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

New Year's Resolutions

I guess technically the top-up option would apply to all teams. It is unlikely to apply to teams at the top, who have theoretically been "on top" of their rosters all season long anyway. The min. # is significantly less than 82 anyway, so it accounts for the odd issue that affects every team, like injuries etc. It could conceivably apply to a team in the middle who maybe met the # everywhere but were under at one position; those few added points may move them up a spot or two which would affect the draft order (but in a good way). It's not perfect, but it's better than doing nothing. There's plenty of time in case anyone sees a loophole here, but it's been under discussion for quite a while so it should be fine.

To your point about the goalies, it is definitely a tricky issue to navigate. I'm not sure the # is perfect, but we've had ample time to discuss it and it seems to be fine with most teams.

As for the lotto odds, it is definitely something that needs to be decided. I think a few people have made suggestions in the past, they can certainly mention them again here as we try to find the best solution for the league.
 
axlsalinger said:
Couple of items to discuss here:

1. Top-up minutes with Minimum GP per position: We have discussed this issue multiple times and the last time it came up, were looking at 70-72 GP min for skaters, with a top-up of 0.55 PPG. There was some question regarding whether this same # should apply to the goalie position. Also a suggestion of ranking lottery teams by fantasy points per game instead. We can continue to discuss this last suggestion if people wish to do so, I would like to prevent over-complicating the situation and I seem to recall this coming up once before, and there being a good reason why this wasn't the best solution.

At this point, I will say that the rule will officially change to a minimum GP of 70 for both skaters and goalies with a top-up total of 0.55 points per game. We can try it for a season and then tweak it if need be. If people want to modify the numbers overall, or for goalies specifically, or consider Mindz' suggestion instead, there is nothing preventing us from further discussion. But barring any further discussion and agreement to modify the rule, this is official.
Click to expand...

It's a step I guess, I don't think it fixes the problem though and it's needlessly complicated (but it you want to do math, knock yourself out mang)


3. Draft Date: I still lean towards sooner rather than later, regarding our draft. We have voted in the past and if memory serves, the majority of people wanted to hold our draft shortly after the NHL draft. I still don't see any compelling reason why this should change. I do agree with soco's point that it probably doesn't need to start on the Canada Day weekend when people might be travelling. So perhaps just after that would be a solid option.
Click to expand...

Mirroring the show as much as reasonably possible seems to justify a lot of other moves, so I don't know why we'd move the draft away from the NHL's draft.

4. Salary cap: I think most of us agree that (a) this would be a great idea, (b) if it had been implemented prior to the league's creation. Changing it now would open up several cans of worms that I think are probably not worth the bother at this point. Always open to discussion in the future, however.
Click to expand...

Agreed

5. Positional Overrides: I just looked into this on Fantrax, and was about to make the changes when I realized the only way to do it would be "retroactive to the start of the season". I am concerned about whether this will muck up the scoring in some way. It really would only affect 4 players. Kadri switched from W to C; Dustin Jeffrey from W to C; and adding W to Seguin and C to Joakim Lindstrom. Probably something that should wait until the off-season. As for the addition of a F position, I really don't think it's necessary and would not support the idea unless the majority wants to make this change. I still think this issue is overblown.
Click to expand...

Is it possible to start a test league and give that a run to see if it effects anything? I'm cool with waiting until the off season, but the current system of arbitrarily losing eligibility on positions that certain players spent the majority of their career playing seems ridiculous to me because a current coach doesn't play said player in X position doesn't alter the player's ability to play that position. Surely there has to be a bit of common sense applied here for determining position eligibility.

6. PIM: I think there is value to players who "impact" the scoresheet in different ways. Perhaps it's an antiquated concept, but there is some validity to the idea of guys being involved physically having more value than guys who float their way through games.
Click to expand...

Being involved physically is great. We have categories that do a far better job of capturing that than PIM's. The guy leading the league in PIM right now is Steve Downie. He doesn't hit a lot, or block a lot of shots...he's a mental case who has been given 5 match penalties this year. Why are we rewarding this? Aside from the obvious argument of hooks, holds, high sticks not being positive on ice actions worth rewarding, when the player being most rewarded for that cat is a mental case who has been thrown out of almost 1 in 5 games he's played this season, we're doing it wrong.

Regardless of how warm and fuzzy that type of play makes us feel, when it hurts the team, we shouldn't be rewarding it. Reward PIM but not punishing shitty, lazy penalties would be as silly as rewarding SB in baseball without punishing CS because "something something speed on the bases". Some times you have to let old timey "logic" go in the face of data. As we have no way of punishing shitty penalties, or separating them from potentially good penalties, doing away with category entirely as junk is the way to go imo.

The real oversight here (IMO) is the lack of Shots on Goal as a scoring category. I noticed this a while back and forgot to bring it up for discussion, but I would definitely not be opposed to adding it as a stat in the summer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, agreed.
 
Agreed with getting rid of PIM's and adding SOG. Just have to figure out how the points would then shake out.
 
Last edited:
MindzEye said:
It's a step I guess, I don't think it fixes the problem though and it's needlessly complicated (but it you want to do math, knock yourself out mang)
Click to expand...

I would prefer to avoid math whenever possible. But I am pretty sure the FPPG idea came up before, and there were some good points made against it. It could possibly discourage teams near the bottom from making moves to add certain players. I also prefer to use points accrued by active players as the main source of fantasy points.

As I said, it is still technically open for discussion, I just wanted to make sure we had a finalized rule in place in case we don't come up with a better option.


Mirroring the show as much as reasonably possible seems to justify a lot of other moves, so I don't know why we'd move the draft away from the NHL's draft.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with you here. The 2015 draft takes place on June 26–27 (Friday and Saturday). We could still conceivably start ours on the Sunday or Monday (June 28-29). I do understand that the Canada Day weekend is a busy one for a lot of people, so waiting an extra week isn't a huge deal either. This rule is still yet to be finalized. It's tough because some teams want to have it before the NHL draft, some people just after, some after but not on Canada Day, and some want to wait until September.

Is it possible to start a test league and give that a run to see if it effects anything? I'm cool with waiting until the off season, but the current system of arbitrarily losing eligibility on positions that certain players spent the majority of their career playing seems ridiculous to me because a current coach doesn't play said player in X position doesn't alter the player's ability to play that position. Surely there has to be a bit of common sense applied here for determining position eligibility.
Click to expand...

I suppose it's possible, but I was referring to guys whose positional eligibility was altered manually from Fantrax's settings and never changed back, which only applies to 4 guys right now - it's just not worth the risk. I think you may be referring to something different, since these 4 guys have not lost any eligibility. Going back to the debate we had when this first came up, I just prefer to go with Fantrax's settings rather than constantly having to make manual modifications. I get your point about a guy like Filppula, who has generally played center in his career, but has spent a chunk of this season playing LW. (Although he was moved back to C a couple of weeks ago). He should have both C-W eligibility. Is it possible Fantrax simply waits to make the change until a guy has a certain number of GP at the position? I know that's how it works in baseball.

Being involved physically is great. We have categories that do a far better job of capturing that than PIM's. The guy leading the league in PIM right now is Steve Downie. He doesn't hit a lot, or block a lot of shots...he's a mental case who has been given 5 match penalties this year. Why are we rewarding this? Aside from the obvious argument of hooks, holds, high sticks not being positive on ice actions worth rewarding, when the player being most rewarded for that cat is a mental case who has been thrown out of almost 1 in 5 games he's played this season, we're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

This is in some ways an over-simplification, but at the same time it is a fair point overall. I still don't mind the category, but am not against removing it in the off-season in favour of a bump-up in hits (although the scoring for this stat can sometimes be fairly arbitrary in and of itself) and blocked shots, along with the addition of SOG. We could consider having a vote on this in the off-season. We would have to do some testing to make sure the #'s don't get out of whack (as always), but it could certainly be done.
 
axlsalinger said:
I would prefer to avoid math whenever possible. But I am pretty sure the FPPG idea came up before, and there were some good points made against it. It could possibly discourage teams near the bottom from making moves to add certain players. I also prefer to use points accrued by active players as the main source of fantasy points.
Click to expand...

I addressed some of this in my previous post. There is no benefit in avoiding "making moves" because isolated player changes do very little to the overall numbers. It would take something significant and blatant to significantly alter fpg numbers over the course of the season

As I said, it is still technically open for discussion, I just wanted to make sure we had a finalized rule in place in case we don't come up with a better option.
Click to expand...

That's fair, but a waste of time, the team with the lower FPG is going to end up lower if this method properly normalizes. If it doesn't, then the flaw is with the method we're using to normalize and it won't produce the desired results.




Yeah, I agree with you here. The 2015 draft takes place on June 26–27 (Friday and Saturday). We could still conceivably start ours on the Sunday or Monday (June 28-29). I do understand that the Canada Day weekend is a busy one for a lot of people, so waiting an extra week isn't a huge deal either. This rule is still yet to be finalized. It's tough because some teams want to have it before the NHL draft, some people just after, some after but not on Canada Day, and some want to wait until September.
Click to expand...

In fairness, Jays and I were pretty much the only two who wanted it before, and put that in the category of "salary cap" for me. It would be nice as we would see a truer indicator of drafting ability, but whatever.


I suppose it's possible, but I was referring to guys whose positional eligibility was altered manually from Fantrax's settings and never changed back, which only applies to 4 guys right now - it's just not worth the risk. I think you may be referring to something different, since these 4 guys have not lost any eligibility. Going back to the debate we had when this first came up, I just prefer to go with Fantrax's settings rather than constantly having to make manual modifications. I get your point about a guy like Filppula, who has generally played center in his career, but has spent a chunk of this season playing LW. (Although he was moved back to C a couple of weeks ago). He should have both C-W eligibility. Is it possible Fantrax simply waits to make the change until a guy has a certain number of GP at the position? I know that's how it works in baseball.
Click to expand...

Fantrax (actually, SportsInc) uses starts. So if a player is named in the starting line up as a centre, but a serial line juggler like Quenneville has him playing the wing 50% of his shifts all season, SportsInc will not give additional eligibility, ever.
 
Blueman said:
fp/g average will be skewed by add/drops, trades during the season no?
Click to expand...

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about and how it's relevant.

Every move and injury and trade will affect your team average fp/g. But how is that relevant to anything?
 
For the top up we should make it nice an simple. Like how Axl suggested using .55. I think that's a fair bit too low but it's nice and simple. We could figure out the average of the entire league for each position then go with something close to that.
 
Habspatrol said:
I honestly have no idea what you're talking about and how it's relevant.

Every move and injury and trade will affect your team average fp/g. But how is that relevant to anything?
Click to expand...

If someone who wants to tank, simply trades a couple of his best players, or conversely picks up some really low fp/g players, they could skew their overall fp/g. Thus I don't like it.

so now please screw off.
 
Blueman said:
fp/g average will be skewed by add/drops, trades during the season no?
Click to expand...

I don't know why you would call that "skewed" though. FPG wouldn't be skewed, it would just show an accurate representation of the quality of your club. Where FPG can be ****ed with is if an owner was sitting an impact player on the bench, in place of a scrub, for the duration of the season. I provided an example earlier. If you sat a 1.0fpg player who played all 82 games, for a .5 scrub, it would take your team FPG down .05. So it would "help" a bit, but wouldn't make that much of a difference in the grand scheme. For example, the 4th worst club right now has a .81fpg, the worst team has a .68. You would have to be benching multiple stud players all year to "tank" to that kind of a level, and we already combat against that as a league with the expectation that you play your best roster. Just hiding a stud for a week or two on your bench over the course of a season would do nothing.

The one place ranking by fpg might need a bit of help is with goalie games as they tend to be of higher value than skater games on average. If you did skater FPG and Goalie FPG separately and then extrapolated the goalie games out to 90, added the point total and calculated the total fpg with 90 goalie games added in, I think that would give the truest representation of a clubs strength that we're going to be able to come up with.
 
Blueman said:
If someone who wants to tank, simply trades a couple of his best players, or conversely picks up some really low fp/g players, they could skew their overall fp/g. Thus I don't like it.

so now please screw off.
Click to expand...

WTF is your problem? Go **** yourself.
 
If someone who wants to tank, simply trades a couple of his best players, or conversely picks up some really low fp/g players, they could skew their overall fp/g. Thus I don't like it.
Click to expand...


Then how do you propose we rank the lottery teams?
 
A team's fantasy points per game is their fantasy points per game... period. Trades, adds, drops, injuries, suspensions and other factors can affect it to varying degrees throughout the season... that's why we play. The team that manages all these factors the best wins.

I just literally do not understand how this is pertinent to any discussion about the "top up" rule. The rule is just to decrease the affect of apathy or intentional benching of your players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top