Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 18, 2011 11:16:50 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2011 11:16:50 GMT -5
lower end teams will just end up trading their nhl players for minor league players and then do absolutely nothing until the entry draft, watching their team sink in the standings.
|
|
|
tanking
Dec 18, 2011 13:12:23 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Dec 18, 2011 13:12:23 GMT -5
lower end teams will just end up trading their nhl players for minor league players and then do absolutely nothing until the entry draft, watching their team sink in the standings. yep. so why are you so offended by this? NHL teams do it when they sell their soon to be FA's to get the maximum return on their good players, knowing the rest of their season is pretty much a wash because they are out of the play-off hunt. It is how the actual NHL works, its how teams like the Penguins became the team they are today...why do you expect a fhl to be different? tanking is when you take active NHLers that are on your team and you bench them, to artificially get a better draft pick. If your team just sucks, your team just sucks. and as long as you are icing the most competitive team you have, you are not cheating.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 19, 2011 9:46:24 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2011 9:46:24 GMT -5
Zaphod - I agree to an extent. It is true that many NHL teams through the years have adopted a strategy that could best be described as 'tanking' but the major difference between them and us is that they're a business and as such are still required to ice an NHL calibre team as part of their obligations to their fans and the league. We don't have that aspect to contend with so it does present a scenario where GM's could do as Ottawa is suggesting and gut their active roster of NHL players, keeping just enough toxic contracts to meet the salary floor. This argument has been brought up already and there have been some suggestions brought forward: 1) Institute a 'trade review' period for any GM moving NHL assets for prospects/picks when their team isn't currently icing a full NHL roster. This would probably necessitate a trade review committee but shouldn't be overly difficult to enforce. 2) Institute a min games played limit whereby the offending GM would lose draft position for every 'x' number of games played they came in under the min. I'd love to bring this thing to a vote and bring an end to the never-ending debate over how best to monitor 'tanking'. For the record, I'm much more concerned with having 30 active GM's than perceived roster violations by rebuilding GM's but this issue keeps coming up so lets just legislate something and be done with it Comish?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 19, 2011 11:00:48 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2011 11:00:48 GMT -5
For the record, I'm much more concerned with having 30 active GM's than perceived roster violations by rebuilding GM's but this issue keeps coming up +1 Although this tanking issue needs resolution, we do need to re-evaluate (replace) some of these really inactive managers. EDIT: Islanders GM hasn't logged into this site since September. Does he update Fantrax? He has some really good players/prospects (Nugent-Hopkins, Duchene, Tavares, Schwartz, Tarasenko) that would make it very attractive to another manager, and us 29 managers would like to make trades with.
|
|
|
tanking
Dec 19, 2011 15:04:26 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Dec 19, 2011 15:04:26 GMT -5
2) Institute a min games played limit whereby the offending GM would lose draft position for every 'x' number of games played they came in under the min. I love this choice. But. Injuries are as difficult to keep on top of as a team sending a player to the minors or heading to Europe (Filatov) but this might be the best way to deal with it. Gives GMs an entire season to deal with the situation rather than sudden injuries/sent to the minors situations where a GM is forced to make quick trades that may be bad for the teams future so to be compliant. As for icing a crappy team, it happens EVERY season in the NHL. Chicago did it for decade's before Dollar Bill passed away. The Penguins were horrible for almost a decade until they drafted Fleury #1, Malkin #2, Crosby #1. that team was garbage but the draft did what it is designed to do and eventually that team got better. Other teams like the Islanders and Panthers, no matter how bad their team is, their drafting is worse and they haven't improved in a long ass time. The draft is not this sure-fire fix that many GM's are alluding to here.
|
|
|
tanking
Dec 19, 2011 22:27:34 GMT -5
Post by johnnybower (Det GM) on Dec 19, 2011 22:27:34 GMT -5
I agree with zaphod here. I was kinda surprised that there was no minimum game requirement when I came aboard. I've perused some of our league rosters and there is a real lack of games played in the NHL on some. I realize that these rosters conform to our league rules and I'm not bitching...just sayin'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 20, 2011 10:51:09 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 10:51:09 GMT -5
if we have a minimum gp then we're just gonna get managers saying "oh its not my fault that the nhl team sent my guy to the minors, he should have been in the nhl"
then what?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 20, 2011 13:11:22 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 13:11:22 GMT -5
if we have a minimum gp then we're just gonna get managers saying "oh its not my fault that the nhl team sent my guy to the minors, he should have been in the nhl" then what? Then they're docked draft position, there's no gray area....that's the whole point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 20, 2011 13:28:18 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 13:28:18 GMT -5
why not dock a draft position if they have 5 nhl dmen instead of 6? i'm fine with either way but if we do have minimum gp, what if a team is on pace to hit the minimum but their player gets injured in the last week, will they be forced to trade a prospect for an nhl player? either way teams will complain and will be in a situation where they may be forced to trade for nhl players using their prospects.
what would the minimum gp be? would it be 82 games per active roster spot?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Dec 20, 2011 15:26:25 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2011 15:26:25 GMT -5
why not dock a draft position if they have 5 nhl dmen instead of 6? i'm fine with either way but if we do have minimum gp, what if a team is on pace to hit the minimum but their player gets injured in the last week, will they be forced to trade a prospect for an nhl player? either way teams will complain and will be in a situation where they may be forced to trade for nhl players using their prospects. what would the minimum gp be? would it be 82 games per active roster spot? IF this is something that the league wants then I think the min games played limit would have to be put to a vote but I don't think we can set it to 82 games per active roster spot or we'll have too many people who'd be crushed by this rule. This should also answer your 1st question as there would be some degree of leeway for teams who are unable to ice an entire roster while also keeping active tanking in check. As for the complaining.....should this proposal move forward everyone would have a fair chance to contribute to the discussion and that would be the last chance to air any concerns. After that it'd be pissing in the wind.
|
|
|
tanking
Dec 20, 2011 15:30:45 GMT -5
Post by stlouisgm on Dec 20, 2011 15:30:45 GMT -5
I just want to say that I really like the idea that we are throwing ideas and opinions out there. I hope to get a small team of us to iron out these ideas off-line and to propose league rule changes for next season. Would like to start putting together this team around February 1st. Hoping Praba and Zaphod will be part of this team along with a few others. If anyone is able and willing to be part of this team, please send me a PM. In the meantime, keep the conversation going....
|
|