|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 12:06:43 GMT -5
Post by PineRider (SJ) on Nov 26, 2015 12:06:43 GMT -5
With the "new NHL" and the devolution of fighting, I'm wondering what everything thinks about replacing PIM's for another category.
No, I'm not just asking a self-serving question. It's just that coaches now bench players for taking penalties, and the days of sending out Wendel Clark to take care of business are over.
If we decide to go this route, this would be a major change and I don't think it should take effect for at least a couple of seasons to let people plan for roster adjustments, but I am curious as to what everyone else's opinion is...
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 16:29:18 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Nov 26, 2015 16:29:18 GMT -5
I gotta tell you with Antoine Roussel and Brandon Prust deciding they are "hockey players" now has been frustrating as hell. I think Mike Ribeiro is my leading PIM guy for the month.
More important than discussing replacing it is, what do we replace it with? There is 'Time on Ice', there is 'Shifts' or even a scoring option called Truculence which is Hits + Blocks + PIM rolled into one score.
The question we have to ask is, for those players that the PIM stat is supposed to be providing team value towards....what is an alternative scoring matrix that still gives those players value.
if we are discussing changes, to completely railroad your discussion, I was wondering if we might consider changing the number of players we allow for active. A few seasons ago we moved from 12 F and 6 D to the current 10 F and 6 D because the league was running a zero tolerance hard-line stance against teams having non-active players on their roster. I never understood why we took away 2 F slots and did nothing to the D slots.
In fantrax we can assign Utility slots to our active rosters which could be filled by forwards or defencemen. I would propose we change our active roster set-up to be 10 F, 5 D and 3 Utility slots. Or 2 or 1 or whatever. I just find it odd that we roll 30 teams and have devalued forwards but put a premium on defencemen because out of a pool of 6x30=180 active defencemen we require that each team scramble to fill their roster properly.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 17:18:37 GMT -5
Post by mtlgm on Nov 26, 2015 17:18:37 GMT -5
I gotta tell you with Antoine Roussel and Brandon Prust deciding they are "hockey players" now has been frustrating as hell. I think Mike Ribeiro is my leading PIM guy for the month. More important than discussing replacing it is, what do we replace it with? There is 'Time on Ice', there is 'Shifts' or even a scoring option called Truculence which is Hits + Blocks + PIM rolled into one score. The question we have to ask is, for those players that the PIM stat is supposed to be providing team value towards....what is an alternative scoring matrix that still gives those players value. if we are discussing changes, to completely railroad your discussion, I was wondering if we might consider changing the number of players we allow for active. A few seasons ago we moved from 12 F and 6 D to the current 10 F and 6 D because the league was running a zero tolerance hard-line stance against teams having non-active players on their roster. I never understood why we took away 2 F slots and did nothing to the D slots. In fantrax we can assign Utility slots to our active rosters which could be filled by forwards or defencemen. I would propose we change our active roster set-up to be 10 F, 5 D and 3 Utility slots. Or 2 or 1 or whatever. I just find it odd that we roll 30 teams and have devalued forwards but put a premium on defencemen because out of a pool of 6x30=180 active defencemen we require that each team scramble to fill their roster properly. Obviously PIM's is a niche category and it is one of a number of odd ones in fantasy. It's treated as a positive stat when it say 20% of the time leads to something bad for the penalized team in an NHL game. In roto leagues positive points are awarded to it as opposed to negative points. You would almost think that points should be awarded to the player from the opposition that drew the penalized player to take the penalty in the first place. In head to head it's still a cat won by the team with the highest penalty minutes. There are many useful nhl players who have higher PIM totals that aren't all fighting based that will be on rosters regardless(Lucic, Backes, etc, PF types). Zaphod has a point though, what do you replace PIM's with and is there a way in fantrax head to head to give negative value to PIMS? Plus/Minus is a pain in the ass stat whether roto or head to head. Heavily negatively penalized in roto at usually -10 in that every even strength goal impacts 5 players on the team scored on. While everybody on the ice has a role legitimately many players on the ice for a goal against are doing their job and a breakdown by 1 or 2 leads to 5 being dinged. Not much to do here but lowering the penalty for a minus in roto would be nice as it can totally derail an impressive offensive performance by a player. Hits and Blocks often times are left to the vagaries of the hometown official scorer but IMO are necessary in a deep league to add value to as many players as possible. Stat categories though are limited and shifts or TOI may benefit certain teams more than others and I can't say I'd be a fan of some of the fancy combo stats that fantrax has on offer. If Truculence were used it would conceivably require the adding of cats-maybe takeway/giveaway ratio and shootout goals which i don't think we include in a players goal total. As far as our roster size I wonder why an overall total of 22 was chosen with 23 making the most sense to emulate the real NHL. However that extra roster spot is incorporated would be subject to discussion obviously and nothing should come to pass before the start of next season really and not sure we need to wait two seasons(I'll be dead) as certainly a brandon prust won't be outright dropped and useless lie a shawn thornton i dropped yesterday. He was my leading PIM's guy but was legitimately doing nothing. Ultimately i conduct myself within the context of whatever the rules and cats are with little real concerns other than honesty and fair play. Not concerned in the least how bad my team sucks if i am enjoying myself. In that vein as i've kind of mentioned to a couple people in passing via PM while considering people are busy etc I think 48 hours to pick up a waiver claim since it is possible to not be on for what amounts to a 24 hour period but i do wonder how much is being done with regards to ensure teams rosters are being set and cap compliant to avoid any perception of tanking. As mentioned, realization that real life comes first since a loss here or there in a category here or there because someone is not setting their lineup impacts standings which impact draft order. I preset my lineup as best I could while away and lost a matchup by one hit so it does not take much not being around to have a real impact. I'll be quiet now as it's eating time and I've been a little rude as their are people over.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 17:59:41 GMT -5
Post by johnnybower (Det GM) on Nov 26, 2015 17:59:41 GMT -5
If we are going to look at increasing active roster size (and I'm not opposed to it) then I think we need to increase the size of the bench as well. In a league where daily line changes are used and we discourage non-NHL players being used, then I think we need to provide GM's with more players at their disposal to use on a daily basis. I would also look at shrinking the prospect roster as well to make more RL NHL'ers available for GM's to shore up their lineups when the injury bugs hit. With only 3 rounds in the draft each year we really don't need big prospect pools...
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 21:56:54 GMT -5
Post by PineRider (SJ) on Nov 26, 2015 21:56:54 GMT -5
I agree with Zaph that the numbers for D roster spots don't add up. One vote here for reducing the active D requirement from six to five.
That said, I am also opposed to increasing the bench roster size. Smaller roster sizes generally means more activity; yes, some of us will have to make some hard choices, but it's the hard decisions that make fantasy hockey fun. Plus, it is too difficult for bottom-feeding teams to field legal rosters, especially when there are not many active FA's floating around.
Trying to move the discussion back to PIMs ;-), truculence is interesting... but it then double-counts hits and blocks.
I'm not opposed to making PIMs a negative stat, where the team who has more at the end of the week LOSES the category as opposed to winning it... that seems more in line with today's NHL.
BTW - guys like Lucic and Backes are valuable not because of their high PIM's (they only have 18 and 23 respectively... lower than goons like Toews and Giroux). They are valuable because they have high hit totals PLUS they score.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 22:55:15 GMT -5
Post by mtlgm on Nov 26, 2015 22:55:15 GMT -5
I agree with Zaph that the numbers for D roster spots don't add up. One vote here for reducing the active D requirement from six to five. That said, I am also opposed to increasing the bench roster size. Smaller roster sizes generally means more activity; yes, some of us will have to make some hard choices, but it's the hard decisions that make fantasy hockey fun. Plus, it is too difficult for bottom-feeding teams to field legal rosters, especially when there are not many active FA's floating around. Trying to move the discussion back to PIMs ;-), truculence is interesting... but it then double-counts hits and blocks. I'm not opposed to making PIMs a negative stat, where the team who has more at the end of the week LOSES the category as opposed to winning it... that seems more in line with today's NHL. BTW - guys like Lucic and Backes are valuable not because of their high PIM's (they only have 18 and 23 respectively... lower than goons like Toews and Giroux). They are valuable because they have high hit totals PLUS they score. Wasn't saying Lucic and Backes were valuable because of PIMS but that they get PIMS but do many other things offsetting any potential negative effects of the PIMS to a greater extent. Thornton, Bordeleau of Blood when he played, Reaves, etc the true goon types only usefull in one cat and at the most a second are the guys who are really disappearing. 10-5-1-1(being a utility spot where you can have a D or a F) would probably work or even a 2nd utility spot to incorporate a 23rd roster spot on our active rosters. I don't know for sure that smaller roster sizes guarantees more activity. Being active guarantees more activity. There are rosters not being set and not the GM less teams. Real life first obviously but it rarely takes more than a minute or two to set a roster daily, maybe more if a full slate of games with everyone on your active roster involved but non activity brings to mind the question of 'is the tank on"? If truculence were used it would include PIM/HITS/BLKS as one cat so the separate cats and hits and blocks would disappear. No double dipping. Why I mentioned the other cats that could conceivably be added to keep us at 15 cats.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 26, 2015 23:10:26 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Nov 26, 2015 23:10:26 GMT -5
Trying to move the discussion back to PIMs ;-), truculence is interesting... but it then double-counts hits and blocks. I'm not opposed to making PIMs a negative stat, where the team who has more at the end of the week LOSES the category as opposed to winning it... that seems more in line with today's NHL. I mentioned the Truculence stat as a replacement for PIM, BLK and HIT stats. It complicates the conversation though. making PIM a negative stat is, bluntly, dumb imo.
|
|
|
Post by PineRider (SJ) on Nov 26, 2015 23:56:11 GMT -5
It's about as smart as keeping PIMs when it's not as relevant anymore...
In any case, what other categories does Fantrax track?
If enforcers are disappearing in the NHL, what kinds of players replaced them? Are there just more scorers now (but smaller - Gaudreau, Fabbri)? Are there more checkers?
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 27, 2015 20:16:51 GMT -5
Post by magicstew on Nov 27, 2015 20:16:51 GMT -5
I don't mind looking at PIM's as a negative stat, just like the NHL a penalty negatively effects your team. Another stat to look at maybe faceoff wins -FW - Winning faceoffs is a real skill, positively effects your team if you win the draw. Just my $.02.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 27, 2015 22:49:42 GMT -5
Post by Penguin on Nov 27, 2015 22:49:42 GMT -5
The hit stat is recorded, why not takeaways? Both subjective that vary from arena.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 29, 2015 16:06:21 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Nov 29, 2015 16:06:21 GMT -5
all stats that aren't goals are subjective from rink to rink.
|
|
|
Post by Penguin on Nov 29, 2015 21:08:59 GMT -5
all stats that aren't goals are subjective from rink to rink. I mean things like shots, PIMs, FO, blocks are much more black and white type stats that don't have a large variance due to this nature. Hits/takeaways/giveaways are heavily skewed depending on home team. Islanders are most blatant example of padding hits and takeaway.
|
|
|
PIMs
Nov 29, 2015 21:32:54 GMT -5
Post by mtlgm on Nov 29, 2015 21:32:54 GMT -5
PIMS do have their good points as well. I'm constantly getting two minutes for looking so good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
PIMs
Dec 1, 2015 17:11:17 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2015 17:11:17 GMT -5
If we're spitballing ideas here, I like the idea of dropping a D slot and adding a util slot. I also like the idea of contracting the minors. I'm sure there are some diehards out there who'd argue the opposite but I must admit, when I peruse our FA pickups it reads like a who's-who of players that will most likely never get a sniff of NHL action. As much as I enjoy the prospect game I have little to no interest in spending much time researching the absolute longshots that we're reduced to in order to fill out a minor league roster. It's got to be hellish to take over a team and try to find just one D level prospect available anywhere. PIMs are a bit of a shitty stat but I'd argue +/- is just as shitty and usually less predictable. Winning in fantasy hockey is partly about making informed decisions regarding outcomes that can be modeled and predicted and in that sense I'd support PIMs over +/- or SHP or SO or GAA. All of those stats are are random 'noise' for the most part and not something we can really build a team around although someone did point out that even PIMs are getting tough to predict. Goals, primary assists and SOG are the backbone of forward stats and SV% is the backbone of Goalie stats. PIMs were always meant as a way of giving value to 'sandpaper' players but maybe in todays they are becoming a 'noisier' stat.....I'm talking myself in a circle here In closing, is there any reason we can't just reduce the stat categories and forget about replacing them? I vote to slash PIMS, +/-, SHP and GAA (or SO)
|
|
|
PIMs
Dec 1, 2015 17:47:47 GMT -5
Post by mtlgm on Dec 1, 2015 17:47:47 GMT -5
If we're spitballing ideas here, I like the idea of dropping a D slot and adding a util slot. I also like the idea of contracting the minors. I'm sure there are some diehards out there who'd argue the opposite but I must admit, when I peruse our FA pickups it reads like a who's-who of players that will most likely never get a sniff of NHL action. As much as I enjoy the prospect game I have little to no interest in spending much time researching the absolute longshots that we're reduced to in order to fill out a minor league roster. It's got to be hellish to take over a team and try to find just one D level prospect available anywhere.
PIMs are a bit of a shitty stat but I'd argue +/- is just as shitty and usually less predictable. Winning in fantasy hockey is partly about making informed decisions regarding outcomes that can be modeled and predicted and in that sense I'd support PIMs over +/- or SHP or SO or GAA. All of those stats are are random 'noise' for the most part and not something we can really build a team around although someone did point out that even PIMs are getting tough to predict. Goals, primary assists and SOG are the backbone of forward stats and SV% is the backbone of Goalie stats. PIMs were always meant as a way of giving value to 'sandpaper' players but maybe in todays they are becoming a 'noisier' stat.....I'm talking myself in a circle here In closing, is there any reason we can't just reduce the stat categories and forget about replacing them? I vote to slash PIMS, +/-, SHP and GAA (or SO) The Bolded-nonsense, I took over a team and it's loaded with D prospects I added. Oh wait, maybe i'm just loaded. But seriously, there is no rule that says each team MUST have 25 prospects. I went up to the max and went down and back up and I'll likely sign one today sometime for s**** and giggles but you only need to have as many as you feel like having. When I took over and got rid of prospects who were either dead or in jail or playing hooky instead of hockey I think I had 5 or 6 left. I enjoy scrounging for prospects and a players value goes up and down every day and a 7th rounder can all of a sudden become a roster player. I think 25 is fine. It's a little lower than what the ZFHL allows and far lower than the bloated minors of 65 in SCFHL(I like that number as well, so there). I think it is not a bad thing to have variety in the leagues one is in if you are in more than one. Plus how to implement reducing prospect rosters. In a vacuum each team will add 3 a year. It would have to be a two year thing really to have teams gradually pare down their prospect rosters after having built them up. I'm newer but that isn't fair to teams who have meticulously cultivated a prospect roster with a definite plan and direction in mind. Just saying. As far as stats, a wholesale sweeping change isn't a good idea either as teams are built with the stats in mind. truculence is not a bad idea but would still consider looking at replacing our newly condensed by two stat package with stats that further enhance the edict of making every player potentially have some value. As far as SOG's a player can be credited with a shot on goal from his own blueline if he is lucky enough to get it by everyone and on goal. Don't really want any player credited with that bs not to mention some players are shooting when they hit the parking lot of the arena. A better stat is SH%(shooting percentage, not sure if that is the correct fantrax abbreviation). At least a player is getting credit for some success at shooting. Giveaway/Takeway gives some indication of how good or bad a player is in regards to possession stats one of the new favorite toys in terms of stat analysis and i don't think it overly favors anyone. No more subjective than Hits/Blocks which would be melded with PIMS for truculence. Don't think you want to get rid of GAA or SO's with maybe GAA since we have SV% being the one most possible to be removed. A 2 to 1 skater/goaltender ratio needs to be maintained though I think. It's fantasy hockey and though we try it never totally emulates the real game and the same stats we use can be just as egregious in the real game.
|
|