Roster Size - Poll - Please vote ASAP

[Deleted]

Hi there,

I've just talk with Dave and told me that regarding the roster size we were stopping at 70. From the get go I told Dave we should do 10 per season until we reach 90 for roster size meaning 70 minor and 20 nhl line up.
So now the question I have for everyone is should stop at 70 while still obtaining 5 entry picks and 4 round of waiver pick. That mean each year we are adding 9 picks. I understand we are still aloud to drop anyone that left the nhl or retired but I feel the magic number is 90. So here's the option for voting

A) Stay as is which is 70 for ever
B) Add by 10 until we reach 90



By the way I've check every roster and found that following facts:

on a possible 1680 player's we could own, we own 1435 player's divided by 24 equal to 59.79 per team. Here's the interesting facts:

Under 50: 4
51-59: 6
60+: 13
65+: 8
70: 1
71+: 1 - Richmond is sitting over the limit at 71 making his team illegal atm.


From now on I'll be the person in charge for making everyone follow this rule. This mean if we stay at 70, we will have 9 team will be over the limit will be force to trade away their picks or drop player's to make room.

[Deleted]

Great work Frank in researching this.

The way the rules are now, we should stay at 70.

If we ever decide to cap the contracts at 50, I would get behind increasing the player above 70.

[Dave (PLK)]

I am TOTALLY against going over 70.

This just gives strong teams more chances to stash players in the minors.

[Deleted]

Sorry I guess I missed a guy somewhere with everything happening. i'll have a look and get compliant. Sorry again.

i can def see Dave's concern with strong teams stashing extra players in the minors. Depending on the legwork that would have to be done you could do the extra guys would have to he prospects.

[Deleted]

also I can't vote because my choice is not there.

I vote "stay at 70, for now".

[Deleted]

If you are one of those gm that feel 70 is not enough but feel 90 a tad much we could always modify it at 80. Either way please vote and again if you want a bit more then 70 then vote for the 90 option.

[Deleted]

I will vote stay at 70

but I don't like the words "for ever". those words are misleading and should not be in the poll.

[Deleted]

Weird how everything come full circle to stashing Assets but this league was build on having that option. So all suddenly we are no longer able to continue this tendency. Why ? Everyone is afraid of stashing this and that ..... Why ?

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2016 18:51:12 GMT -5 @eric said:

I will vote stay at 70

but I don't like the words "for ever". those words are misleading and should not be in the poll.

And that's why you shouldn't vote for the option 1 since Dave doesn't want to ever surpass the 70 mark.

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2016 18:51:41 GMT -5 @thenudge said:

Weird how everything come full circle to stashing Assets but this league was build on having that option. So all suddenly we are no longer able to continue this tendency. Why ? Everyone is afraid of stashing this and that ..... Why ?

I think some are worried about league parity.  However, I've come to my own conclusion that it will take a while to rebuild this roster.  It won't be something that happens overnight no matter what type of changes may come, if any.

I'm just hoping to not lose out on the lotto again like last year........figures crossed

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2016 18:51:41 GMT -5 @thenudge said:

Weird how everything come full circle to stashing Assets but this league was build on having that option. So all suddenly we are no longer able to continue this tendency. Why ? Everyone is afraid of stashing this and that ..... Why ?

Because our waiver wire is pathetic in three years of existence. Waiver wire is suppose to feed the bottom, but all these guys are useless:

2013/14

Oct 17/13 Canners claim Jordan Leopold from Halifax

Nov 4/13 Seals claim Adam Hall from Canners

Nov 18/13 Seals claim Matt Cullen from Belfast

Dec 16/13 Red Deer claims Sean Bergenheim from Belfast

Jan 24/14 Seals claim Alexander Sulzer from Canners

Feb 4/14 Kelowna claims Ray Emery from Pembroke

*****

2014/15

Nov 12/14 Buffalo claims Keith Ballard from Abbotsford

Dec 3/14 Pembroke claims Devan Setoguchi from Toronto


2015/16

David Rundblad

Yanick Weber

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2016 18:57:08 GMT -5 @will said:

Apr 19, 2016 18:51:41 GMT -5 @thenudge said:

Weird how everything come full circle to stashing Assets but this league was build on having that option. So all suddenly we are no longer able to continue this tendency. Why ? Everyone is afraid of stashing this and that ..... Why ?

I think some are worried about league parity.  However, I've come to my own conclusion that it will take a while to rebuild this roster.  It won't be something that happens overnight no matter what type of changes may come, if any.

I'm just hoping to not lose out on the lotto again like last year........figures crossed

Don't you mean 'Fingers crossed' ?


Hopefully I win the lotto this year again, Fingers crossed !!

[WillyBilly (Tire Fires)]

I'd vote for it to go to 80 I don't like either option

[Deleted]

Then vote for option B since option A won't give you 80 this year.

[Tbone (Kelowna)]

Think we should stick at 70, that's still plenty from a 'fun' aspect. Though I'm at near that limit already, there's plenty of teams that are not. So don't think we should even consider increasing until a vast majority are at that point and can stand to benefit from the change. Also, the annual waiver draft is getting thinner by the year, already pretty thin, so increasing this limit will make it even more so. Such that a 4 round waiver draft would be rendered almost useless if we do increase to 90, which would make an already restrictive league even more restrictive to changing the makeup of one's team.