This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I think that after the December power rankings, teams shouldn't be allowed to be burying the young stars. In turn I think this would help drive the trade market since if a team's goal is to tank for a better pick, more peripheral players would be moved to compensate for the addition of the young stars. It's just kinda silly and totally unrealistic for guys who are currently driving the calder race and being legitimate NHL players to be buried in the minors for the sake of tanking. (This isn't intended to be a hit piece on teams doing so, love yall)

Agreed about the tiers... and the changes in the middle are happening every time I load a new statbook so it really is up in the air still. I just wanted to open the discussion now if anyone has ideas on playoff seeding because as the season gets older, we won't be able to make those changes without there being bias attached. Gotta do it right now while everything is still very fluid.

For playoff seeding, isn't it just the standard NHL way?
Top 3 from each division and (2) wild cards?

I'd tend to lean towards keeping the format as is simply because the standings are so fluid and to keep a little realistic nature in the game. As teams in the East who are on outside looking in see where they are in standings, with how many fully loaded teams there are in the East, most rentals and TDL deals will probably send players to the west and that could help shift some of the balance back the other way.

I've always had it set up with top 8 from each conference because (1) I like that way and (2) automating the sheet to show WC standings seemed like a pain in the ass. But the current NHL format is something we could do if people want it, personally I think it's extremely dumb.

No, its just 1-8 each conference, aka the way it should be in real life

I rather have the NHL format for seeding for playoffs.
Feel free to keep the current systems for power-rankings; however, as it allows teams to get a quick glance on how they stack up.

Realistically, 1-8 and the wildcard system will still give the same results (teams in the playoffs).
Just gives the more authentic inter-division match ups.

I agree that the matchups wouldn't really change too much (except for the "Metro Division" in game), but it's just a personal preference of mine that the NHL should do 1-8 each conference IRL. The best teams should be rewarded for great seasons imo. Not punished for playing in a difficult division.

Jonathan Dahlen
Morgan Frost
Filip Zadina


Ryan Zuhlsdorf

I'd say if you have a young player who in real life has played at least 25 games with his NHL club, you should have to put him on your CF team roster.
I myself even made the sacrifice and move Matthew Tkachuk to my full time roster which went against my goal of "tanking".
It is true, some teams are stockpiling all the young talent and keeping them hidden in the minors, when in real life they are making huge impacts to their teams.

Not sure that will spur trades because right now there's so little activity and who's going to move the young kids.
But it might encourage fringe players to be moved.
I myself am dying to make moves but can't find willing trade partners who are also offering players at the spots I'd like to improve.

To the point about this increasing trades, that's what i was going for. The star players themselves won't be moved, but it would cause some other players to be shifted as a result, especially if a team is tanking.

This is a good rule that could be slightly modified and would have a good impact on the game.

Another thing that would for sure spur on trades would be to re-work the silly rule that Free Agents who were given NTC's can't be moved for a full year. I've never really liked that, but I don't make the rules.
The change I would propose would be to allow teams to trade those plays starting on Jan 1st.

Because I know there's a certain team just dying to trade me a certain under performing free agent winger

Do we still do Trade Ratings like what we did in V2?

5/5 Seabrook for Lou?


See you win the deal.

No. A trade has to receive 6/7 BOG votes to revise it in order to do so

I wasn’t asking about revising trades, I remember in V2, we had this google sheets set up that showed how the BOG voted on our trades, and who they thought won. It’s just cool to see who won in the BOG’s opinion.

**** the BOG, myself and a core-group of elitist GMs will give you every trade rating your heart desires.


Note for BOG reading: This is sarcasm.

He's saying we no longer use trade ratings, and they were used to revise trades, but now they're using a BOG vote instead.

My actual opinion is that i don't like the idea of "tanking" for a better draft pick. That's just me though. Either way, i agree about burying the young star players.

I still like the 1-8 format.

Lol, i didn't even see this post until now, and yesterday i didn't come on CF other than when i commented on the Sprong-Petterson trade.

I would now like to start fielding my offers for Jordan Martinook. This may not seem like a big thing, but if you happen to look at his advanced stats/charts and the effect he'll have on your team, he'll prove quite valuable towards a contenders ranking. I also want to take offers on Mark Pysyk and potentially Alex Chiasson for the right price. Don't forget I also want some salary so if you throw in a cap dump, you can pay me some more!

Craig Smith must go! Considering all offers, but preferably including a one year cap dump, high draft picks, and prospect(s).