halifax

I think for the most part, guys will be able to give you pointers but ultimately you just need to play as many games as you can and try and learn from others by watching how they play.

perhaps he needs a new title instead of GENS player...what's a good nickname for a super nintendo and genesis player?(I'll make a new topic)

LOL....start with ACDC's thunderstruck...that will build the excitement

do you do this on purpose? lose abunch and then try and make a comeback? ....gl in game 7

that's a tough question...even if i have the lead i still try to make an effort and score and not play a game of 'keep away'...but on the flip side...I gotta give you kudos...if you're good enough to do that...you're not cheating in anyway and whoever your opponent is simply gonna have to figure out how to get the puck from you. *Edit...I should add that if you are just playing an exhibition game....then it's probably not a good idea..but if its a play off or championship...then you do what you gotta do to win.

congrats man, you've got a great attitude in the community and your write-ups are stellar.

The Deer, You make a good point about nerves. Obviously skill has to do with outcomes but nerves can play a big role as well (maybe even a bigger role). So far, playing in the winter league. I have a record of 11-16...I have a record of 11-1 against the SNES 'B' league players and an 0-15 record against SNES A league players. why is that? You'd think I would've atleast won once against an 'A' league player or lost more against the 'B' guys. well there obvioulsy is a skill difference between the A and B players...but why do i make come backs or win the one goal games against the 'B' players...and blow leads against the 'A' players and lose the one goal games. I think it nerves more so then skill....I go in thinking 'well i'm not supposed to win this game since it is an A league player so let's just have some fun with it' and i find myself trying to make low percentage plays that i wouldn't normally make just trying to get a goal...or on the reverse side playing defence...not concentrating on making the plays. don't get me wrong i'm not saying I should have a winning record against 'A' players...but I know there were a few games where i'd be up but never felt comfortable with playing the lead against the better players and vice versa against the B players(never feeling out of it when fallen behind). i'm not even in the playoffs yet.....lol..perhaps my nerves will be shot by then. EDIT* for the spring perhaps I'll ask Evan if he can start an A-/B+ league...then my nerves wont have anything to do with it

Hey good series guys...congrats to Jota, he played some tough series throughout the playoffs.

I don't know what particular player jersey I would support but I'm a canucks fan so anyone of will em do..even harold snepts. on a side note..my favourite jersey story is that back in high school we played a lot of street hockey(still play today but in a league instead of on the street)...anyways..my older brother liked to be the 'intimidator' to the rest of us younger and smaller guys. He bought a Chicago Jersey so he could be Mike Peluso. Only one day afer he got Peluso and a number silk screened on his jersey, peluso was traded. We still laugh about it to this day.

truer words were never spoken....welcome to the site.

great idea....which team will be the soviets?

The Deer, so you've switched to the dark side...tsk tsk...(i'm kidding of course)...Close first game with kgman nice work....I found manual goalie in GENS a bit frustrating compared to the SNES since you have told hold the button down for a second or so to activate the goalie as opposed to just tapping the button in SNES and having activated your goalie instantly. A lot of times, saves that you know you would've made in the SNES, you lose out on from that split second difference. But obviously it's one of those things you need to get accustomed to. I've thought about playing the GENS as well down the road. I like the league that dimitry has set up with drafting players and if he continues to have these types of leagues I'm gonna try to get in one.

I've tried several line combos with LA in the winter league...and the one I've used for the past 5 or 6 games has been this... Gretzky-Granato-Robitaille Blake-Mcsorley I had sandstrom at center and then he got put out for a game and I through granato in. He scored the tying goal with 2 seconds left against boston then scored the winner in OT. I've put him in ever since.

congrats on the win marc!....great series!

I was losing to the computer when I first started playing the game and he would be trash talking me during the game. I'd hit the post and he'd say things like 'that's all you had to shoot at' or 'the sweet sound of no goal'....'not cool' I said. I've thrashed him ever since.

Evan, Let me know if you want me to replace one of them. Just kidding of course:D

I like using the canucks, just becuase they have one of the fastest, if not THE fastest line in the game(ronning, bure, courtnall). So for tournaments I usually pick them. But in the league I'm running, I had the option to pick them and went for LA instead hoping that a better team(statically speaking) might help give a little bit of an edge. When it's exhibition games or best 4 of 7's ...then we just pick any team.

im a big cancuks fan...rory for life..im voting fo shizzle!

I never knew they existed..those are sweet!

thanks for the feedback! I think I managed to cover your concerns but perhaps I didn't explain them clearly. I think it was addison who asked in a previous topic how I handled forfeit wins. His concern was that it didn't represent the players skill since no game was played and I agreed with that fact. So just to be clear, the forfeit win in the league standings is separate. Try to think of the coachs rankings as a separate standings all together. so the forfeit winner is treated as if no game even happened....however...the forfeit loser(as you pointed out)would be penailzed because they didn't make themself available to play the game and would be handed a 'game played' receiving 0 points(basically a loss). to your second point, If someone wants to front load their games..that is fine because once they reach 40 games played it is simply always updating their regular season score which will best represent their play in their previous 40 games. example. dating back to last season, coach X's last 40 games record was 20-20....40 games ago coach X had received a loss.....then X happen to win his next game...and since the 40th game(which now becomes the 41st game played ago) is now dropped...and your record is 21-19 in your last 40 games and your coach ranking would be adjusted to reflect that change. If someone decides to back load their games...that is where the TDNP's come in. A coach who finished high in the standings from the previous season shouldn't continue to be left at the top of the rankngs if they aren't playing during the new season(its no different then if a coach decided not to come back altogether)...but once the coach played their games...then their score would be adjusted. for replacement coaches like yourself...you would fall under that 5 game per week rule...and since you played 25 games in less then a week...it wouldn't matter..you score would be based on those 25 games... As you mentioned leagues may have different amounts of games next year(some 40, some 50 or whatever). I picked 40 games so that every player is on the same level....its your last 40 games no matter what league you played in..or how many teams you have.. you're right when you say its a lot of work...cause i would have to go through every coaches schedule...and start inputting scores....but id be willing to give it a shot atleast. Also to add to the playoffs theory...im thinking it might be best to receive 5 points for win and a deduction of 2 points for each loss...that way...soemone who sweeps a series would be better off then someone who won in 7 games....for every series not played in...would be a reduction of 8 points(like 4 straight losses).

Was there a point to this, other then the sarcasm?

I wanted to improve this coaches rankings list…so it best represents a coaches skill, commitment to the game and to a lesser extent longevity of playing. For Regular season games… Forfeit wins or ties won’t count as a played game. Those coaches made an attempt to play the game and shouldn’t be penalized but since the game wasn’t played. It would be treated as if there was no game at all. However, a forfeit loss or DNP would count as a game played…If you don’t try to play your game you should be penalized and have it be a game played which of course you receive zero points. I would take the last 40 regular season(regardless of season) ‘games played’ and total your points. That is your regular season score. (obviously a perfect score is 80 points…2 pts per win)…and of course this is constantly updated with each game played. This will also solve the issue of coaches with multiple teams since I can take their last 40 games in general. As well….new coaches don’t have to wait more then a one season to have a chance to get there name on the list. I’ve also factored in a temporary did not play category…TDNP….this would be put in place to factor in someone’s accountability for playing games. Evan gives roughly 8 weeks to play 40 games…or 5 games per week. If at the end of week one you have a minimum of 5 games played…you will have 0 TDNP….week 2 a minimum of 10 games played…etc. as long as you stay above this average…your games will be factored normally. However…if at the end of week one you have zero games played your TDNP would be 5….meaning you’ve ‘temporarily’ played 5 games and received zero points…. Once you play your games and get caught up…the TDNP’s disappear. The reason for this category is to prevent someone staying at the same score for a long period of time without playing games….with TDNP’s, their score would decrease over time but as I explained…once they get caught up for the minimum games required…their score would be adjusted like any normal situation. I’m still torn on how the playoffs should factor in. I’ll still prefer to use the 5 points per game to total 80 points(16wins X 5) equals a championship. I’ll take the last 4 play-off series(including to the previous season) into account. If you get eliminated in the first round…your score for the next 3 rounds will be zero but counts as a playoff series. But how would playoff forfeit wins factor into the equation?…should it be the same as regular season? This issue was one I was wrestling with for sure since I already mentioned how it is incorporated for regular season games. I think a forfeit in the playoff should count (but only for the playoffs). Here’s an example as to why. Team A and B play in different conferences...both finish with identical 35-5 records. Both teams meet in the final where Team B beats Team A in 7 games. However during the playoffs Team B received two forfeit wins. So both teams receive 70 points for their regular season score…yet in the playoffs team A is credited with 15 victories (75 points) and team B only 14 victories(70 points)….which would leave team A at the top of the ranking even though they lost in the finals….to me this wouldn’t be reflective of a true number one. I think team B should get credit for those forfeit wins into their rankings….again this would only be for the play offs. I also wondered if playoff losses should factor in the ranking as well(meaning a team that sweeps someone should deserve better then some who needs 7 games to beat an opponent)…but I wasn’t sure how I could go about it. One difficult thing will be to determine a league’s strength. Although I would argue that the ‘b’ leagues from this year were weaker…I think to only give them 50% is unfair…but what is a good number?….and as Evan mentioned in another topic…the leagues could be set up a little differently for the spring….so determining a league’s strength will be tough to do. Is this a lot of work? Definitely…which is why I asked Dadonch44 to see if his stat tracker could be modified to fit this formula or one close to it. Obviously this would save me time from doing manual calculations. Dadonch44 has a keen interest in stats and said he would help out if he could. Hopefully it was explained clearly.....I look forward to your feedback.

perhaps that may be the case for the GENS....but I think there is a debate for SNES... Lemieux seems to score from wherever, whenever...but like i say..i only gave him a 'slight' edge over roenick and yzerman.

that's pretty sweet....on top of that..your avatar kicks ass....

I don't think there's any players better then the three already mentioned...I think i'd give lemieux a slight edge over the other two... Best goalie is Rick "can you spare" Knickle.