|
Post by Minnesota Wild on Feb 20, 2007 2:05:35 GMT -5
I agree, I like the first 2 suggestions. Definitly seem like they would be good for keeping the league active from year to year.
|
|
|
Post by darkvaliant on Feb 20, 2007 2:13:01 GMT -5
Yeah, I wouldn't go with number 3, since that's pretty much the point of a dynasty.
I like the idea of a turnover draft. Losing a few players off a championship team would be a blow, but it would also give the other managers a chance to grab some better players and improve their teams a bit. It would also force the top teams to put a little work into rebuilding their success.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Captals on Feb 20, 2007 2:48:17 GMT -5
yeah the 2nd one is the important one. The consolation prize is nice to have though.
|
|
|
Post by philadelphiaflyers on Feb 20, 2007 8:54:55 GMT -5
im okay with the first two as well. but i think an easier way to do it would to just have every team only protect a certain amount of players not just the playoff teams and then have a draft. the draft of course would start with the worst team picking and work back to the top team. but how ever we decide to do it im cool with
|
|
|
Post by calgary on Feb 20, 2007 9:46:59 GMT -5
I agree with the Flyers on this one. Every team should have to protect a certain amount of guys. However, I think this should be done in after year 2 as this will be a short season.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Captals on Feb 20, 2007 9:56:13 GMT -5
im okay with the first two as well. but i think an easier way to do it would to just have every team only protect a certain amount of players not just the playoff teams and then have a draft. the draft of course would start with the worst team picking and work back to the top team. but how ever we decide to do it im cool with That kind of negates the point of the draft though. It also makes for more unnecessary work for the commish. The bottom teams are the teams that need help and the playoff teams are the ones that deserve to lose players. If we made it for all teams it makes it more complicated unnecessarily and doesn't hurt the top teams as much. It also would make the draft take longer which is another unneccessary hastle. I just think non-playoff get players, and playoff lose players. Thus strong turnover. My vote goes to start at the end of 2007-2008 season after the fantasy playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Wild on Feb 20, 2007 10:07:01 GMT -5
Gotta say I agree with Pittsburgh on this one. The reason being that I intended for this to be a dynasty league, and if everybody gets to draft then it's essentially just a keeper league. Plus, the purpose of this turnover system is to strengthen the weaker teams and knock down the top teams a bit, with the way Pittsburgh has it layed out I think it serves it's purpose better than a full draft.
|
|
|
Post by philadelphiaflyers on Feb 20, 2007 10:55:14 GMT -5
im okay with the first two as well. but i think an easier way to do it would to just have every team only protect a certain amount of players not just the playoff teams and then have a draft. the draft of course would start with the worst team picking and work back to the top team. but how ever we decide to do it im cool with That kind of negates the point of the draft though. It also makes for more unnecessary work for the commish. The bottom teams are the teams that need help and the playoff teams are the ones that deserve to lose players. If we made it for all teams it makes it more complicated unnecessarily and doesn't hurt the top teams as much. It also would make the draft take longer which is another unneccessary hastle. I just think non-playoff get players, and playoff lose players. Thus strong turnover. My vote goes to start at the end of 2007-2008 season after the fantasy playoffs. well in a way its going to happen anyway because the lesser teams will have to drop players to fit their new picks in, and the teams that get their players taken away from them will have to fill their empty roster spots and will most likely select players that the other teams drop. like i said though either way is fine with me ;D
|
|
|
Post by Washington Captals on Feb 20, 2007 11:51:08 GMT -5
That kind of negates the point of the draft though. It also makes for more unnecessary work for the commish. The bottom teams are the teams that need help and the playoff teams are the ones that deserve to lose players. If we made it for all teams it makes it more complicated unnecessarily and doesn't hurt the top teams as much. It also would make the draft take longer which is another unneccessary hastle. I just think non-playoff get players, and playoff lose players. Thus strong turnover. My vote goes to start at the end of 2007-2008 season after the fantasy playoffs. well in a way its going to happen anyway because the lesser teams will have to drop players to fit their new picks in, and the teams that get their players taken away from them will have to fill their empty roster spots and will most likely select players that the other teams drop. like i said though either way is fine with me ;D yes but to a lesser extent... also that way commish doesn't have to keep track of as many unprotected players and the draft is shorter as I mentioned. Regardless, I am glad everyone agrees that turnover is important even in a dynasty!
|
|
|
Post by patriot0103 on Feb 20, 2007 15:48:44 GMT -5
I'm fine with the turnover system as well....I like how Project has it mapped out, but I think we need to make sure that we don't make the turnover too drastic. The bottom teams should still need to do some work to climb back up, and the top teams shouldn't be devastated and instantly put back to a rebuilding phase. I think it'll work fine as long as we have the right balance.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Captals on Feb 20, 2007 17:16:49 GMT -5
I'm fine with the turnover system as well....I like how Project has it mapped out, but I think we need to make sure that we don't make the turnover too drastic. The bottom teams should still need to do some work to climb back up, and the top teams shouldn't be devastated and instantly put back to a rebuilding phase. I think it'll work fine as long as we have the right balance. Agreed. We have to determine what is appropriate for a 14 team league with 28 man rosters. The top teams should always be given a chance to repeat with good planning and depth to take over for any losses.
|
|
|
Post by nashville on Feb 20, 2007 18:15:38 GMT -5
I have a few questions:
1. Will the initial player draft be a "snake" draft, as in regular Yahoo leagues?
2. Will next year's NHL draft-eligible prospects also be selected in the inaugaral NDHL player draft?
3. Is there any way to "hide" farm players from the Yahoo FA database, so they don't show up there as available? Is there some Commissioner function to remove them from our player database?
A few suggestions as well:
1. I've always advocated that vetos do have a place in fantasy hockey, but only in very specific circumstances. I completely agree that it's the responsibility of consenting GMs to make trades that work for both parties. However, there are some circumstances (collusion, a suddenly injured player) where a veto is necessary. I think a process could be managed informally by the commish, so long as there is justification for a veto. Collusion was already discussed, but imagine this scenario:
- On Monday I offer Iginla and Modin for Shanahan and Knuble. - On Tuesday Knuble and Shanahan collide, and end their seasons. - On Wednesday I try to cancel my offer, which was made when all players were healthy, but it was accepted just before I logged in.
Intervention is needed in situations such as this.
2. If the league is a snake draft, I've been a part of a league that has a fun way of managing when you make your selection. It works like this:
- A randomizer determines your "draft preference seeding" - Each team submits their selection preference, based on their seeding: Seed 1 - 1 Seed 2 - 1,2 Seed 3 - 1,2,14 Seed 4 - 1,2,3,14 Seed 5 - 1,2,3,14,13 Seed 6 - 1,2,3,14,4,13 etc
Then, based on their seed, and order of preference, a draft order is determined. Seed 1 - 1 Seed 2 - 1,2 Seed 3 - 1,2,14 Seed 4 - 1,2,3,14 Seed 5 - 1,2,3,14,13 Seed 6 - 1,2,3,14,4,13 etc
This introduces some control over your draft position, as well as some gamesmanship and strategy (as in a snake draft, whoever picks 14th also picks 15th, etc). Some people prefer a lower seeding.
3. I think there may be some benefit to adding another skater statistic. I prefer slightly more scoring emphasis on skaters than on goalies, as a goaltender is only 1/6 of an on-ice unit in hockey. Perhaps something like faceoff wins might be fun, rewarding success at the center position.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Captals on Feb 20, 2007 19:08:25 GMT -5
personally I don't think sudden injuries should be taken into account if a league is vetoing a deal. It is bad luck either way if a guy gets injured. Just timing.
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Wild on Feb 20, 2007 19:16:57 GMT -5
I have a few questions:1. Will the initial player draft be a "snake" draft, as in regular Yahoo leagues? 2. Will next year's NHL draft-eligible prospects also be selected in the inaugaral NDHL player draft? 3. Is there any way to "hide" farm players from the Yahoo FA database, so they don't show up there as available? Is there some Commissioner function to remove them from our player database? 1) Yes, it will be a snake draft just as in regular Yahoo leagues. 2) I was going to put this up for a vote, originally I was planning on doing a seperate draft after the NHL draft takes place for prospects draft this year. But if people would prefer to include 2007 - eligible prospects in with the inaugural draft, we can do that as well. The only problem is that it's still 4 months before the draft, a lot can happen before then. Regardless, I will set up a poll for everybody to vote on it. 3) As far as I know there is no way to "hide" players on Yahoo. All you will have to do though is come on to the message board, go to the roster's page, use the search function (Cntl+f) and type in the players name. If the player is not found then he is a free-agent. 1. I've always advocated that vetos do have a place in fantasy hockey, but only in very specific circumstances. I completely agree that it's the responsibility of consenting GMs to make trades that work for both parties. However, there are some circumstances (collusion, a suddenly injured player) where a veto is necessary. I think a process could be managed informally by the commish, so long as there is justification for a veto. Collusion was already discussed, but imagine this scenario: - On Monday I offer Iginla and Modin for Shanahan and Knuble. - On Tuesday Knuble and Shanahan collide, and end their seasons. - On Wednesday I try to cancel my offer, which was made when all players were healthy, but it was accepted just before I logged in. Intervention is needed in situations such as this. I agree that would be wrong. But it can be very easily reversed by me just placing the players back on the original teams. I think everybody in this league is knowledgable enough to not make stupid trades. In the case of injuries, it can be discussed among the league and reversed if necessary. I really don't think collusion will be a problem but if it is both managers will be removed and players will be put back on their original teams. I just feel that with this issue the pros outweigh the cons. 2. If the league is a snake draft, I've been a part of a league that has a fun way of managing when you make your selection. It works like this: - A randomizer determines your "draft preference seeding" - Each team submits their selection preference, based on their seeding: Seed 1 - 1 Seed 2 - 1,2 Seed 3 - 1,2,14 Seed 4 - 1,2,3,14 Seed 5 - 1,2,3,14,13 Seed 6 - 1,2,3,14,4,13 etc Then, based on their seed, and order of preference, a draft order is determined. Seed 1 - 1 Seed 2 - 1, 2Seed 3 - 1,2, 14Seed 4 - 1,2, 3,14 Seed 5 - 1,2,3,14, 13Seed 6 - 1,2,3,14, 4,13 etc This introduces some control over your draft position, as well as some gamesmanship and strategy (as in a snake draft, whoever picks 14th also picks 15th, etc). Some people prefer a lower seeding. I'm not sure I completely understand. So we randomize the draft order, and that simply gives you a preference number for which you can choose any position you want that isn't already taken? If so, that's something that can be discussed and used if everybody likes it. 3. I think there may be some benefit to adding another skater statistic. I prefer slightly more scoring emphasis on skaters than on goalies, as a goaltender is only 1/6 of an on-ice unit in hockey. Perhaps something like faceoff wins might be fun, rewarding success at the center position. I'm ok with this, either SHP, SOG, or FOW could be added. Once again, we would need everybody elses opinion on it.
|
|
|
Post by Anaheim Ducks on Feb 20, 2007 19:36:30 GMT -5
3. I think there may be some benefit to adding another skater statistic. I prefer slightly more scoring emphasis on skaters than on goalies, as a goaltender is only 1/6 of an on-ice unit in hockey. Perhaps something like faceoff wins might be fun, rewarding success at the center position. I'm ok with this, either SHP, SOG, or FOW could be added. Once again, we would need everybody elses opinion on it. If you want to add any skater stats, either SHP or SOG is fine with me. But I am not a fan of FOW. Team will be benefit by just having the centerman in the team. Anyways, i prefer status quo.
|
|