smozoma Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 How many games are we having? Last year we did 56(4/2/2/2 (division matches)), I think. I'd rather do 62(4/3/2/2) or even 68(4/4/2/2). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDonch44 Posted October 26, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 How many games are we having?Last year we did 56(4/2/2/2 (division matches)), I think. I'd rather do 62(4/3/2/2) or even 68(4/4/2/2). i was figuring on 56 again. Like Dmitry said that if you change too many things, (i.e. penalty length, season length) then the records will be skewed. For example, instead of Sandstrom having 250 goals this season with a 68 game schedule he will have 312. Then you have to figure out, oh was that season 2 when they played 56 or season 3 with 68. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 I like 4 vs division, 3 vs conference, 2 against other conferences. However I see how this can skew the stats. So 4 vs division, and 2 vs everybody else works for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smozoma Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 i was figuring on 56 again. Like Dmitry said that if you change too many things, (i.e. penalty length, season length) then the records will be skewed. For example, instead of Sandstrom having 250 goals this season with a 68 game schedule he will have 312. Then you have to figure out, oh was that season 2 when they played 56 or season 3 with 68. The NHL used to have fewer games in the early days. Our league is still young. We should embrace change early on, before we have a long history that becomes more and more difficult to deviate from. We can always have an historical "goals per game" measure, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDonch44 Posted October 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 thats true too smoz.... It's up to you guys... if you feel we can handle a bigger schedule, then thats fine. Everyone just has to stay committed all the way through. So, what are the opinions out there, stay at 56, go up to 68, 82? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesomerino Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 thats true too smoz.... It's up to you guys... if you feel we can handle a bigger schedule, then thats fine. Everyone just has to stay committed all the way through. So, what are the opinions out there, stay at 56, go up to 68, 82? Personally, I could play a whole 82. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokkeefan Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 more the better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smozoma Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 thats true too smoz.... It's up to you guys... if you feel we can handle a bigger schedule, then thats fine. Everyone just has to stay committed all the way through. So, what are the opinions out there, stay at 56, go up to 68, 82? Here are some options: 56 (4/2/2/2) 62 (4/3/2/2) 68 (4/4/2/2) 78 (6/4/2/2) 80 (4/4/3/3) 92 (4/4/4/4) and kind of like baseball (was): 66 (6/6/0/0) I like 68(4/4/2/2). Since making the playoffs is based on your performance relative everyone else in your conference, it seems right to play them all the same number of times. It also makes it not matter how we distribute the teams among divisions. We only have to worry about keeping the conferences about even, which is much easier to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegr8199 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 great points smo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HABS Posted October 29, 2007 Report Share Posted October 29, 2007 ya 68, 4/4/2/2 sound pretty good Stats might be a bit skewed, but as long as the PTS/per gm, goals/per game stats are there should be ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDonch44 Posted November 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 Here is the alignment: Ron Barr Conference wboy Division EricAnthony76 AngryJay93 KingsCupRun93 Logan DaDonch44 SSiG Dallongeville Division HABS Vocally Caged Scribe99 newjerseykiller edisaurusrex awesomerino --------------------------------------- Mark Lesser Conference Dmitry Division kgman thegr8199kings skoolyardpuck hokkeefan matthurray jamonica Evan Division Carse takeyourpill666 dmac smozoma Backhandfloater IceStorm70 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flames4LifeFLA Posted November 7, 2007 Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 Cool division/conference names. Hopefully the league can stick with this format for a bit and build some history/tradition. (DaDonch- is there any way you can make the standings page on the GDL site a little more, um, "professional?" Maybe have it look like your '94 Record Keeper or Evan's Classic League, in terms of graphics, organization, etc. I know you are doing other league administration duties, just mentioning for the future.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDonch44 Posted November 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 Hey Jamonica, What do you mean like have division, conference, home/away, and vs. conference standings? or just the overall look or both? Divsion Standings Example I did sent Dmitry the logos i used for the standings. But he has the control over the standings part of it. The only part of the database i have access to is the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flames4LifeFLA Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 (edited) DaDonch44 said: Hey Jamonica, What do you mean like have division, conference, home/away, and vs. conference standings? or just the overall look or both? Divsion Standings Example I did sent Dmitry the logos i used for the standings. But he has the control over the standings part of it. The only part of the database i have access to is the draft. Deleted Edited April 5, 2018 by Flames4LifeFLA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDonch44 Posted November 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I see what you're saying Jamonica. I'll talk to Dmitry and see what he can work out for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flames4LifeFLA Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 This is why you rock, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmitry Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 If you guys want to hire a professional designer for a better look, then go for it. I would be happy to apply some professional changes to upgrade my shoddy work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaDonch44 Posted November 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 If you guys want to hire a professional designer for a better look, then go for it. I would be happy to apply some professional changes to upgrade my shoddy work. Hey D, I hope you didn't take offense to what we have been saying. By no means is your work shoddy. We wouldn't be where we are right now without the work you have put in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skoolyardpuck Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 i dont think anyone agrees with what jamonica said. I didn't find anything "shoddy" about the site at all, it was very well done. I'm sure it took a ton of effort to even get it to look like that. Please think before you speak. We're not the ones doing the work here so it goes for all of us when we say we're not in a position to criticize anything done here, whether it was intentional or not. Helpful suggestions are of course ok. But watch what you say and don't take dadonch or d's hard work for granted. Please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IAmFleury'sHipCheck Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 i dont think anyone agrees with what jamonica said. I didn't find anything "shoddy" about the site at all, it was very well done. I'm sure it took a ton of effort to even get it to look like that. Please think before you speak. We're not the ones doing the work here so it goes for all of us when we say we're not in a position to criticize anything done here, whether it was intentional or not. Helpful suggestions are of course ok. But watch what you say and don't take dadonch or d's hard work for granted. Please. I know I'm echoing what a lot of people feel, but I like the layout of the site Dmitry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegr8199 Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Ive always loved the site and especially the awesome database youve done dmitry. Most of us cant say enough about what youve done for this league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scribe99 Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Jamonica doesn't speak for the owners who have been here for years now. I've seen so many things to love about Dmitry's site, it's pretty ridiculous to criticize it like that. We have individual player records, user records, tons of team stats, random records, season-to-season tracking, etc. --- it's '94 heaven. Personally, I like the old school flair and realistically I don't care that much about fancy graphics or anything. It has better CONTENT than any league. The standings page doesn't need to be changed. And I think people are getting too carried away here. I like the way DaDonch has set up polls and everything for the owners, but the attitude of entitlement seems to be getting worse. We don't need to alter and take a vote on every single minor detail about the league. Allow the people who offer their services to this league a little more freedom and respect. Some of the criticism of the new rom creases and player indicators, just rubbed me the wrong way. You have artists out their making a new hack just for this league, and people won't even give it a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IAmFleury'sHipCheck Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Jamonica doesn't speak for the owners who have been here for years now. I've seen so many things to love about Dmitry's site, it's pretty ridiculous to criticize it like that. We have individual player records, user records, tons of team stats, random records, season-to-season tracking, etc. --- it's '94 heaven. Personally, I like the old school flair and realistically I don't care that much about fancy graphics or anything. It has better CONTENT than any league. The standings page doesn't need to be changed. And I think people are getting too carried away here. I like the way DaDonch has set up polls and everything for the owners, but the attitude of entitlement seems to be getting worse. We don't need to alter and take a vote on every single minor detail about the league. Allow the people who offer their services to this league a little more freedom and respect. Some of the criticism of the new rom creases and player indicators, just rubbed me the wrong way. You have artists out their making a new hack just for this league, and people won't even give it a chance. I agree with everything except for the comments about the creases and player indicators... simply said, I play this game b/c it's nhl'94. I only want to play nhl '94. I've stuck to this game since it hit the shelves b/c I think it's the best. In my opinion, those 2 things have an impact on the gameplay. Also, I say why fix it if it's not broken. But don't get me wrong, I do appreciate the creativity put into these hacks. But it was put to a vote and there was an overwhelming response that the original style is preferred. I don't think there should be any offense taken to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSiG Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 Jamonica doesn't speak for the owners who have been here for years now. I've seen so many things to love about Dmitry's site, it's pretty ridiculous to criticize it like that. We have individual player records, user records, tons of team stats, random records, season-to-season tracking, etc. --- it's '94 heaven. Personally, I like the old school flair and realistically I don't care that much about fancy graphics or anything. It has better CONTENT than any league. The standings page doesn't need to be changed. And I think people are getting too carried away here. I like the way DaDonch has set up polls and everything for the owners, but the attitude of entitlement seems to be getting worse. We don't need to alter and take a vote on every single minor detail about the league. Allow the people who offer their services to this league a little more freedom and respect. Some of the criticism of the new rom creases and player indicators, just rubbed me the wrong way. You have artists out their making a new hack just for this league, and people won't even give it a chance. Quoted for emphasis. It's not really about how the game looks, it's about how the game PLAYS. We all sometimes forget this huge thing... GRAPHICS DON'T MAKE THE GAME!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmitry Posted November 9, 2007 Report Share Posted November 9, 2007 my main priority has always been data over presentation. right now i think a decent recordbook needs to be added. dadonch is redoing some of the logos, so i will be uploading them. i don't mind criticism as it will help things improve, although shoddy isn't a very inspiring term. give the site time to grow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.