• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

New Year's Resolutions

axlsalinger

axlsalinger

Well-known member
Okay folks. Time to "resolve" a few loose ends in the hockey dynasty league. We've recently had several threads where people make good points on either side of a debate, and then the discussion fizzles out before we come to a resolution. We're all busy so it gets hard to keep track of the various discussions sometimes, so that's what this thread is for. Let's make a list of outstanding issues that need to be clarified and/or resolved, and we will do so over the next week. ie. finalize some rules. If you think of something that's unresolved post it here. Also, if there's an issue that we may not have discussed recently but requires clarification, feel free to post it here as well.

(1) League Constitution - We will create one. I am hoping to get a hold of a constitution from a different dynasty league one of our members is in, and that will give me a good head-start on getting the ball rolling on ours. PM me if you're willing to help out, and I'll try to dole out a few sections to different people so it doesn't end up being too much work for anyone in particular.

(2) The Draft - we need to finalize exactly how the draft will work going forwards, and when it starts. I have said before that I lean strongly towards implementing whatever changes we make this summer. I don't anticipate any new elements that we haven't already discussed ... it's simply a matter of finalizing the rules, in writing. There is also the question that Mindzeye asked about the value of a draft pick he has traded for. Previously I wanted to hear what JaysCyYoung thought about the issue as well as a few other league members, but I don't think he commented on it. So hopefully he will now. Check out Mindz' thread below titled "Question concerning lottery protected draft pick" for the full details. Also, What are the lotto odds going to be for the picks this year?

(3) Top-Up Rule for a minimum # of GP per position. We were close to done on this one, I'll try to dig up the options and we should be able to quickly discuss and finalize this one.

--- The rule is officially changed to a minimum GP of 70 per position slot, for both skaters and goalies with a top-up total of 0.55 points per game.
 
Last edited:
1) I have no problem helping, once you have a structure sorted out we should find a way to meet as a group online (chat, skype group, etc) so that we can divy work efficiently.

2) Yeah, we should definitely formalize a date, like "2nd Saturday after NHL draft" or something similar.
2A) Yes, I'd like to see if we can get some forward movement on that issue, and if comments aren't forthcoming, a decision from the commish
2B) An additional draft matter to discuss is eligibility. I know it's been our policy to this point to not allow undrafted players to be added in between drafts as a method of adding "fairness". I'd like to see us more closely mirror how the NHL does it, with a window in the summer to sign junior aged kids who were passed over in the draft, a window when the NCAA season finishes to take NCAA free agents, and mirror whatever the **** the rule is on signing undrafted europeans. In short, NHL teams don't have the same restrictions we impose here, and if we're taking all of these steps to mirror the NHL, these should also be implemented to further mirror the NHL

3) I think the simplest method would be to rank the lottery teams by FPG. It's an extremely simple stat to find on fantrax and over the course of an entire season, it's really hard for individual decisions (sitting a top scorer in a sneaky fashion for a week here or there) to make any sort of a difference to such a large data set. It almost entirely removes in the incentive for not swapping out injured players for weeks on end. For example, if Owner A had a 1fpg stud prospect defender and was playing a .5 journeyman in his place over 82 games, that's a 41 point swing...which sounds like a whole lot, but when you look at it against a full schedule of 20 players x even an average of 70 games played per slot, the difference of 41 points over the entire season is only about .02fpg, so taking a .69fpg club (such as the worst fpg group in the league right now) down to .67fpg...and that's a pretty extreme example of tanking. If you tried really ****ing hard to tank all year, you might, might be able to make your team .05-.07 fpg worse than it would be at it's best without drawing a significant amount of heat for unfair tanking.
 
Can we keep the draft away from the canada day long weekend as a starting date? Annoying to try and be by your phone when travelling around, especially if outside cAnada where don't get data on my work phone. My selfish hope :)
 
In terms of lotto odds, love matching up to nhl draft to make it more fun to watch it.

What about in terms of matching up dynasty finish to nhl finish

Last place: 30, 23,
Second last: 29, 22
Third last: 28, 21
Fourth last: 27, 20
Fifth last: 26, 19
Sixth last: 25, 18
Seventh last: 24, 17
 
soco22 said:
Can we keep the draft away from the canada day long weekend as a starting date? Annoying to try and be by your phone when travelling around, especially if outside cAnada where don't get data on my work phone. My selfish hope :)
Click to expand...

That's a good idea. That would usually be the weekend after the draft though no? I'd say that any time after that weekend would/should be cool though.
 
Having the draft so early in the year feels counterproductive.....having it later in the year, closer to the season, is so much more logical, whether it's the impact of potential retiring guys, seeing where FA's signed, injuries, KHL defections/returns, etc etc......player values can change dramatically between July and say September.

I realize we're all impatient and excited to get it going as soon as possible.....but logically, it makes much much more sense to do it later in the year, once the landscape is more established.
 
Last edited:
soco22 said:
If talking discussion, wouldn't mind putting the salary cap idea back into focus.
Click to expand...

We've discussed it before, but at this point I think the focus should be on ironing out the remaining glitches in the matrix before we decide to discuss the potential of completely rewriting the code.
 
MindzEye said:
We've discussed it before, but at this point I think the focus should be on ironing out the remaining glitches in the matrix before we decide to discuss the potential of completely rewriting the code.
Click to expand...

If writing a rule book, figure not bad timing to put that thought out there. Isn't that the point of this thread? Things we have discussed but never concluded on.
 
For sure... no harm in bringing it up. That's what the thread is for. I agree with the other guys that we shouldn't be adding a salary cap yet.
 
Montana said:
Having the draft so early in the year feels counterproductive.....having it later in the year, closer to the season, is so much more logical, whether it's the impact of potential retiring guys, seeing where FA's signed, injuries, KHL defections/returns, etc etc......player values can change dramatically between July and say September.

I realize we're all impatient and excited to get it going as soon as possible.....but logically, it makes much much more sense to do it later in the year, once the landscape is more established.
Click to expand...

tumblr_lyf7auMC7k1rn95k2o1_250.gif
 
i don't like the salary cap idea, feels like the kinda thing you had to go with from the start not bring in mid stream to me

i don't really care when we do the draft but i have always enjoyed the proximity of it to the actual draft and most of all our tying our lottery to the nhl draft lottery. hopefully we can continue that. soco's suggestion for the draft seems ok

the overridden positions still haven't been fixed, it only really affects 2 players on teams at this point but still its been a couple years of bringing this up...

i never did understand the "fairness" in not allowing undrafted or ncaa guys not to be signed. if they have already been draft eligible and passed over they should be fair game imo. stupid rule that counteracts the whole point of this league. if we are going to limit it, at least leave some windows to pick up these guys as mindz has suggested.

somebody had previously brought up the idea of changing a few of the wing spots to forward spots. i think this is something we should revisit. there seems to be no rhyme or reason as to who or when some guys a given dual eligibility and a lot of young wingers seem to be started out as centers by fantrax. it seems like some teams can gain a big advantage or disadvantage based merely on the whims of fantrax deciding positions.
 
soco22 said:
If writing a rule book, figure not bad timing to put that thought out there. Isn't that the point of this thread? Things we have discussed but never concluded on.
Click to expand...

Oh, by all means put it out there, i just don't think we're going to get anywhere with such a major rewrite of the league when we have such a hard time getting details like those already discussed sorted out.

I'm intrigued by the idea of a salary cap, but we've got a lot of stuff to sort out first before that discussion imo.
 
The Green Hornet said:
somebody had previously brought up the idea of changing a few of the wing spots to forward spots. i think this is something we should revisit. there seems to be no rhyme or reason as to who or when some guys a given dual eligibility and a lot of young wingers seem to be started out as centers by fantrax. it seems like some teams can gain a big advantage or disadvantage based merely on the whims of fantrax deciding positions.
Click to expand...

This x1000

The only thing I think we should look into then, is having a C & F designation, and the forward scoring takes away, or at least significantly diminishes the points awarded for faceoffs.

Wingers are disproportionately valued in this league.
 
The Green Hornet said:
somebody had previously brought up the idea of changing a few of the wing spots to forward spots. i think this is something we should revisit. there seems to be no rhyme or reason as to who or when some guys a given dual eligibility and a lot of young wingers seem to be started out as centers by fantrax. it seems like some teams can gain a big advantage or disadvantage based merely on the whims of fantrax deciding positions.
Click to expand...


Yup. Agree with all of this. Fantrax does some really strange things with eligiblity and it's resulted in some players being overvalued in our league. As long as we don't allow faceoff stats to accumulate in the "F slot", we should do it.
 
The Green Hornet said:
i never did understand the "fairness" in not allowing undrafted or ncaa guys not to be signed. if they have already been draft eligible and passed over they should be fair game imo. stupid rule that counteracts the whole point of this league. if we are going to limit it, at least leave some windows to pick up these guys as mindz has suggested.
Click to expand...

I think the window idea is perfect. After our draft to the start of the season perhaps? Then lock it up until the following draft? At least it gives managers a chance to grab someone they like that went undrafted.
 
Deckie007 said:
I think the window idea is perfect. After our draft to the start of the season perhaps? Then lock it up until the following draft? At least it gives managers a chance to grab someone they like that went undrafted.
Click to expand...

I think the best thing would be to emulate however the show does it. I think you can sign CHL kids until Oct 1, you can sign NCAA kids at the end of their final college season. It would actually make our waiver priority mean something as well, as currently it means **** all given the lack of quality in our waiver wire.
 
I have another thing we should look into changing.

Why do PIM have a value? Penalties are a bad thing. We should take the points awarded to PIM and find a way to somewhat equally reallocate them to something like SOG, which is the closest thing we have in our toolkit to analogue possession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top