Содржина: Canada Senior NT Discussion

I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible. If a player is going to be done in 2 seasons, why keep him around now if it is at all close. Their builds are nearly the same. Dawdy trains faster. The only difference is EXP in reality.

The question really is, would you rather spend a season or two building his chem up when he passes Koyle due to Koyle's higher EXP or would you rather take the hit on EXP now and get ahead on chem?

Dawdy's IGR was 46 today. Keep in mind IGR doesn't reflect *all* that influences performance. I'm sure you're aware our IGRs and OTSs are comparable yet you can't beat me muahahha

Yup, Roger Bellemare is probably the only one in the pipeline that may make the NT in the future. None of the graduating SMs will probably be added to U20 I'm guessing, it was a pretty weak position last year.

Disregard that last post, totally got Bellemare's position screwed up in my head, he's a CM. The SMs were a disaster last year and probably will be worse this season for U17.

I noticed. You picked one of my LMs who I'm training to sell after he went 15 6/6 to 16 5/6 after being pulled 2nd or 3rd last week.

Ya, unfortunately he will probably be the starting LM, he's just a bit behind Laurent Cassady right now but your facilities are better. Unfortunately the best LM right now is a guy you've already sold, Jed Recchi, but he's going to be passed quickly.

Absolutely, CM is still a position where we have decent guys, while SM will quickly become a big issue.

Theodore Lacombe trained 180OR last season. I don't know for Lacroix and Wallace, but Lacroix is similar in Q's and CL 4 insteads of 5, so let's assoume it was 175, and Wallace 200.

Lacombe could train 650 in the next 4 seasons. Lacroix maybe 600 in the next 4, and Wallace maybe 700. Might be less since both Lacroix and Wallace might drop to CL3 early. All of them are 380 less than Dawdy. I don't know how much Dawdy trained last season, but he might improve by 450 over this timeframe. So Dawdy can still be 150 to 250 ahead of these guys, it might take 6 seasons for that, but that's not even sure.

So let's stick with Dawdy for the next 4-6 seasons to come, at least. And that might be the same for the whole squad.

SF:

This is a joke. Stan Burnett is done with the team, he's much worse than Gordie Lemieux , and I'm not sure I would select him. Please help me find at least 1 viable option.

In a game such as the one against Peru where they played with 3 CD, I'd really like to have a SF as an option.

I still like Gary Kidd as a USF. Bobby Holmes can play LSF. Just gimmi the word and I will bump up passing. Put Holmes in next game as SF so I can track rating.

Ya I know I told you I would like to just focus Kidd as a CF, but I'll continue to train passing more until we can get someone to replace him as a SF option. Still think his actual production is better than his IGR, as evident that he always is in the top 5 of scoring in I.1.

When you upload your team to the player database, does every NT manager have access to it? And does anyone have the link to the database?

do we have a SF ratio.... I just add passing and Ka-boom the IGR at SF is similar to that of CF. But that was 3 seasons ago.

I could never figure out an ideal one for Stan Burnett, he was good for a few years but not enough teams train SF to find a great pattern... maybe Canucks has the secret formula...

But ya everytime the NT wanted Kidd to play SF I would just add passing as well, seemed to work almost as well as training both pass and tech higher than CF. Nice quick fix always for me with Kidd as his quality is 99 for pass.

Maybe he does... the last person I'd tell is skipman6... hard enough to beat him

We'll have tojust skip SF if there's none available. Kidd is okay, but tec would have to go at least to 60% I guess, I personnally train 65-73 as primary. He's Universal, which is good, but is aging and we have better players, so at the end he wouldn't see a lot of action. Not sure if it's worth it to you.