|
Post by Blake on Apr 16, 2014 5:16:15 GMT -5
Not a big fan of players like Matt Martin and Luke Schenn having any value. I say that as the owner of Kris Russel (3rd in BS) and several physical players. Also a big beef I have with those stats is that they what is a hit or block varies from arena to arena. If you break down home hits there's a difference of 900 hits from 1st to 30th. You also notice that Erik Karlsson has 122 hits and anton Volchenkov has 129, anyone who watched these two regularly can tell you what wrong with that. There are other examples out there I'm just too lazy to look them up.
Also I'd like to see an attempt to fill NYR and COL before the dispersal draft. Personally I like the number of 20 teams, with that said I understand the difficulties of finding replacements. And as for the dispersal draft I'd assume it would be a snake draft. And as for the issue of draft order I'd suggest a weighted lottery where no team can move down or up more than 5 slots, cause good would it do the league if the top teams got the top players? There's also the issue of what would we do with the draft picks those teams hold for the prospect draft. Do we just remove those picks or add them to the dispersal draft.
|
|
|
Post by Trevor (Buf) on Apr 16, 2014 6:57:51 GMT -5
Just a suggestion that nobody has mentioned.... A category of Takeaways if we need a 13th....
|
|
|
Post by Adam (Tor) on Apr 16, 2014 7:02:10 GMT -5
im fine with just adding hits/blocked shots and staying at 12 cats, im really not convinced that adding a 13th changes the odds of having ties. Regular season record seems like the obvious tie breaker for playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by Trevor (Buf) on Apr 16, 2014 7:03:38 GMT -5
We use it in a points league I'm in...every player gets them and it's basically even (sort of) across the board...not upping anyone's value drastically...the highest in the league was 83, and a whole bunch of guys (100+??) between 20 and there
|
|
|
Post by Trevor (Buf) on Apr 16, 2014 7:06:00 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind having 13 categories....but only for that fact and nothing to do w ties or no ties
|
|
|
Post by Ian (Pit) on Apr 16, 2014 9:23:07 GMT -5
Ian, In my view this desire to have an odd number of cats to avoid ties is overrated. If we have a tie in the playoffs overall standings is a totally fair way to break the tie and I think most GM's were onboard with this solution. The problem with condensing PPP snd SHP in my view is that the balance of power shifts a bit more towards the Goalie stats. I don't think we need to give the G more value IMO. Let's poll the league but my vote is replace +/- with your Hits/Blocks combo cat. This is the option getting the most traction from the GM's I talked to. We can always evaluate again next offseason but we don't want to be changing this stuff every year as it does have an affect on the way guys build teams. As I stated before a lot of discussion even took place, I will do everything in my power to minimize ties. Are they going to happen,? Yes! Can I stop them from happening? NO! Do I feel having an odd number of cats will help minimize them? Hell yeah! I don't think tie-breaking is as minor as some of you are painting it to be. It almost seems like guys are fearful of playing teams more than once in the regular season?? In the less probable chance of a tie taking place, under an ODD cat system (best out of 3 mentality), having a second regular season matchup for a tie-breaker makes sense to me for creating regular season rivalries and strengthening playoff seeding as well as undoubtedly deciding a winner or loser - MORE SO than relying on a single regular season matchup to decide so much. Perhaps some teams that had robust regular season records this past year would fail to see my point. Or teams that didn't experience a playoff tie "loss" don't understand. Regardless of who is in that seat, single-matchup regular season matchups dictating so much, is a sh*tty set up . Furthermore, it may lead to someone losing a playoff game, which is a way sh*tty way to lose, period. Only the post season should be a single game set-up, not the REGULAR season AND post season. GMs deserve to have a crack at each other more than once before a playoff, all the more if one of those regular season matchups ended in a tie . No, I do not feel one aspect of minimizing tie-breaking is overrated. I, too, AGREE that regular season standings are the most fair way to determine playoff-seeding and break tie-breaking. HOWEVER, breaking a tie in a best out of 2 matchup is not acceptable. I've never heard of anyone calling "best out of 2" , it's best out of 3. Considering how tight the playoff race was and what happened in our matchup, how many more red flags does one need to see to take note of a matter? I am still waiting for all of the GMs, who are in favor of having 1 regular season matchup instead of 2, tell me how that is a better option and a more balanced approach to determining playoff-seeding and possible tie-breaking? Looking at the cats available and what guys want to keep, i don't see how a 3% swing is a deal-breaker or radical scoring shift. I tried several scenarios with 12,11,10 and finally 9 cats, and this was by far the closest to our percentages. Just about every other scenario, with the same cats and not dropping to 9 created a bout a 10% swing for skater or goalie. I invite anyone to kick around some scenarios and number crunch without creating a substantial shift. With the way this is going, I'm more susceptible to reinstate +/- and add hits + BLK and be done with this.
|
|
|
Post by Dave (Chi) on Apr 16, 2014 9:35:54 GMT -5
I agree 100% with Mike. Multiple games per scoring period and adding a 13th category...all just to reduce the likelihood of tie...does not make any sense to me.
The best tie breaker in the playoffs, IMO, is FULL regular season record. It's simple and it places a value on the entire season. [I'm not convinced playing 2 matches per week will have much impact on the final standings, and it overly complicates things.] And the insistence on adding a 13th category seems odd, given we are keeping SHP (which are rare, and could led to many ties anyways).
I think the most simple thing to do is replace +/- with (hits+blocks); I'd also be ok if we delayed implementation for 1 year so that teams could adjust as they see fit.
|
|
|
Post by Ian (Pit) on Apr 16, 2014 9:42:09 GMT -5
I agree 100% with Mike. Multiple games per scoring period and adding a 13th category...all just to reduce the likelihood of tie...does not make any sense to me. The best tie breaker in the playoffs, IMO, is FULL regular season record. It's simple and it places a value on the entire season. [I'm not convinced playing 2 matches per week will have much impact on the final standings, and it overly complicates things.] And the insistence on adding a 13th category seems odd, given we are keeping SHP (which are rare, and could led to many ties anyways). I think the most simple thing to do is replace +/- with (hits+blocks); I'd also be ok if we delayed implementation for 1 year so that teams could adjust as they see fit. How does playing each other twice in the regular season "over "complicate things? How does this burden the GM? I need more than blanket statements because 3 seasons worth of experience is really pooping all over opinion on something that has not been experienced once, let alone thrice.
|
|
|
Post by Ian (Pit) on Apr 16, 2014 9:59:40 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind having 13 categories....but only for that fact and nothing to do w ties or no ties That's cool. I respect you simply stating so. But an odd number of cats, whether decreased or increased from 12 will have an effect on tie breaking simply because it is not an even number. The "odds" of there being a tie decrease.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2014 10:51:51 GMT -5
Ian don't take this the wrong way and I don't mean to be disrespectful at all but it seems to me since you lost a tie you want to completely shake up the whole league to fix your circumstances. I may be wrong but that is the appearance I'm getting. All these massive changes you want to implement one right after another are going to massively affect this league and the way it plays. I have been trying to be a voice of caution and reason and I seem to be getting drowned out in all the hubub. Most long term keeper leagues make few if any and then even minor changes year to year to test out the waters and see how it affects things. I mean with all this stuff may as well just start over if you want a new league because thats the direction this seems to be going. And if you want to boot me from here for speaking my mind I'm OK with that. I think this needed to be said, it's the vibe I've gotten from a few managers as well. I've said my peace now, if I'm still wanted I will vote on issues as they come up but I have to say I don't like the direction this is going.
|
|
|
Post by Trevor (Buf) on Apr 16, 2014 11:26:31 GMT -5
I fully agree with you Ken....except that I think you're partially right on the first view....while Ian was negatively affected by the tie in the playoffs, and it appears as though he's trying to make changes because he was personally affected, I think it's the opposite....I think that he WAS personally affected but that only served to show him and us what the problem with ties is...unfortunately, it was Ian who tied, but it could have been any one of us and hopefully this discussion would still be happening.
|
|
|
Post by Ian (Pit) on Apr 16, 2014 12:01:04 GMT -5
Ian don't take this the wrong way and I don't mean to be disrespectful at all but it seems to me since you lost a tie you want to completely shake up the whole league to fix your circumstances. I may be wrong but that is the appearance I'm getting. All these massive changes you want to implement one right after another are going to massively affect this league and the way it plays. I have been trying to be a voice of caution and reason and I seem to be getting drowned out in all the hubub. Most long term keeper leagues make few if any and then even minor changes year to year to test out the waters and see how it affects things. I mean with all this stuff may as well just start over if you want a new league because thats the direction this seems to be going. And if you want to boot me from here for speaking my mind I'm OK with that. I think this needed to be said, it's the vibe I've gotten from a few managers as well. I've said my peace now, if I'm still wanted I will vote on issues as they come up but I have to say I don't like the direction this is going. Not that at all, Ken. There were several ties this year, including ties I had with a couple of teams to make the playoffs. StL, myself and Toronto had several types of ties going on at once. It was fun. But too many ties, IMO. The playoff deal was the cherry in top. Had that happened to someone else, I would be doing the same thing. I never make a decision on 1 factor alone. The way I see it is if it can happen to one of us, it can happen to all of us. I would have hoped some GMs would have the ability to look at it that way instead of taking the easy route of: "oh, he wants to change that because it happened to him". Frankly, I don't want to see anyone lose a playoff game that way. Why should anyone? Just as big a problem I am having with this talk and even some views with "+/-" is that some GMs are providing blanket statement in their defense. That will not do. You, for example, provided some data regarding HITS and BLKS that others did not. I appreciate that. That kind of argument goes a lot further, in my book, than 10 other GMs simply saying they don't like a change due to preference. This is not about preference or one GM being BIGGER THAN THE LEAGUE. All of the matters I proposed I see as possible loopholes that are worthy of discussIon and potential hazards: TRANSACTION CAP, TIE-BREAKER, CAT CHANGES. Hell, I voted to keep "+/-" after proposing whether it should go or stay. People brought that up last season. We went yet another year with it. It is an indifferent stat to me, personally. I bring it up after this season and become vilified by some because I see, what I feel is a problem that just so happened to hit home first. Does that make it any less legitimate because I am the commissioner? Really? NSH was the #1 +/- team by a WIDE margin this past year....not even close. Pretty sure I lost that cat. had I won that, cat, I would have won the playoff match. Knowing this, would it not have made sense for me to vote against the +/- cat down and not for it??? I voted for it because I read several arguments that made some good points, not just blanket statements. That is the point of discussion. We can all think we know whatever. Sometimes a different perspective make another look at things differently with fresh eyes.. I am not afraid to be PROVEN wrong. That is what I am inviting others to do. I am not jus setting my lineup and gaming like some. I have a vested interest in seeing this league thrive. I host a variety of matters and never make a decision on 1 count. It takes a lot or several matters for me to take speak on something OR take action. Those whom I have had candid talks know this and know that I don't just make knee-jerk reactions or abuse my "commissioner" title/power or whatever. I don't even think I used it more than twice in a 3 year span. And considering some of the dysfunctional GMs and fence riders and entire host of gray area problems, I think that's pretty good, not to toot my own horn. I'd go as far to say there have been more times that I have ignored my gut (and listened to other GMs instead) on an issue only for it to come back and bite me. Van and NSH should both be able to attest to that and perhaps a few others. Regarding all of these matters, I am actually weighing what all of you are saying vs. the changes that have been the past 3 years and also looking at what the season has taught me. I''m not afraid to make a difficult, easy, popular or unpopular decision. Had I been, we wouldn't be exactly where we are with a solid group I am proud of. We would still have some old rules, some old GMs (not sure the league would still be around now) and we wouldn't be on the Fantrax platform this very day today - the move was not a popular one. Perhaps Where I am being more "self-centered" about the process is in regard to my paying good money so we can have a premium league with features , that I feel, are being wasted and could hopefully improve the league. Yes, I'm greedy. I want the league to be better and get my monies worth. In closing, I finished 5th in +/-, I am probably the most aggressive GM here with transaction - probably one of most aggressive traders, and definitely one of the most offensive oriented teams. ALL OF THE THINGS WE ARE DISCUSSING make my team less effective. I would be much better off NOT bringing up a great deal of them. Hell, I see me winning my fair share of games more than ties. I don't have anything else to say or gain moving forward except to see the league improve. I would really like to move on so we can get on with the program and I can renew the league. But with that said, I won't gloss over this just to renew.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2014 13:17:00 GMT -5
So you're ok Dave with Troy Brouwer being more valuable than Malkin? Very high chance of that happening here in theory this is the case in practice it is actually irrelevant it is a dynasty league the teams are already drafted so even if you add hits and blocks as separate categories they are only 2 categories out of 13 if we go that route, it is not going to upend the standings, there will be fluctuations for sure but the effects are going to be much smaller than people realize in terms of what the standings would look like with or without those categories it will change trade values of some players, big deal imo, trade values of players change all the time an algorithm might determine those players to be more valuable than Malkin but it is still about constructing a team and Troy Brouwer would no more win a person this league by himself if the changes are made than Malkin can win his owner the league by himself under the current setup in a league this size making more players valuable is not necessarily a bad thing
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2014 13:21:43 GMT -5
It almost seems like guys are fearful of playing teams more than once in the regular season?? not at all i would have no problem with playing teams more than once but the season isn't long enough to do that with every team given the number of teams we have
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2014 13:29:32 GMT -5
Frankly, I don't want to see anyone lose a playoff game that way. Why should anyone? because it is part of the game, we have all won playoff games that way and we have all lost playoff games that way because that is the way virtually every league in existence handles things it isn't a matter of wanting, it is a matter of accepting that sometimes it is going to happen and sometimes you will get the bear and sometimes the bear will get you
|
|