Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 7:27:45 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2011 7:27:45 GMT -5
I've been trying to keep up on this reading but it's quite a thread to get through so here are my quick thoughts: We can not impose some of these restrictions on the bottom feeding teams or we'll simply be replacing GM's every year as they get tired of trying to rebuild within such a confined system and finding that if their farm is weak they really have no hope in sight. How can we ask a guy to move a future asset for a band-aid fix just so that he has a full roster? I don't see the point. The team in question certainly isn't competitive to begin with or they wouldn't be in this situation so more often then not they'd be asked to make counter-productive moves and I can imagine how frustrating that gets. To me the cap issue is a big one! I see that as one of our main tools for avoiding tanking. Cap situations are well within the control of all GM's and there really is no excuse for not adhering to them. As mentioned earlier, some teams are attempting to make the best of an inherited situation but I find it hard to believe that it's as difficult to take on salary as some are indicating. I moved Jovo for a 5th at the draft......starting to think I could have landed a 1st for him by the say people are talking....damn I completely agree with the idea of reducing our active roster. It is intensely difficult to maintain a full roster in this league even with a solid team so I can't imagine how tough it must be for a gutted franchise. One last thought that I've tried to convey many times before but I feel the need to throw it out there once again. Adding roadblocks to shitty/re-building teams makes for a painful process that most GM's aren't willing to wait out. If we want a thriving league we must give them every opportunity to pull themselves out of the gutter.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 10:13:25 GMT -5
Post by uofmehockey on Oct 23, 2011 10:13:25 GMT -5
Just a note Fantrax DOES let us pick and choose what roster positions count against the cap so we could include IR players if we decide to. One easy click.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 16:50:54 GMT -5
Post by wildgm on Oct 23, 2011 16:50:54 GMT -5
I would suggest the following: Change positions to 2 LW, 2 C, 2 RW, 6 F, 6 D, 1 G, 4 Bench Set minimum # of active player to 2 for LW, C and RW. Set minimum # of active players to 3 for F and to 5 for D. Set total minimum # of players on active roster to 15. This way up to 4 slots may be left open if you don't have any valid players to fill the positions. IR players count against the cap.
This forces a GM to always field at least 3 full lines plus 5 D's and also helps somewhat with the cap floor for injury depleted teams.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 17:37:20 GMT -5
Post by PHI GM on Oct 23, 2011 17:37:20 GMT -5
I know I am new here but I do not want Tom Poti's contract counting against my cap. So he is put on the IR for the next two seasons til he is off the Caps LTI. If you want to have your guy's salary count, put him in a reserve slot (definitely if we expand the number of reserve spots). For those that want the benefit of having a players salary count, then they should have the draw back of sacrificing a reserve spot. That seems balanced to me. For others that don't, then utilize the IR.
I read the post regarding the issue of Fantrax letting us count IR against the cap or not, as him (I think it was STL) talking about individual teams having the choice. Were Buffalo, I think you are saying we can do it as a league in one click. Apples and oranges.
Though I could be completely wrong on everything.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 18:33:32 GMT -5
Post by Sami (CGY) on Oct 23, 2011 18:33:32 GMT -5
I know I am new here but I do not want Tom Poti's contract counting against my cap. So he is put on the IR for the next two seasons til he is off the Caps LTI. If you want to have your guy's salary count, put him in a reserve slot (definitely if we expand the number of reserve spots). For those that want the benefit of having a players salary count, then they should have the draw back of sacrificing a reserve spot. That seems balanced to me. For others that don't, then utilize the IR. I read the post regarding the issue of Fantrax letting us count IR against the cap or not, as him (I think it was STL) talking about individual teams having the choice. Were Buffalo, I think you are saying we can do it as a league in one click. Apples and oranges. Though I could be completely wrong on everything. I completely agree with the GM from Philly.
|
|
|
Post by PineRider (SJ) on Oct 23, 2011 19:25:47 GMT -5
There are two main issues: tanking and player availability.
For tanking, I completely agree with vancouver to keep the salary floor. I think we should also have a draft lottery like the NHL so that tanking does not assure any team the top overall picks. Like the NHL, they have better chances, but no guarantees.
For player availability, I do like the suggestions to reduce the active roster, but i also think there needs to be enough NHL-active players in the FA pool... which means we would also have to reduce the reserve rosters to free people up. I'm not sure I like the idea personally, because I like having a big farm roster - it rewards those who do their homework on prospects. However, I'm not sure how else to increase the number of available players.
You can pick up a player like Alex Giroux because he is a LW playing right now, but what happens if/when he gets sent back down? If you already had a reserve of 20 and you had to drop a farm kid to get Giroux, do you drop Giroux and get someone else? Then Giroux gets called up again...
Also, if you're a rebuilding team, you have a bunch of top notch rookies, some who are playing right now (eg. Grachev) but they do get sent down. Is the expectation to drop a promising farm kid just to get a Tim Stapleton? Strong teams will generally have weaker farm teams, so they will snatch up whoever I drop... The rich get richer.
I'm new to the league and will play within the rules that are set. I just want to know that (a) people won't accuse me of cheating, and (b) I can see my rebuilt through. I am committing to this league for at least four years... can any of today's top team say the same, when their teams start their downslide?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 19:29:39 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2011 19:29:39 GMT -5
why dont we increase the farm team size?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 20:39:36 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2011 20:39:36 GMT -5
why dont we increase the farm team size? I vote to decrease the farm team size
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 23, 2011 23:11:40 GMT -5
Post by uofmehockey on Oct 23, 2011 23:11:40 GMT -5
let's not talk about the farm team size since it seems fine. If you have reasons for either cause make another thread.
I think letting people choose is nice but yeah that would be impossible to do except manually. I'd still rather include IR salary in most cases instead of exclude it since I feel excluding it is a more common issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 24, 2011 7:21:04 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2011 7:21:04 GMT -5
let's not talk about the farm team size since it seems fine. If you have reasons for either cause make another thread. I think letting people choose is nice but yeah that would be impossible to do except manually. I'd still rather include IR salary in most cases instead of exclude it since I feel excluding it is a more common issue. My farm team comment was a joke ;D (although I strongly disagree with increasing it and would like to see it contracted, it is not a big issue) The IR salary issue is a double edged sword. I would not want my IR contracts counting against my cap but at the end of the day it doesn't really matter because this league format also makes it impossible for me to pick up a short term IR replacement since I'll just be on the hook for their contract after my player returns and I need to drop the replacement. This is one of the major reasons that I think it's impossible to enforce a rule saying that all teams must have a full roster of active NHLers at all times.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 24, 2011 9:32:01 GMT -5
Post by uofmehockey on Oct 24, 2011 9:32:01 GMT -5
Yeah perhaps the best thing is to give leniency to everyone on it. I mean if someone is blatantly putting 7 or so prospects in their active roster that is completely different than what we are discussing. However I think you're right with IR/salary issues more flexibility makes sense.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 24, 2011 23:31:56 GMT -5
Post by stlouisgm on Oct 24, 2011 23:31:56 GMT -5
I appreciate all the input that you guys have provided about the issues discussed. My interpretation of this discussion is as follows:
Because the IR issue is indeed a double edged sword, I believe it is best to use apply salary toward the team's salary cap unless that salary puts the team over the league's salary cap. In other words, it may or may not be used as long as it does not hurt the team. This application will apply only toward this season at this point and will be re-evaluated next off season during the rules review.
The league needs more flex ability in positions to allow GMs to properly fill their active rosters. Therefore, I will adjust each center and wing position to two from 3. The number of IR positions will not change. I will also adjust the forward 4 and add 2 additional bench/reserve positions. the structure will now look like this.
2LW, 2C, 2RW, 4 F, 6D, 1G, 5R, 3IR
I feel these changes are for the ultimate betterment of the league and I will not implement this change until Wednesday to allow anyone who is opposed to this action to PM me their thoughts.
|
|
|
tanking
Oct 25, 2011 8:15:25 GMT -5
Post by Sami (CGY) on Oct 25, 2011 8:15:25 GMT -5
I appreciate all the input that you guys have provided about the issues discussed. My interpretation of this discussion is as follows: Because the IR issue is indeed a double edged sword, I believe it is best to use apply salary toward the team's salary cap unless that salary puts the team over the league's salary cap. In other words, it may or may not be used as long as it does not hurt the team. This application will apply only toward this season at this point and will be re-evaluated next off season during the rules review. The league needs more flex ability in positions to allow GMs to properly fill their active rosters. Therefore, I will adjust each center and wing position to two from 3. The number of IR positions will not change. I will also adjust the forward 4 and add 2 additional bench/reserve positions. the structure will now look like this. 2LW, 2C, 2RW, 4 F, 6D, 1G, 5R, 3IR I feel these changes are for the ultimate betterment of the league and I will not implement this change until Wednesday to allow anyone who is opposed to this action to PM me their thoughts. As much as this sucks for people like me who, in order to ensure that I had a proper roster, downgraded talent to shore up depth at LW, it is in the best interest of the league.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 25, 2011 8:30:55 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2011 8:30:55 GMT -5
so just to confirm...every team has to have the following:
2LW 2C 2RW 4F 6D 1G
and all of the above have to be in the nhl?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
tanking
Oct 25, 2011 8:48:25 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2011 8:48:25 GMT -5
As much as this sucks for people like me who, in order to ensure that I had a proper roster, downgraded talent to shore up depth at LW, it is in the best interest of the league. Good on ya Sami.......I can see light at the end of the tunnel for this league!
|
|