Bruins in Spiral of Doom and Gloom

[Vaive-Alive]

Beantown (AP):

The Boston Bruins are in a spiral of doom and gloom. Not quite as horrific as a convertible bond death spiral, but their poor performance has created a strong feedback loop with the SIM Moral value that is definitely amplifying the teams woes and compounding their losses. The hole is getting deeper, the sides steeper, and to climb out of it is becoming increasingly more difficult. "We're at an alltime low of 39 on the Moral scale. This is uncharted territory for this franchise. Terrible really, and very unexpected." stated GM Kruegs.

GM Kruegs is contemplating his options at this point in time, although there is no indication that the team is about to make any significant moves as of yet. When asked what he might do, GM Kruegs stated "At this juncture, the only thing I can say with any certainty is something that my good friend Louis Gosset Jr. once said to Chuck Norris..."If the gold isn't here, it must be somewhere else." "

Bobby Orr
Boston Globe

Click to read more...

 

[Canuck09]

One of my issues with this sim is the Morale rating (when turned on like ours is). It causes such highs and lows and once you get too high/low you seem to stay there forever. Start out with a few wins and ride that train to the top all year. Start out with a few losses and it's a struggle to win more than 2 at a time.

I've even read the creator of the damn program saying he sets it at 1 for his test seasons. Why put it in there if you have to turn it down/off to get results you like?!?

 

[HFNHLOilers]

That's an interesting point but unless something is outta wack in my version of the sim not entirely true. My league the CHL has moral turned on I started the season out and incredible 5-0 made no changes to my lines and proceded to lose 5 games in a row and ever since it's been win one lose one. I honestly don't know how much of an impact moral has because my team isnt very high moral and I'm still finding ways to win. Also adding another point here isn't that how the real NHL works too though the worst teams Ottawa, Edmonton, Toronto go on long losing streaks which lowers confidence which in turn leads to more loses and when they wi n they play with more confidence? Not saying either of your teams are the worst in our league but I'm just pointing out the fact this happens in the NHL as well not to mention. I'd also like to point out that the inter division packed schedule tends to lead to bogus results and can easily change once we get out of this. Did anyone at the start of the year expect the Coyotes to be leading the pacific or Red Wings to be leading a very strong central ?

 

[The old geezer]

To be honest I hadn't really paid attention to Morale this year but the variability is much lower this year. Only the Av's are above 70 (71) with a couple in the 60's whereas the bottom is mid 30's. The Wings are 57.

This is a much tighter band range than last year. I remember having a moral rating of high 70's and low 80's most of the year and some teams peaked in the 90's. In short, I'm not sure the morale rating could justify this change and I do think that there has been less streakiness league wide this year than last.

Final note: This is purely my perception based on some observations I made last year but as far as I can tell, you, as GM, can influence your teams overall morale by the way you set your line-ups. I'll leave it to you to figure out what I mean but as far as I can tell morale does not change solely on win's and losses.

 

[Canuck09]

Did anyone at the start of the year expect the Coyotes to be leading the pacific or Red Wings to be leading a very strong central ?

While morale obviously doesn't run the entire league and determine results 100% of the time I don't think we can say it doesn't have any impact. If not due in large part to early morale boosts, how else could teams like the Coyotes, Wings or Hurricanes still be leading their divisions at this point? Not to be overly disrespectful but those teams aren't exactly the strongest.

There's definitely more to the whole sim than morale but it's been documented and acknowledged by Simon that it causes very random results and I agree. It certainly makes things interesting though.

To be honest I hadn't really paid attention to Morale this year but the variability is much lower this year. Only the Av's are above 70 (71) with a couple in the 60's whereas the bottom is mid 30's. The Wings are 57.

This is a much tighter band range than last year. I remember having a moral rating of high 70's and low 80's most of the year and some teams peaked in the 90's. In short, I'm not sure the morale rating could justify this change and I do think that there has been less streakiness league wide this year than last.

Final note: This is purely my perception based on some observations I made last year but as far as I can tell, you, as GM, can influence your teams overall morale by the way you set your line-ups. I'll leave it to you to figure out what I mean but as far as I can tell morale does not change solely on win's and losses.

I don't think morale has had a chance to climb to the 80-90 (or drop to the 20-30)point range yet given that everyone starts at 50. At our current rate the top teams will hit 80-90 by the mid point of the season.

As for other causes for morale fluctuations, I agree it's not soley based on wins/losses but it is very largely based on that from what I see. I tracked mine every game for a 20-30 game stretch last year with my regular attendance tracking and outside of injuries causing a major drop, wins/losses were the only thing that seemed to consistantly cause changes.

 

[HFNHL Commish]

For what it's worth, while I think that I set my team up fairly well for this version of the sim (STHS would seem to reward my roster depth more than FHL ever did), I fully believe that morale played a large role in my Ducks winning the Western Conference last year. On paper, I had no business winning the conference...

 

[Hossa]

I think Matt said the importance of Morale was decreased this year in the sim settings. So it shouldn't be the single explanation for everything. That being said, it might still be having an impact, but the test will be to see how things go as the schedules open up.

I don't want to ***** about being hard done by, but the run of divisional games to start the season has certainly demoralized my team. The Northwest is probably the strongest division in the league again this year, but even then, 27th in the league still confuses the hell out of me, particularly since injuries have not been the issue. I genuinely wonder whether my club will be able to recover from this if Morale is having a big impact on things.

 

[MatthewFlames]

This is a much tighter band range than last year. I remember having a moral rating of high 70's and low 80's most of the year and some teams peaked in the 90's. In short, I'm not sure the morale rating could justify this change and I do think that there has been less streakiness league wide this year than last.

I think Matt said the importance of Morale was decreased this year in the sim settings. So it shouldn't be the single explanation for everything. That being said, it might still be having an impact, but the test will be to see how things go as the schedules open up.

The leagues morale setting this year is 25. Last year it was something like 60-65. So it should have far less impact.

Final note: This is purely my perception based on some observations I made last year but as far as I can tell, you, as GM, can influence your teams overall morale by the way you set your line-ups. I'll leave it to you to figure out what I mean but as far as I can tell morale does not change solely on win's and losses.

Um yes This is true.

 

[MatthewFlames]

For what it's worth, while I think that I set my team up fairly well for this version of the sim (STHS would seem to reward my roster depth more than FHL ever did), I fully believe that morale played a large role in my Ducks winning the Western Conference last year. On paper, I had no business winning the conference...

Just like what happens in real life sometimes - look at the NHL Avs last year versus this year - with pretty much the same team except young players with more experience (injuries aside) - The sim does have more randomness than most people like - from reading the forums - but each version seems to have less.

 

[MatthewFlames]

I don't want to ***** about being hard done by, but the run of divisional games to start the season has certainly demoralized my team. The Northwest is probably the strongest division in the league again this year, but even then, 27th in the league still confuses the hell out of me, particularly since injuries have not been the issue. I genuinely wonder whether my club will be able to recover from this if Morale is having a big impact on things.

Yeah - that was ****** - the schedule maker just plain sucked and I did about a dozen versions before I realized that I just couldn't get it to not do that.... some were so horrible - there was the first one which had 4 out of my first 5 games against the Oilers - I couldn't take that much of an advantage tho.

 

[Vaive-Alive]

Final note: This is purely my perception based on some observations I made last year but as far as I can tell, you, as GM, can influence your teams overall morale by the way you set your line-ups. I'll leave it to you to figure out what I mean but as far as I can tell morale does not change solely on win's and losses.

Are you suggesting I should increase the ice time of my players with higher individual MO values. Have you looked at my player's individual MO values? They're all on Prozac right now. But if you have suggestions - please - send them to me! I've had Fleischmann on my top line for the last 4 games ( MO 48 )- he's had the highest MO - to no avail.

I know Drew and Matt are probably more familiar with the SIM than most in this league - so lets not be shy guys - pray tell...

 

[Vaive-Alive]

And another loss. New lines. Same result. Appear to be beating a dead horse here....

 

[HFNHL Commish]

Looks like Rinne responded to his verbal thrashing in media. Sorry it came at your expense, Kruegs. ;-)

 

[Ohio Jones]

Looks just as streaky as last year to me. 5 wins, 3 losses, 1 win, 5 losses... if it wasn't for the extra point from my many OT and SO losses, I'd only have 18 points in 23 games and be third last in the West.

Hmm... maybe that isn't streaky, maybe my team just sucks!

 

[Ohio Jones]

Looks just as streaky as last year to me. 5 wins, 3 losses, 1 win, 5 losses... if it wasn't for the extra point from my many OT and SO losses, I'd only have 18 points in 23 games and be third last in the West.

Hmm... maybe that isn't streaky, maybe my team just sucks!

By the way... I don't seem to be able to view the individual game data form the last round of games played. Anyone else experiencing that issue? Is it an upload problem?

 

[MatthewFlames]

By the way... I don't seem to be able to view the individual game data form the last round of games played. Anyone else experiencing that issue? Is it an upload problem?

Seems to have been an upload problem. Re-doing it now.

 

[Ohio Jones]

Seems to have been an upload problem. Re-doing it now.

Thanks - that's got it. I guess if you're going to lose a game in overtime, losing it to a Henrik Sedin set up of Rick Nash is about as reasonable as it gets.

 

[Hossa]

Um yes This is true.

Was that the case last year as well?

Yeah - that was ****** - the schedule maker just plain sucked and I did about a dozen versions before I realized that I just couldn't get it to not do that.... some were so horrible - there was the first one which had 4 out of my first 5 games against the Oilers - I couldn't take that much of an advantage tho.

Ya I know you tried to sort it out and the schedule maker held his ground. Obviously if the divisional games had gone my way I'd feel differently about it, but short of relocating the team to Quebec City to force a divisional change, what can you do I guess.

 

[MatthewFlames]

Was that the case last year as well?

Ya I know you tried to sort it out and the schedule maker held his ground. Obviously if the divisional games had gone my way I'd feel differently about it, but short of relocating the team to Quebec City to force a divisional change, what can you do I guess.

Yah - I wish I was still in divisional games 'cause I'm now 0-4 outside the division

I'm not sure if you could affect morale last year - but I have read in the forums that you can affect morale with ice time rewards - and that too much ice time can also have an affect.

I read a discussion on the forums where some have noticed that if you have a line of 3 softies but play them with a high physical rating this will affect them as well. I've noticed that with the set-up of my 4th line - and its done better when I used my physical bums on that line and not my 1st line forwards again (since I have a higher DF and PH ratings set-up).

Also read that there are certain players who will play better in certain combos - I've read that players who have high PA and closely rated SC (almost in balance but PA higher) will shoot less, pass more - but players with a higher SC and lower PA will almost always shoot - there is a relationship to a players performance in some algorithm in the sim. It's not a published thing but its on the forums in discussion with Simon and GM's who've worked the most in testing.

So trying to find a combo of those types might work - I have Wolski with a 79 passing and a much lower SC, so he's a passer, and he's worked well on the PP with Hejduk, who has a high SC rating. I think if you have three totally balanced players SC, PA wise it doesn't work as well as if you have one or two players who have opposite strengths.

On my PP top line (Wolski, Datsyuk, Hejduk) I have 9 assists for Wolski, 10 for Datsyuk, with Hejduk doing the scoring. I think its because Wolski/Datsyuk are more 'pure' passers - there PA rating is more than 6 points higher than the SC rating, while Hejduk has a higher SC. When I had Umberger on the PP, who has more balanced ratings, they barely scored.

Does that make sense?

Of course none of this is really official - Although Simon has opined in on the SC PA ratings thing.

So - I think it's not just morale... there are other factors to consider. We're all experimenting --- but reading through discussions on the boards over at SimonT helps a lot. I'm no guru but catch me on msn and I'll try to answer any other questions 2.

 

[Hossa]

Yah - I wish I was still in divisional games 'cause I'm now 0-4 outside the division

I'm not sure if you could affect morale last year - but I have read in the forums that you can affect morale with ice time rewards - and that too much ice time can also have an affect.

I read a discussion on the forums where some have noticed that if you have a line of 3 softies but play them with a high physical rating this will affect them as well. I've noticed that with the set-up of my 4th line - and its done better when I used my physical bums on that line and not my 1st line forwards again (since I have a higher DF and PH ratings set-up).

Also read that there are certain players who will play better in certain combos - I've read that players who have high PA and closely rated SC (almost in balance but PA higher) will shoot less, pass more - but players with a higher SC and lower PA will almost always shoot - there is a relationship to a players performance in some algorithm in the sim. It's not a published thing but its on the forums in discussion with Simon and GM's who've worked the most in testing.

So trying to find a combo of those types might work - I have Wolski with a 79 passing and a much lower SC, so he's a passer, and he's worked well on the PP with Hejduk, who has a high SC rating. I think if you have three totally balanced players SC, PA wise it doesn't work as well as if you have one or two players who have opposite strengths.

On my PP top line (Wolski, Datsyuk, Hejduk) I have 9 assists for Wolski, 10 for Datsyuk, with Hejduk doing the scoring. I think its because Wolski/Datsyuk are more 'pure' passers - there PA rating is more than 6 points higher than the SC rating, while Hejduk has a higher SC. When I had Umberger on the PP, who has more balanced ratings, they barely scored.

Does that make sense?

Of course none of this is really official - Although Simon has opined in on the SC PA ratings thing.

So - I think it's not just morale... there are other factors to consider. We're all experimenting --- but reading through discussions on the boards over at SimonT helps a lot. I'm no guru but catch me on msn and I'll try to answer any other questions 2.

You know the division title is out of reach when your primary division rival is giving you tips.

Thanks Kershaw, I'll try and grab you on MSN but lately Adium's been acting up for some reason.

 

[The old geezer]

I'm not sure if you could affect morale last year - but I have read in the forums that you can affect morale with ice time rewards - and that too much ice time can also have an affect.

I read a discussion on the forums where some have noticed that if you have a line of 3 softies but play them with a high physical rating this will affect them as well. I've noticed that with the set-up of my 4th line - and its done better when I used my physical bums on that line and not my 1st line forwards again (since I have a higher DF and PH ratings set-up).

Darn, there goes my sole point of advantage

This is what I observed last year as well and have used, overplaying guys hurts and you need to find some special teams time for those 3rd/4th liners. Really tough for me when on my team the bottom 6 and 3rd pairing are already over matched.

I've also found the play style to help as Matt mentioned from the boards. The last thing I've noticed not mentioned here is having guys staying as healthy scratches too long not only pulls them down but it seems they're whiners that bring the rst of the team down.

On the bright side as GM's adopt this my team should start losing more and improve my draft position

 

[MatthewFlames]

To add to the balanced PA, SC concept in the previous post.

I recently moved Trent Hunter off my 2nd line - and bumped up Downie. And the line stopped scoring (and I started losing)

I think the reason is this PA, SC balance concept.

Downie is a PA 71 SC 71
Wolski is a PA 79 SC 72
Hunter is a PA 74 SC 70
Setoguchi is a PA 72 SC 75

So - Wolski (5G, 8A) passing to Setoguchi (8G, 6A). Hunter has 3 goals on that line - and though he only has one assist, I think he obviously is better suited than Downie.

So, it's not a happy balance in some ways - Hunter really isn't a 2nd line F, he should be on my 3rd. I don't really have a 2nd line F to put in (Downie and Berglund have 71 PA, SC - a balanced rating that doesn't help give the line a huge edge)....

AND - on the morale front - both Downie and Hunter have had their MO drop significantly since the line changes (as has the whole team since we've lost 3 straight)

 

[MatthewFlames]

Thanks Kershaw, I'll try and grab you on MSN but lately Adium's been acting up for some reason.

You know mine was for a few weeks too - just downloaded an updated version yesterday that seems to have fixed it.

 

[Hossa]

To add to the balanced PA, SC concept in the previous post.

I recently moved Trent Hunter off my 2nd line - and bumped up Downie. And the line stopped scoring (and I started losing)

I think the reason is this PA, SC balance concept.

Downie is a PA 71 SC 71
Wolski is a PA 79 SC 72
Hunter is a PA 74 SC 70
Setoguchi is a PA 72 SC 75

So - Wolski (5G, 8A) passing to Setoguchi (8G, 6A). Hunter has 3 goals on that line - and though he only has one assist, I think he obviously is better suited than Downie.

So, it's not a happy balance in some ways - Hunter really isn't a 2nd line F, he should be on my 3rd. I don't really have a 2nd line F to put in (Downie and Berglund have 71 PA, SC - a balanced rating that doesn't help give the line a huge edge)....

AND - on the morale front - both Downie and Hunter have had their MO drop significantly since the line changes (as has the whole team since we've lost 3 straight)

What I don't understand is why you've succeeded with Datsyuk, one of the highest PAs in the game, at wing, with Umberger at center instead. I see that your first line is balanced, but the organization of it confuses me.

The key to my offensive struggles is Geno, who thankfully has stopped fighting every game, and hasn't torn his ACL either, but has been poor no matter where he plays. He's had time at C and RW on both the first and second line. Last year I put Ribeiro between he and Staal and rode that unit all the way, but nothing I've done has been able to duplicate that success. I'm just getting eaten alive at even strength. Second best combined special teams in the league.

You know mine was for a few weeks too - just downloaded an updated version yesterday that seems to have fixed it.

Mine never works at the school library for some reason, nor does regular Messenger. Only Skype, because it for some reason has no issues with a crappy internet.

 

[MatthewFlames]

You know the division title is out of reach when your primary division rival is giving you tips.

And I can also tell you exactly why you can't score and why you're losing right now. You didn't try to lower your awesome players awesome PA ratings.

Check it:

Krejci PA 80, SC 71
Vermette PA 77, SC 74
Laich PA 77, SC 74
Backes PA 75, SC 73
Malkin PA 88, SC 81
Antropov PA 80, SC 76
Staal PA 81, SC 80

Basically - if the PA/SC balance thing is real - then you're suffering from it big time - So, its not really affecting the number of shots (758 for the Canucks versus 685 for the Flames) but perhaps the ability for your team to create real scoring chances.

You do have:

Hornqvist PA 72, SC 76

And he should play with Krejci and Malkin probably (since they're the 'purest' passers you have.) Especially on the PP.

Right now you have Malkin with Patty which is good - but I think Krejci will be a better fit. Vermette is a more balanced player which strangely probably unbalances your lines