2nd Vote - Stashing NHLers in the minors

[Deleted]

I do not think we owe Richmond anything but I tried to make the league realize that we needed to give Richmond something extra like a extra 1st entry or waiver pick but it got shot down. I just don't see anything good materializing from this discussion (what Eric poll). I really don't see limiting movement will help this league or parity. I really hope I'm wrong about Eric motivation but if it's a personal attack on a team like Jimmy it's the wrong way to do so since like Buffalo and Jimmy point out this change will only help Jimmy and hurt any competitive team that could win against Jimmy. So again I hope we are trying to make change for the better of the league and not as personal gain. By the way I voted for limiting vets.

[Deleted]

Everyone: Please stay on topic.

Refrain from personal attacks on certain GM's.

Stats so far:

12 GMs voted.
1 GM refrained.

Which leaves 11 GMs still to contribute.

[Deleted]

And just to squash the rumour, I don't have a personal problem with Jimmy or any of the GMs here.

Having opposing opinions does not equal personal problems. Opposing opinions is normal interaction with people.

We have 24 GMs here, all individuals. We'll bring our opinions on this matter together and see what we can come with.

[Dave (PLK)]

May 5, 2016 19:52:18 GMT -5 @thenudge said:

May 5, 2016 19:11:36 GMT -5 @eric said:

There would be a compromise.

For example, Stashing starting goalies would be penalized as well. Making for a mutually beneficial trade.

If the following option wins: Limited number of veterans in the minors

Wouldn't a vet goalie like Miller count as one of limited veterans that would be exempt from waiver at the beg of the year ? If so your point is moot at best. Why would I keep a guy like Kulemin over a guy like Lack ? If I need to choose between them, then I'll take the one that hold the most value. You can't start creating multiple rules and destroying everything we built just because some of us are simply in a bad position.

I agree with Frank here about creating more rules.

Players come and go and teams get better and worse...it's the cycle of the NHL as well as our teams here.

Not everyone can win. Just try to improve.

We all have known the rules from day 1 and we really don't need to start changing them now.

No matter what we do, there will always be top teams and bottom teams. Look at Toronto and how he turned around his team in a couple of seasons. It happens. Yes, Kelowna is a strong team and won twice in a row, but he just barely won this year. Playoffs are short and sweet, anything can happen.

I think we have a strong league now with a great bunch of GMs and we really don't need to change a whole lot.

[Deleted]

Put me down in the refrain camp. I can't support any position about "stashing NHL'ers in the minors" that has no correlation to league parity issue. Creating a rule that will kill certain types of trades, remove certain types of team building strategy, unfairly target some teams and have no impact on other teams....just for the sake of making a new, micro-managing rule is just nonsense to me.

[Deleted]

I appreciate your stance Dave on micro management.

A question for you: what if we were forced to set our lines ups a certain way? For example, I played Mike Richards and scatched max pac because Richards was hot and max pac was cold. Would this be considered as tanking? According to some people here, they believe a GM is forced to play thier best players in the lineups at all times. I could not be allowed to scratch max pac.

Or how about this : I keep a better quality waiver free player in the minors of year and play a weaker veteran on my starting roster in fear of losing my veteran through waivers. Would this be considered as tanking? again some people feel we do not have to right to manage our teams as we desire.

Or the opposite: keeping a better quality veteran in the minors and play a weaker waiver free player in fear of having to call up a veteran and only to lose him later through waivers? Would this be considered as tanking? Some people here say this is tanking.

So is micromanagement a two way street? Or is it for some and not others? I am interested to hear what you think about this.

[Deleted]

May 6, 2016 21:03:22 GMT -5 @eric said:

I appreciate your stance Dave on micro management.

A question for you: what if we were forced to set our lines ups a certain way? For example, I played Mike Richards and scatched max pac because Richards was hot and max pac was cold. Would this be considered as tanking? According to some people here, they believe a GM is forced to play thier best players in the lineups at all times. I could not be allowed to scratch max pac.

Or how about this : I keep a better quality waiver free player in the minors of year and play a weaker veteran on my starting roster in fear of losing my veteran through waivers. Would this be considered as tanking? again some people feel we do not have to right to manage our teams as we desire.

Or the opposite: keeping a better quality veteran in the minors and play a weaker waiver free player in fear of having to call up a veteran and only to lose him later through waivers? Would this be considered as tanking? Some people here say this is tanking.

So is micromanagement a two way street? Or is it for some and not others? I am interested to hear what you think about this.

Hey Eric,

Buffalo did a similar move benching Eric Staal in favor of Matt Murray. It paid off for him and almost won because of that move. He was able to do what ever he wanted when it matter. The only thing I said about such a move was regarding the start of the year. Imagine this, you start off the year with sending Max to the minor in favor of let's say Mike Richard. How would you explain such a move? Oh I saw him practice, he look soo good!! But If during the year Mike Richard is on a hot streak and his playing a extra game then go for it bench Max in favor of Mike Richard. Those two are two separate situation.


Now to the 2nd part, let's say you start off the year with Dylan Storm and send Mike Fisher to the minor since he's waiver exempt then and only then. Then that would be aloud, you're aloud to edit your line up anyway you want but there's big difference between trying out something and trying to tank off the bat. You may not fully understand between the two but trust me I do. Don't be shy and set your line any way you want except benching or sending a star to the minor in favor of a scrub.

[Deleted]

And that's my point right there Frank.

See the micro management double standard? Some are allowed to stash their NHLers while others are chastised for even mentioning such a thing.

[Deleted]

May 6, 2016 21:55:06 GMT -5 @eric said:

And that's my point right there Frank.

See the micro management double standard? Some are allowed to stash their NHLers while others are chastised for even mentioning such a thing.

Your Point is moot at best. How does it make sense for you or anyone to send Max Pax to the minor in favor of Mike Richard to start off the year unless you think Max was recently injured.

[Deleted]

That's my point Frank.

If GM's are allowed to freely stash NHLer in in minors, we cant boss them around to say which ones.

If you remember when we started the league, we allowed for stashing so overpaid average players would be taken like Campbell, Heatley and Lecavalier. But we have evolved since then. Now we see high impact players in the minors all year like Backlund or even a starting goalie like cam ward for example. This is not good for the league but it is within the rules.

So that's my point. If the rich teams are permitted to do as they please, then the poorer teams should be allowed to stash NHLers as they please as well, regardless of reason. As we are not micromanaging roster decisions.

[Deleted]

May 7, 2016 6:31:11 GMT -5 @eric said:

That's my point Frank.

If GM's are allowed to freely stash NHLer in in minors, we cant boss them around to say which ones.

If you remember when we started the league, we allowed for stashing so overpaid average players would be taken like Campbell, Heatley and Lecavalier. But we have evolved since then. Now we see high impact players in the minors all year like Backlund or even a starting goalie like cam ward for example. This is not good for the league but it is within the rules.

So that's my point. If the rich teams are permitted to do as they please, then the poorer teams should be allowed to stash NHLers as they please as well, regardless of reason. As we are not micromanaging roster decisions.

This is a topic I prefer not going into, simply use your head and make the best lineup you can. That's all we are asking of you. We won't interfere with anyone lineup unless you are letting a healthy player on IR rot. We had problem with that last year but this year we will be more on it. Again use your head and we won't need to micromanage anyone lineup.

[Deleted]

Here is one idea for you Frank.

How about a 20% over/under fantrax score rule.

I'm not sure about the exact value of 20%, but I just use it for example.

The rule is each team adds up the total fantrax score of their team (all NHLers including in the minors) of their team. Each team is allowed to keep no more than 20% of their total fantrax score in the minors.

So basically: high profile NHLers cannot be stashed in the minors for saving for the playoffs, or for tanking.

The stashing NHLers in the minors goes back to its original purpose when we started the IFFHL: To keep high salary average players or 4th liners.

What do ya think?

[Deleted]

May 7, 2016 10:17:03 GMT -5 @eric said:

Here is one idea for you Frank.

How about a 20% over/under fantrax score rule.

I'm not sure about the exact value of 20%, but I just use it for example.

The rule is each team adds up the total fantrax score of their team (all NHLers including in the minors) of their team. Each team is allowed to keep no more than 20% of their total fantrax score in the minors.

So basically: high profile NHLers cannot be stashed in the minors for saving for the playoffs, or for tanking.

The stashing NHLers in the minors goes back to its original purpose when we started the IFFHL: To keep high salary average players or 4th liners.

What do ya think?

How would that % work week to week ? It's easy to calculate when the season is done but during will be very hard to keep track of. That mean would need a at least a few gm taking notes on every player stats on a daily basis which I feel is way too much work. I really don't mind doing the work but let's say during weak 1 you start with Lars Eller in the minor. During that weak of 3 games he post 5G- 2 A- +8 - 11 hits - 2 block - 15 shots - 1 GWG - 2 PPG - 2 PPA - 20 FOW - 12 FOL - 17:45 AVG- so how now the question how much would this player cost us in pts or % wise ?

[Deleted]

I agree too much work each week.

I think we do this twice a year: once after trade deadline, and once before the season starts.

Also, I think it can be done upon request from a GM if there was a major trade. For example if Dave trade away Getzlaf mid-season and he only gets prospects and picks, then we can do an extra review for him.

What do ya think?

[Deleted]

May 7, 2016 10:36:43 GMT -5 @eric said:

I agree too much work each week.

I think we do this twice a year: once after trade deadline, and once before the season starts.

Also, I think it can be done upon request from a GM if there was a major trade. For example if Dave trade away Getzlaf mid-season and he only gets prospects and picks, then we can do an extra review for him.

What do ya think?

So for example if your total fantrax score at the trade deadline is 100,000 then you are allowed to have 20,000 fantrax points in the minors. Then that number stay the same through the end of the season and playoffs.

And then we re-caculate before the season start for next year.

I don't know about the 20% but we can talk about how to figure out the right %