|
|
Post by WillyBilly (Tire Fires) on Dec 13, 2014 17:21:58 GMT -5
Have 2 other GMs manage the teams during the season roster changes and those things and if we cant find 2 people by the end of the season i say disperse the 2 teams and go with 22 GMs going forward. Either include their player in a dispersal draft or include their players in the waiver draft. Their draft picks that have not been traded would disappear.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2014 18:09:11 GMT -5
None of these options are ideal, having 2 GMs leave during the season is pretty crappy.
Waiting until the offseason is the easy choice, I'm not sure its the most effective choice though.
Frank, if we wait until the summer, your plan would be solid. I was just hoping to have something more definitive sooner.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2014 18:18:42 GMT -5
None of these options are ideal, having 2 GMs leave during the season is pretty crappy. Waiting until the offseason is the easy choice, I'm not sure its the most effective choice though. Frank, if we wait until the summer, your plan would be solid. I was just hoping to have something more definitive sooner. I really understand where you are coming from but I just feel it wouldn't be a great idea to dissolve of those two team and have ourselves a dispersal draft during the season. I'll say we keep on looking for gm and will go from there. I'm sure I can find gm for my idea but I really don't know if I can find a gm for Canners if we don't want to do my idea cause his team is terrible. |
|
|
|
Post by Tbone (Kelowna) on Dec 13, 2014 21:35:09 GMT -5
In general, big rule changes like this should not be made during the season. We should let the season play out with the current 24 teams for several reasons:
- We all play each other team once per season (with the exception of 1 - 22 matchups) - so eliminating 2 of these matchups may impact the competitive balance of who plays who during the season- particularly with a bottom feeder like Canners
- Draft picks - trades were made for future picks for the teams in question - and valuation was made with expectation of certain standings for these teams - to eliminate these teams mid-season affects these transactions significantly
- 1st overall draft is particularly valuable this year and one of the teams (Canners) is the odds on favorite to get that pick - that should not be given away so easily and would be an extremely valuable asset in a dispersal draft if we go that route - one that may compare to the top Calgary Asset (Backstrom)
I like the idea of the dispersal draft for the two teams in question after the season ends - we should be striving to have a good competitive league and this would make for an attractive entry for new potential GM's - and would be interesting for the rest of us to observe. So dispersal draft after the season ends for the two teams in question would be my preference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2014 22:34:54 GMT -5
In general, big rule changes like this should not be made during the season. We should let the season play out with the current 24 teams for several reasons: - We all play each other team once per season (with the exception of 1 - 22 matchups) - so eliminating 2 of these matchups may impact the competitive balance of who plays who during the season- particularly with a bottom feeder like Canners - Draft picks - trades were made for future picks for the teams in question - and valuation was made with expectation of certain standings for these teams - to eliminate these teams mid-season affects these transactions significantly - 1st overall draft is particularly valuable this year and one of the teams (Canners) is the odds on favorite to get that pick - that should not be given away so easily and would be an extremely valuable asset in a dispersal draft if we go that route - one that may compare to the top Calgary Asset (Backstrom) I like the idea of the dispersal draft for the two teams in question after the season ends - we should be striving to have a good competitive league and this would make for an attractive entry for new potential GM's - and would be interesting for the rest of us to observe. So dispersal draft after the season ends for the two teams in question would be my preference. Very well said and very happy we shared the same view as why we should do this option. |
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks on Dec 13, 2014 23:09:08 GMT -5
Let's continue to look for two new GM's and we can worry about this issue during the summer
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruyns (Barrie) on Dec 14, 2014 2:14:30 GMT -5
Let's continue to look for two new GM's and we can worry about this issue during the summer Agreed, we have all season to find a replacement and lots of people seem to like the challenge of rebuilding so maybe we find someone. If we don't find a replacement then we have from May to October and in those 5 months we can discuss other options like contraction or dispersal drafts for new GMs. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Dec 14, 2014 10:43:19 GMT -5
Let's continue to look for two new GM's and we can worry about this issue during the summer Agreed, we have all season to find a replacement and lots of people seem to like the challenge of rebuilding so maybe we find someone. If we don't find a replacement then we have from May to October and in those 5 months we can discuss other options like contraction or dispersal drafts for new GMs. /\ What they said... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2014 16:40:32 GMT -5
Agreed, we have all season to find a replacement and lots of people seem to like the challenge of rebuilding so maybe we find someone. If we don't find a replacement then we have from May to October and in those 5 months we can discuss other options like contraction or dispersal drafts for new GMs. /\ What they said... That what she said and I wasn't happy with that answer. So I told her, didn't ask her but just told her to be quiet and .....!! But at the end of the day, we stil need to find al a gm! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 12:21:59 GMT -5
Alright boys, well you got me here now. A bunch of you will recognize me from other leagues.
I'm vastly opposed to merging the assets of both to draft within that by 2 GM's as that will simply leave us with 2 very bad teams.
If ultimately the best option is to contract 2 teams (can't leave an odd number), then I'll happily play interim and throw myself up on the waiting list later.
It's gonna be a long rebuild so offer away. Only interested in picks/specs/young guns really but I have a couple vets that should entice the competing teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 12:33:19 GMT -5
I felt my idea was a great one but it seem like we aren't going to use which I'm fine with. The thing to do I think is keep it the way it is but give a helping hand to whom ever take Canning Canner. Now I bet you guy's are wondering what I mean. What I mean is let the gm that take over Canning Canner choose whom ever he want from the UFA list and who he want to keep on his team. Either way the max aloud per team is still 60.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2014 11:32:50 GMT -5
Warning: the below was conceived and typed before my morning coffee; I'm very prone to stupid comments in this situation 
Haven't given this much thought, but could we do an expansion draft just for Canners in the off season? Something like: every team gets to protect 45 players (just picked that number out of a hat, could be higher or lower), and Canners could pluck a max of 1 player off existing teams? If some teams lost their 46th best player (or whatever), it should not cause too much damage to individual teams, but might go a long ways to help stocking Canners, or at least giving the new GM a chance to put a stamp / direction on the team. A team losing a player could be given a compensatory waiver or entry draft pick (i.e., 6th round entry pick or 5th round waiver pick).
I'm open to Frank's idea too...although that would pretty much kill whatever value there is in the waiver draft this year. It also would "screw" teams that have traded for wavier picks, as their value would go down the toilette. In this scenario, we may want to consider giving teams the option of converting their waiver picks to entry picks for 2015 (i.e. waiver picks converted to entry picks after the 5th round entry draft is over).
Whatever we do, I hope it's in the off season, and I hope it does something to prop up Canners without destroying any single team (especially Calgary).
Dispersal was a great (and fun) idea; but that was only if we couldn't find two new GMs...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2014 13:07:35 GMT -5
Don t you mean converting waiver pick to the 2016 entry pick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2014 13:46:49 GMT -5
The thing we should do is give Canning Canners five switch. That mean he can drop any five of his team and take any five off the UFA list. I won't name names but I know at least one name that he should pick but this way it doesn't hurt the waiver wire too much and still precedent deals worth the same when they traded for waiver picks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 20, 2015 15:08:53 GMT -5
BUMP
We need to discuss this further....now that the season is over.
|
|
