Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 15:18:52 GMT -5
I would love to "give" a few players from Prince Valley (currently no GM) to River Rats to prop them up.
River Rats was destroyed by Jon, and the team is unsalvageable as is.
I think a new GM would still pick of Prince Valley even if a few players were traded over to River Rats.
I would have loved to do that with Montreal too. But with a GM in place there now, I'd rather not do that unless the new guy consented.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 15:21:36 GMT -5
In particular, I would love to see a goalie move over, either Ryan Miller or Eddie Lack.
River Rats hasn't had a legit goalie, and Jon foolishly kept trading away his first waiver picks for peanuts. So the new GM doesn't even have a crack at Darling or Hammond.
Prine Valley would still be left with one of Miller/Lack, plus enroth, hackett, sorokin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 16:27:14 GMT -5
I'm not opposed to a similar idea to what Sabres has said. Each team protects all their players except say 10 guys and Will is then free to add no more then 1 player from each team if he wants to. His constraint is the same 70 player limit we all have, so if he wants to add more players then he has roster spots he'll have to cut some players.
My only real concern is the precedent that is set. I'd like to hope his current roster situation is one that will be unique, but I've been in leagues long enough to know there's no such thing as unique. Where is the line drawn and how do we prevent this from happening again? Is this a one time thing or is this something that is done yearly for whoever finished last?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 16:41:57 GMT -5
Thanks for the input, Josh. I view this as a one-time only thing. Based on very unusual circumstances. Jon did not have the knowledge to be in this league, which is clear as day by the team he drafted. And if that wasn't bad enough, he then proceeded to completely dismantle it, getting rid of all his valuable pieces for "futures" - many of which will not pay off.
when i look at last year's standings, teams 17 to 23 are not that far from a playoff spot. everyone is competitive. except river rats. that team will never be competitive without some help.
and with no manager for prince valley right now, we can do a few transfers or trades to help out a really, really bad team.
Im also cool with your idea, i don't mind losign one of my 70 assets to help his team, for the good of the league. but from earlier discussions, it sounds like a number of people aren't willing to do that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 17:18:02 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2015 18:56:59 GMT -5
I'm not opposed to a similar idea to what Sabres has said. Each team protects all their players except say 10 guys and Will is then free to add no more then 1 player from each team if he wants to. His constraint is the same 70 player limit we all have, so if he wants to add more players then he has roster spots he'll have to cut some players. My only real concern is the precedent that is set. I'd like to hope his current roster situation is one that will be unique, but I've been in leagues long enough to know there's no such thing as unique. Where is the line drawn and how do we prevent this from happening again? Is this a one time thing or is this something that is done yearly for whoever finished last? We use this exact format when we had a expansions in my other league. We went from 16 to 18 team. It's something that work very well. I'm really for and against for this idea. I see a lot of reason why we should do it like by doing this we give Will a better chance to rebuild but I just don't want this to be something that repeat itself since it wouldn't be fair for the gm that as been able to build a great team that compete year in and year out. So atm moment I'm leaning toward no but I could see a lot of good coming from this. What to do ? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 20, 2015 19:15:20 GMT -5
He IS getting Eichel
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2015 6:25:21 GMT -5
i suppose my suggestion is to move this issue from 4th in line to 1st in line, given that we have a team with no owner. once an owner is found, the idea put forward may no longer be workable.
Yes, he'll get eichel. Won't make any difference. Team isn't even remotely competitive. Due to terrible initial draft, followed by a complete dismantling for prospects.
Just curious, has anyone asked RiverRats if he'd like the remaining expansion team?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 21, 2015 9:02:41 GMT -5
no, haven't asked....
he hasn't mentioned anything either
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2015 9:16:27 GMT -5
If we do that then what do we do with current Canners? Disband it and roll with 23 teams?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone (Kelowna) on Apr 21, 2015 9:30:35 GMT -5
I would suggest pooling all of Montreal, Prince Valley and Richmond assets together (including current/future picks) and doing a full re-draft with the three owners only. Perhaps even combine that with each of the other 21 teams donating 1 asset into the pool based on defined parameters (eg. >2200 fpts - or other agreed upon threshold, and under a certain age).
Do a lottery to determine 1st pick for the 3 and do a continuous snake draft until they fill up a certain roster limit - perhaps 60 or so - or what the league average is. This could be quite entertaining for the rest of us and also provide each of the 3 new owners a chance to give their own input to 'Building' their own team, which really gives them a sense of ownership. There are quite a few super high end assets in there, so probably some difficult choices to be made.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 21, 2015 10:11:01 GMT -5
If we do that then what do we do with current Canners? Disband it and roll with 23 teams? we need an even number of teams |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Apr 21, 2015 10:16:42 GMT -5
I would suggest pooling all of Montreal, Prince Valley and Richmond assets together (including current/future picks) and doing a full re-draft with the three owners only. Perhaps even combine that with each of the other 21 teams donating 1 asset into the pool based on defined parameters (eg. >2200 fpts - or other agreed upon threshold, and under a certain age). Do a lottery to determine 1st pick for the 3 and do a continuous snake draft until they fill up a certain roster limit - perhaps 60 or so - or what the league average is. This could be quite entertaining for the rest of us and also provide each of the 3 new owners a chance to give their own input to 'Building' their own team, which really gives them a sense of ownership. There are quite a few super high end assets in there, so probably some difficult choices to be made. We just got a new GM for Montreal....I don't think he would like the idea of having his players pooled with the other 2 teams.... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2015 12:00:59 GMT -5
i love tbones idea
and i'll let the new gm speak for himself whether he likes the idea or not.
personally, as a new gm, i'd probably like the opportunity to select my team.
if he doesn't like it, there was no harm with the proposal. which is coming from the right spirit, imo.
and again, i never expect something like this to happen again. jon was out of his element here. very nice guy, but just didn't have the hockey knowledge...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2015 16:42:03 GMT -5
Some teams including mine start having a lot of NHLers(veterans) in their farm team. Maybe that could help the Canners.
Exemple, I have Liles who has 0 trade value and hes just down there in case of an injury in playoffs. Even though he aint that good in our league format, he would be more useful for the Canners
|
|
