfredsson is one I have now). In the end though, I'm the head scout of my team. I use guys that the coaches don't really love and my scouts call limited (see Brandon Prust) to decent results, usually pulling in 30 points and 6.75 avr with a league min contract and playing a shutdown role.

dybbuk wrote:Are you speculating about the tactics/overall talent thing?

Absolutely, that's total speculation At least for the tactics part. I think the overall talent is really taken into account. I doubt the tactics one is implemented in the game, but maybe it is... Afterall, we're still discovering new things about this game, nearly 2 years after its release... Anyhow, it would make sense if coaches reports took the tactical stuff into account, no? But then again, i doubt it's in.

Well, I think it would be fairly complicated system, seeing as how somebody could theoretically change their tactics before everygame. Surely not everybody is going to fit into every system.

dybbuk wrote:Well, I think it would be fairly complicated system, seeing as how somebody could theoretically change their tactics before everygame. Surely not everybody is going to fit into every system.

Yes and no... If you change your tactics that much for every game, you're players will be totally lost on the ice, no matter their skills or the type of players they are. So in this case, it's the coach (or the human player who sets the strategies...) that doesn't have his place with the team