Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2011 14:45:36 GMT -5
all of these ideas seem pretty complicated. I am having a hard time digesting what has been discussed. perhaps i am coming too late to the discussion. My suggestion may not work until next year but i propose we make July 1st of each year the beginning of our draft and we open up the draft to all available players-newly drafted, signed college, European players' rights, players coming out of retirement, any dropped players before July 1st, etc. This is probaly similar to most keeper leagues. With this method each team can decide on their priority of picking prospects or vets. If a team picks up a veteren player then they would have to drop a player if they go over the roster limit. Not sure what to do for the Jagr situation but my two cents for next year.
|
|
|
Post by uofmehockey on Jul 6, 2011 16:40:14 GMT -5
yeah LA Kings is echoing what we plan to do based off of what Vancouver said for next year. thanks for the input.
|
|
|
Post by Sami (CGY) on Jul 6, 2011 17:13:22 GMT -5
Limiting the FA pickups to one a month (or even one every two months) makes it less willy-nilly with the two week rental players. I know that I sound like a broken record but why are we trying to make this so complicated? It seems to me that this is far too much work for very little benefit. As you will learn, Rho, and Chuck/Kris/Yas can back me up on this, there are no FA's worth "renting" on a two-week basis in this league. In fact, the only FA's signed throughout the course of the season tend to be prospects that were undrafted in the DTDL but have started to make their mark. There aren't even many of these so I don't think it's worth complicating the in-season free agency period. Kris (Vancouver) put forth an excellent proposal for next off-season, which was echoed by L.A. and seems to have been accepted without argument by everyone to date. For me at least, this leaves only the question of how we open free agency for this pre-season. Why don't we just put to a vote whether we want to follow: 1) Jesse's suggestion of tweaking our existing first come, first serve model; or 2) Kris' suggestion of all FA's being subject to waiver priority. I think that it might be easier to figure out the blind claims and nitty-gritty details like that after we have decided on the framework. After all, such issues will need to be ironed out no matter which proposal we follow. Edit: Re-reading the other posts, I think that I misunderstood the debate and we are, in fact, debating how to deal with FA signings throughout the whole season. My bad.
|
|
|
Post by Sami (CGY) on Jul 6, 2011 17:20:07 GMT -5
The new idea that I want to if it has enough support is the general principal that we set a schedule of a few different types of players that could suit different teams being available each week. We could sort out if we want it blind and how many claims they get per week, two weeks, month or whatever it is. I was thinking about this some more, Yas. My issue with this is that it kind of defeats the value of doing one's own homework. If the player has to be made available publicly to everyone then whomever did the research loses the benefit of that research. I'm curious as to whether there even are any FA's that anyone cares so strongly about other than Jagr? Sure, there are a lot of prospects out there that will go un-drafted and could therefore be signed as FA's, but are they so good that we need to implement a complicated signing process?
|
|
|
Post by Staden (TOR) on Jul 6, 2011 20:56:04 GMT -5
The new idea that I want to if it has enough support is the general principal that we set a schedule of a few different types of players that could suit different teams being available each week. We could sort out if we want it blind and how many claims they get per week, two weeks, month or whatever it is. I was thinking about this some more, Yas. My issue with this is that it kind of defeats the value of doing one's own homework. If the player has to be made available publicly to everyone then whomever did the research loses the benefit of that research. I'm curious as to whether there even are any FA's that anyone cares so strongly about other than Jagr? Sure, there are a lot of prospects out there that will go un-drafted and could therefore be signed as FA's, but are they so good that we need to implement a complicated signing process? I agree This is mostly just for Jagr, and i don't like the whole posting openly as it lets people just scavenge. Jagr is different in the sense that i dont think anyone has to study up on him to know they likely want him.
|
|