Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 2:35:25 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2011 2:35:25 GMT -5
i thought you resigned? i dont understand why you got so offended that i said you needed to have at least 6 nhl dmen on your squad. are you really against trading that much? are you not going to make a single deal all year? if falk plays the next game then i'll cross your team off. why are you baiting a good owner? what do you hope to achieve? a league with 29 owners? 28? i'd rather have 28 owners that play their best rosters than 30 who dont. i dont understand why you guys are all getting pissed off, all im doing is making sure everyone plays the best roster they could. last year was pathetic, teams were tanking like crazy and it affected draft positions heavily. i'm trying to fix this now while the season is early so we dont run into the same problems, and it would be helpful if you guys would stop getting in my ass just because i point out your team doesnt have enough players in a certain position or your team is under the cap. buffalo was missing a rw and it took him a second to sign one, i dont understand why people cant put effort to do the same. i'm putting in more effort trying to help fix people's rosters than people are putting into trying to fix their own.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 3:55:51 GMT -5
Post by ursanator on Oct 22, 2011 3:55:51 GMT -5
With all games for the day locked just prior to the first game of the day there are going to be times when you are busy and do not get to set roster for that day. By the time I get home from work at least 1 game has already started . I do not have time in the morning to set my roster and there are times at night when I do not get a chance to do it so when I am off on weekend I set my roster for the upcoming week. Many things can happen during the week and I may not be able to modify my roster but it is not tanking . Dressing players that play next to no minutes and have no points does not help you. The obvious tanking should be looked at but in most cases tanking occurs later in season not in the first month
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 7:20:25 GMT -5
Post by spitball on Oct 22, 2011 7:20:25 GMT -5
why are you baiting a good owner? what do you hope to achieve? a league with 29 owners? 28? i'd rather have 28 owners that play their best rosters than 30 who dont. i dont understand why you guys are all getting pissed off, all im doing is making sure everyone plays the best roster they could. last year was pathetic, teams were tanking like crazy and it affected draft positions heavily. i'm trying to fix this now while the season is early so we dont run into the same problems, and it would be helpful if you guys would stop getting in my ass just because i point out your team doesnt have enough players in a certain position or your team is under the cap. buffalo was missing a rw and it took him a second to sign one, i dont understand why people cant put effort to do the same. i'm putting in more effort trying to help fix people's rosters than people are putting into trying to fix their own. DO NOT accuse me of cheating. we are trying to maintain our rosters to the specifications of the league. players get injured, players get sent down, players have their position eligibilty changed. it isn't possible to keep up 100% of the time, under this league's current strictures ( two free agent claims per week? not enough ). to throw a blanket over all of us, and call everyone out for tanking, is violently careless.
|
|
|
Post by PineRider (SJ) on Oct 22, 2011 11:21:30 GMT -5
Tanking is when you are actively fielding an inferior lineup. I am fielding the best team i can... the others are too. Just because my team sucks does not mean I am tanking on purpose.
I took over a team nobody wanted because it was mismanaged by the previous GM, and have hopefully drafted/traded to the point that my team can be competitive in a few years. I realize I can make a few more moves, but do not want to gut the team's future.
Before the season, I even picked up guys like Cheechoo and Giroux because the had an outside shot of making the team... And because there really are not a lot of players available. Then I had to trade two promising but active players just to make the salary floor...
Those of us trying to rebuild don't have a lot of options, and people do try and take advantage when you "need" to trade. Now you want us to drop players we want to keep for a rebuild for a fourth liner?? Those of you with shallow benches would snap the players up. The weak rebuilding teams become farm teams for the strong ones...
FYI - I did check with Rich a couple of weeks ago, because I was concerned I didn't have enough active players. His response was to actively field the best lineup you can, because there is no expectation that you drop a rebuilding piece in favor of a fourth liner.
We should wait for him to give a definitive answer to all of us...
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 11:56:08 GMT -5
Post by JetsGM on Oct 22, 2011 11:56:08 GMT -5
not sure what the issue is with Redden, he is on my bench not in an active slot....... there isnt a clear cut rule whether having guys who are obviously not in the nhl allowed to count as your active salary. if that is the case then you can load your team with guys like redden, nylander etc which would be circumventing the cap. the commish needs to decide if it's okay or not. ok, we await the comish's decision on this issue. 1. If you acknowledge that there isn't even a rule that I'm violating, why was I publicly accused of tanking? Please remove me from the original post until these matters are settled. 2. I'm unclear why you mentioned Nylander along with Redden and my team. Nylander is not signed to an NHL contract, is not with any NHL organization, nor is he on my team. 3. I'm in favor of getting a ruling on the IR salary rule, as I believe it best if players on IR count continue to count towards a team's cap.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 12:04:11 GMT -5
Post by Sami (CGY) on Oct 22, 2011 12:04:11 GMT -5
@ktl, I lose some sympathy for your "all I'm getting is bad trade offers" when I gave you an offer that not only increased your cap but that you admitted was fair value, only to have you say you didn't want to do it. I don't like calling people out on stuff like this but this is like the third time you've used that line since we had that discussion...
@spitball, it has been well established in this league that if your guys lost positions because of a Fantrax you can have them manually re-added by the commish.
@rebuilding teams, you are all kind of in a shitty position due to previous owners' mismanagement. I have empathy for your position in all of this. Hopefully we can find a solution that is not as drastic as changing the parameters of the pool.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 12:06:32 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2011 12:06:32 GMT -5
sorry guys i was kind of drunk last night and went apeshit lol.
if i changed the topic title from tanking to "invalid rosters" would that make everyone happy? ive said it a bunch of times in the thread, i know some guys arent tanking (i.e devils dont even own their 1st rounder). its just that their roster isnt meeting the minimum amount of nhl players that everyone needs to have.
i just went through our league and checked who didnt have the right amount of nhl players, who was under the cap etc and made a list. the commish can now decide whether it is okay to have guys like redden on your team, or the minimum nhl players but not the right positions etc.
dont take it as a big deal if your name is on the list, just wait till the commish gives the final word on what the rules are. as you can tell our rules are kind of vague so lets get this settled now.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 13:07:25 GMT -5
Post by johnnybower (Det GM) on Oct 22, 2011 13:07:25 GMT -5
Maybe we could look at increasing the number of reserve players from 3 to 5. If you have some players who are not playing because of injuries (DTD stuff) but are not eligible for IR, and your reserve positions are occupied by a backup goalie and 2 guys who also are either not playing or may be banged up too, you're pooched. Just about everyone's lineup is full of guys who either have to be active or on reserve, no other options except release them. Expanding the reserve would allow GM's to maintain a more workable lineup within league rules and allow weaker teams to hang onto some players rather than losing them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 13:14:58 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2011 13:14:58 GMT -5
i think the best option so far is lowering the number of active starting positions. either change the 3F to 3bench or change 3C, 3LW, 3RW to 2C, 2LW, 2RW, and add 3 bench. this way every team will be able to play a full roster since bench doesnt count, and teams that already have a full roster have an advantage because they can play more players since their bench is full.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 15:28:42 GMT -5
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Oct 22, 2011 15:28:42 GMT -5
I don't know how easy it would be to set up, but as I suggested in PM, the IR situation could be settled fairly easily but allowing GM's to utilize the IR'd salary towards their salary cap if they need it.
that way you don't change the rule to hurt the teams up against the upper cap and you don't hurt the teams against the lower cap.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 15:40:42 GMT -5
Post by keytolife on Oct 22, 2011 15:40:42 GMT -5
@ktl, I lose some sympathy for your "all I'm getting is bad trade offers" when I gave you an offer that not only increased your cap but that you admitted was fair value, only to have you say you didn't want to do it. I don't like calling people out on stuff like this but this is like the third time you've used that line since we had that discussion... @spitball, it has been well established in this league that if your guys lost positions because of a Fantrax you can have them manually re-added by the commish. @rebuilding teams, you are all kind of in a shitty position due to previous owners' mismanagement. I have empathy for your position in all of this. Hopefully we can find a solution that is not as drastic as changing the parameters of the pool. All i stated is that the offer was fair value for a win now team, but didn´t suit a rebuilding team at all and i couldn´t do it if i want this team comeptative sooner then later. I must admit it was one of the fairest offers received. The usual process of trade talk in this league was nonetheless " i trade you my old overpaid farts with big contracts for your young promising guys". I have never received more lopsided trade offers ever than in this league and i stick to those words. Period. Yours was nowhere as bad Sami. I feel sorry for not pointing out that 1-2 decent ones that weren´t that bad were on the table too. But i wasn´t aware it was necessary to point that out. All i wanted to express with my statement that i somehow feel ashamed that a lot of guys tried to take advatange of the cap situations of a team in troubles. By the way thanks for those that expressed their opinion on this thread and that there is a lot of intrest on the topic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 15:45:20 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2011 15:45:20 GMT -5
@ktl, I lose some sympathy for your "all I'm getting is bad trade offers" when I gave you an offer that not only increased your cap but that you admitted was fair value, only to have you say you didn't want to do it. I don't like calling people out on stuff like this but this is like the third time you've used that line since we had that discussion... @spitball, it has been well established in this league that if your guys lost positions because of a Fantrax you can have them manually re-added by the commish. @rebuilding teams, you are all kind of in a shitty position due to previous owners' mismanagement. I have empathy for your position in all of this. Hopefully we can find a solution that is not as drastic as changing the parameters of the pool. All i stated is that the offer was fair value for a win now team, but didn´t suit a rebuilding team at all and i couldn´t do it if i want this team comeptative sooner then later. I must admit it was one of the fairest offers received. The usual process of trade talk in this league was nonetheless " i trade you my old overpaid farts with big contracts for your young promising guys". I have never received more lopsided trade offers ever than in this league and i stick to those words. Period. Yours was nowhere as close Sami. I feel sorry for not pointing out that 1-2 decent ones that weren´t that bad were on the table too. But i wasn´t aware it was necessary to point that out. All i wanted to express with my statement that i somehow feel ashamed that a lot of guys tried to take advatange of the cap situations of a team in troubles. i'm sure we can all agree trading is hard in this league because of the setup, regardless if you are trying to obtain salary or get rid of it. IR salary still counting towards your cap seems fair, im sure we can get that rule passed. we still need to work out: 1) whether players that are clearly not in the nhl are allowed to be on your roster counting towards your cap 2) all teams need to dress the same minimum amount of nhl forwards (so far it looks like the majority of us are fine with lowering the active starting spots and increasing the bench)
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 22, 2011 17:34:29 GMT -5
Post by Sami (CGY) on Oct 22, 2011 17:34:29 GMT -5
IR salary still counting towards your cap seems fair, im sure we can get that rule passed. Just to clarify, we're talking about having the option to have it count, right?
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 0:38:40 GMT -5
Post by stlouisgm on Oct 23, 2011 0:38:40 GMT -5
Sorry for not being a big part of the discussion thus far. On the brighter side, I head home tomorrow (6 hour flight) and will be available for the most part on Monday.
Glad to see there has been some solid discussions going on. I'm sure we can make adjustments that will improve the league long term. This league has overcome large obsticles in the past and will continue to do so because of our dedicated GMs. Gentlemen, I salute you.
Here are a few of my thoughts.
I really like 30 team Dynasty leagues because they are challenging and model themselves after the actual NHL as much as possible. 19 active players with 4 active forward lines, 3 defensive pairings and a goaltender and 3 reserves (scratches) seems like such a natural.
However, we are not exactly the same because an injury to a defenseman in Los Angeles (ie Doughty), whom I might own, doesn't mean I automatically have his natural replacement (Voynov) in my minors. In fact, 29 times out of 30 I won't own Voynov. Therefore, there will always be instances where we can't field an entire 23 player active roster.
The point is that all GMs need to field as full a roster as possible.
GM are required to be below the salary cap and also above the salary floor just like the NHL teams have that requirement. Real NHL teams use various methods to do so. (AHL banishment, Europe banishment, LTIR...probably missing some.
I have absolutely no problem with a GM using these players in a reserve position. I believe this practice should be fround upon and not encouragaged because it takes away from the flexability of the team and makes the team less competitive in the short term. But it can be useful for a rebuilding GM.
This particular league is slightly more restrictive in that it has 3 C, 3 RW and 3 LW specfic positions. Unfortunately there also has been some pretty poor management by previous generation GMs that have placed some of the rebuilding teams in really poor postures.
Because of 1. the more restictive positions, 2. the poor previous management, 3. our very restrictive bench and 4. the large increase in last year's cap, our league is in it's current situation.
One note that you all should be aware of. "Tanking" by my definition (not playing players who should be - bench or IR - or playing players in the minors/Europe) will not occur if I am aware of it. I've been monitoring roster activity on Fantrax as well as the rosters themselves too. Praba hasn't been the only one.
Not a fan of throwing anyone under the bus, but it is deserved. One exa.mple: I retroactively replaced Nugent-Hopkins to game 1 active and benched Mr AHL Brule for the Islanders. He instantly moved from #28 to # 15 in the standings that day.
My recommendation:
Change 3 C, 3 RW and 3 LW positions to 2 C, 2 RW and 2 LW.
Also change 3 F to either 6 F or 5 F and 1 additional reserve position.
IR can be changed to be included in the cap, however Fantrax does not allow to pick and choose, therefore although such a move will help the lower salary floor teams, it would hurt those near the salary cap. Fantrax does not make illegal rosters below the salary floor, so those already have to be monitored manually.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 1:23:41 GMT -5
Post by johnnybower (Det GM) on Oct 23, 2011 1:23:41 GMT -5
I like the less-restrictive forward designations but I would still like to see an expanded reserve...as you alluded, this is not real-life NHL...we may not all be able to carry NHL-ready/able backups in sufficient number to keep our rosters compliant.
|
|