Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2014 9:18:19 GMT -5
I like the idea because it allows teams to pick up free agents during the season. I think having 3 per year is a little much. I would suggest one at the allstar break and then one in the offseason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks on Apr 24, 2014 15:59:42 GMT -5
Adding/deleting stat categories.
My experience from other dynasty leagues is to run polls with a simple yes/no option. Do each one at a time and simply go from there. Open a discussion thread (this one) and work from that. I like the idea of adding a couple of categories ("FO%" and "Take Aways"). Not a fan of "give aways".
There might be 1 or 2 cats that we can drop though I haven't has a chance to review them so i will leave that up to you guys to suggest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruyns (Barrie) on Apr 24, 2014 16:53:52 GMT -5
Personally Goalie TOI is the one I'd drop first. No skill or luck involved just goes to the teams who dress 2 goalies like I did last season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2014 18:16:12 GMT -5
Personally Goalie TOI is the one I'd drop first. No skill or luck involved just goes to the teams who dress 2 goalies like I did last season. I agree, I hated that stat. Fucking TOI for golies. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 24, 2014 19:25:00 GMT -5
Personally Goalie TOI is the one I'd drop first. No skill or luck involved just goes to the teams who dress 2 goalies like I did last season. But you need to have the goalies....and the more a goalie gets pulled, the less minutes played he has...so there is that. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2014 19:39:39 GMT -5
Related to goalie TOI is starting goalie dispersements.
The way it is now, teams have 0 to 3 starting goalies. With goalie values so high, it is hard to trade one away/acquire one. It is not too bad right now, but it could be an issue down the road as goalies degress/expand roles.
I would suggest clamping down on the max/min goalie starts so as to eliminate the need to carry 2-3 starting goalies or carrying none at all (I admit I took advantage of this). I think the ideal would be one starter + one backup/split time per team. Setting a max and min should help balances goalie dispersement, increase trade activity, and eliminate the goalie TOI stat. Replace it with goalie assists for example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone (Kelowna) on Apr 24, 2014 20:35:14 GMT -5
Actually, think the Goalie TOI stat is important in maintaining balance and actually creating some value for
backup/2nd goalies. Else, the Goalie starts will be skewed to only needing one starter (just like Blues did
with Quick to win most GAA/SV% stats, with only W offsetting). As it sits now, it's a strategic element
whether to start 1 or 2 goalies as the stats are 2 against 2 (GAA/SV% vs W/MIN) and think it actually worked
well this season, particularly in playoffs where teams had to make a choice to be made depending on opponent (even Rebels had to make a choice to start a weak backup in Ellis to win the MIN stat at the potential expense of GAA/SV%)
The only option I see perhaps is 'replacing' Goalie Minutes Played with SV (Saves). That would maintain similar value to minutes played, but would reward better goalies (who face a lot of shots, yet don't impact GAA to badly)
Anyways, this is another key stat change that should not be made frivolously, as it does have a high impact.
As Rebels stated, goalie values are high (and for a reason), so any change could affect this value drastically (positive for some teams who may have weak goalie positions and negative for those who have high goalie depth). Don't see an issue with the high value of goalies, as that was the bar that was set based on the rules this league was started with, and we all had the ability to adapt accordingly through the draft. And we did, some teams drafted goalies with their 1st/2nd pick just because of this, so to devalue this at this point would not seem too fair to them.
Again, please keep overall fairness to the league as a whole in mind with any potential rule change suggestions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruyns (Barrie) on Apr 24, 2014 21:14:01 GMT -5
Replacing it with saves sounds like a good idea too. I have 2 starters and a backup so I am aware of fairness and it would actually hurt my team just like eliminating wingers taking FOs. I'm concerned with creating a competitive league with good stat categories and if it hurts my chances I can live with it.
The reason I wasn't a fan of goalie TOI is every other cat at the start of the week is up for grabs and depends on your teams performance, but if you had 2 starters playing 3 games in the week and the other team had 1 starter then you are guaranteed to win TOI. Having 2 starters already gives the team an advantage in winning goalie Ws and SOs so giving them another free stat win seemed overkill to me, but that's just my opinion.
If it was taken away I would like to see the option of dressing one goalie and an extra D eliminated, I felt that teams should have the same amount of skaters dressed per week and 2 goalie slots. If we keep goalie TOI I would be an advocate of lower maximum goalie starts as Eric suggested.
|
|
|
|
Post by Golden Seals on Apr 24, 2014 21:51:26 GMT -5
. Having 2 starters already gives the team an advantage in winning goalie Ws and SOs so giving them another free stat win seemed overkill to me, but that's just my opinion. This is why I drafted 2 starters early. But it you guys an change whatever category, I'just roll with the punches. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 24, 2014 22:05:31 GMT -5
. Having 2 starters already gives the team an advantage in winning goalie Ws and SOs so giving them another free stat win seemed overkill to me, but that's just my opinion. This is why I drafted 2 starters early. But it you guys an change whatever category, I'just roll with the punches. Everyone knew the stat categories well before the draft began... You were smart to draft a couple early. |
|
|
|
Post by Bruyns (Barrie) on Apr 24, 2014 22:49:47 GMT -5
Yep, I grabbed my two early. The team with arguably the weakest goaltending on paper won our first championship so it wasn't necessarily the optimal strategy as long as your goalie gets hot in the playoffs like Bryz did.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 25, 2014 7:13:50 GMT -5
and goalie stats only account for 5 of the 17 categories, so you can win without goalies....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 8:50:57 GMT -5
Actually, think the Goalie TOI stat is important in maintaining balance and actually creating some value for backup/2nd goalies. Else, the Goalie starts will be skewed to only needing one starter (just like Blues did with Quick to win most GAA/SV% stats, with only W offsetting). As it sits now, it's a strategic element whether to start 1 or 2 goalies as the stats are 2 against 2 (GAA/SV% vs W/MIN) and think it actually worked well this season, particularly in playoffs where teams had to make a choice to be made depending on opponent (even Rebels had to make a choice to start a weak backup in Ellis to win the MIN stat at the potential expense of GAA/SV%) The only option I see perhaps is 'replacing' Goalie Minutes Played with SV (Saves). That would maintain similar value to minutes played, but would reward better goalies (who face a lot of shots, yet don't impact GAA to badly) Anyways, this is another key stat change that should not be made frivolously, as it does have a high impact. As Rebels stated, goalie values are high (and for a reason), so any change could affect this value drastically (positive for some teams who may have weak goalie positions and negative for those who have high goalie depth). Don't see an issue with the high value of goalies, as that was the bar that was set based on the rules this league was started with, and we all had the ability to adapt accordingly through the draft. And we did, some teams drafted goalies with their 1st/2nd pick just because of this, so to devalue this at this point would not seem too fair to them. Again, please keep overall fairness to the league as a whole in mind with any potential rule change suggestions. I agree with this statement. Look at my first match up. I was againts Rask and Eddy Lack. I decided to bench mason and to only have one starter since I was going to lose the min and the win either way. But having Mason on that week would have brought me negative value since Flyers aren't the best when it comes for GAA or save % but are very good at getting me W. I won my match up with the GAA and Save % that bernier gave me. I was right bout losing the minute played since Vancouver that week was playing 4 games and 3 to boston vs my 2 and 4. That week I won with out winning any of the following G,Apts,W,game played and even +/-. So every match up you need to be awared of those stats and what you might loose by benching some player and what you can gain. I really don't want to decrease the value of the goalies since it's all ready on a low and Eric just prove that by winning the cup with out a great starter. I would rather continuing the way we have it now. One thing I wouldn't mind to take out is the +/- since it's soo random. I rather have the take away and no to give away since that a negative value. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 12:28:38 GMT -5
Replacing it with saves sounds like a good idea too. I have 2 starters and a backup so I am aware of fairness and it would actually hurt my team just like eliminating wingers taking FOs. I'm concerned with creating a competitive league with good stat categories and if it hurts my chances I can live with it. Comment: I wouldn't support eliminating wingers taking FOs either. But adding FO% would be a manner to maintain the advantage for people who collected C/Wers, while also rewarding a skill (i.e. the simple act of taking a face off is not a skill; winning a face off - THAT is a skill). Right now, we only award taking face offs; FO% factors in how good players are at this skill. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2014 1:55:12 GMT -5
Replacing it with saves sounds like a good idea too. I have 2 starters and a backup so I am aware of fairness and it would actually hurt my team just like eliminating wingers taking FOs. I'm concerned with creating a competitive league with good stat categories and if it hurts my chances I can live with it. Comment: I wouldn't support eliminating wingers taking FOs either. But adding FO% would be a manner to maintain the advantage for people who collected C/Wers, while also rewarding a skill (i.e. the simple act of taking a face off is not a skill; winning a face off - THAT is a skill). Right now, we only award taking face offs; FO% factors in how good players are at this skill. Right now we don't "just award taking face offs" we reward "winning face-offs". Regular C's are going to do well in that area but they have to win the face off to get the stat. I believe in a weekly H2H format, FO % would be the average of all players for the entire week so even if a winger went 1 for 1 100%, unless he was the only player taking a FO that entire week, you aren't likely to win FO % that way. and most wingers aren't going to be great in the circle, else they would be Centers anyway. Top teams will work to have as many great FO performers that can play all forward positions so that means those players on better NHL teams have more value. which leads me to +/-. I don't find this to be a useless stat either. It is more of a team stat rather than an individual stat but there are teams which are better for +/- and players for those teams thus have more value. removing that only weakens players on strong NHL teams and strengthens players on weaker NHL teams. all of these changes have significant value changes sweeping across the league so making these changes for the right reasons is essential. I worry that the masses are not considering all stats values properly and we are going to get a popular decision against +/- but all this seeks to do is devalue players on good defensive NHL teams. |
|
