|
Post by PineRider (SJ) on Mar 6, 2012 7:43:19 GMT -5
The goal is not to just expand the FA pool, but to expand it with active NHLers. By the time most rookies hit 100 games or so, they are taking up full roster spots on NHL clubs, rather than getting stashed away on the farm team. The farm shouldn't really be an extension of the reserve imo.
By having a maximum games rule, the GM's will have to fish or cut bait and decide on keeping a second year rookie vs a veteran 3rd or 4th liner. Whichever way they choose, they will have to let an active player go, which will get picked up by a weaker team and (theoretically) strengthening their team.
If you look at the FA pool now, the only players who are not in the minors are the ones who have recently been waived. For a developing team with a lot of prospects, it makes it hard to field a proper roster.
|
|
|
Post by JetsGM on Mar 6, 2012 11:27:28 GMT -5
a couple points- if this is about getting teams to field more fully active rosters then I get that. Tho I think this would eventually be accomplished in the normal course of letting younger players develop and as the first wave hits their 162 gm limit and tough choices are made on which NHLer's to cut. This would just speed up the process.
If it's about the need to increase competiveness I don't quite understand- looking at the final standings from last year vs. the current standings the changes are fairly dramatic. The top 2 teams from last year CAL and PIT are outside the top 15 now. Top team this year (LA) was 20th last year. STL is 2nd this year was 15th last year. 3 other top 10 teams now(OTT,CAR,WPG) finished in the bottom third last year.
i guess we'll have to wait and see how the changes actually affect teams in DTDL. i think this move could actually hurt those young, prospect laden teams that are near the cap floor. I. If a lot of their rookies mature to the proposed 110 gm limit they may not be far along in their careers to have earned lucrative post elc contracts. GM's are gonna have to cut bait on their young players in order not to fall under the cap floor.
In the original post, STL mentioned that if we change to 110 then players on IR won't count against the cap. Since we don't know how these moves are actually gonna to play out I think we should hold off on eliminating the IR/salary exemption/inclusion issue.
|
|
|
Post by zaphod (NYI) on Mar 6, 2012 14:26:35 GMT -5
one thing I just recalled wanting to bring up, we don't ice a full forward roster, but we do 6 dmen.
should we consider altering that also?
12/10=0.8333333333333333 6*0.8333333333333333=5
so 5 dmen is the same ratio.
maybe go with 10 F, 5 D and 2 Utility slots (if fantrax does that)
|
|
|
Post by JetsGM on Mar 16, 2012 9:55:19 GMT -5
one thing I just recalled wanting to bring up, we don't ice a full forward roster, but we do 6 dmen. should we consider altering that also? 12/10=0.8333333333333333 6*0.8333333333333333=5 so 5 dmen is the same ratio. that seems to make sense. we could just eliminate 1 active D slot and add 1 reserve slot
|
|
|
Post by uofmehockey on May 24, 2012 21:51:35 GMT -5
Playoff rules have been posted. Our playoff winner will be awarded the 46th pick and not the 32nd pick. I concur that there is a greater amount of "chance" in winning the playoffs. Winning the President's Trophy is more of an accomplishment and therefore is valued higher (31st pick).
Some of the other proposed rule changes (waivers / prospect game limits) have also been updated.
|
|