Official Q&A Thread

[BrewCrew]

Yea and I think it's a little late to do that now either way.

Yea, it would be too late.

It could be a change for next year, but Idk who would want to?

[izaman3]

I do like things the way there are. But a change we could think about is raising the salary cap to 75 mil, but not until after the draft finishes. To make any changes to cap space, or add/drop rules right now wouldn't really be that fair everyone because everyone planned their draft strategies for a 70 mil cap. However, if we raised it to 75 mil after the draft, everyone will have drafted under the same conditions and the additional cap space can be used on free agents not taken in the draft and more trades between teams before and during the season.

The NHL has 23 man rosters and a cap of 65 mil. Our league has 30 man rosters and only a cap of 70 mil, while its true we do enjoy cheaper prospect contracts, one of the thrills of fantasy sports is getting talented (often expensive) players on your team. Anyway, I think its just something to think about.

[BrewCrew]

I do like things the way there are. But a change we could think about is raising the salary cap to 75 mil, but not until after the draft finishes. To make any changes to cap space, or add/drop rules right now wouldn't really be that fair everyone because everyone planned their draft strategies for a 70 mil cap. However, if we raised it to 75 mil after the draft, everyone will have drafted under the same conditions and the additional cap space can be used on free agents not taken in the draft and more trades between teams before and during the season.

The NHL has 23 man rosters and a cap of 65 mil. Our league has 30 man rosters and only a cap of 70 mil, while its true we do enjoy cheaper prospect contracts, one of the thrills of fantasy sports is getting talented (often expensive) players on your team. Anyway, I think its just something to think about.

Doesn't sound like a half bad idea Izaman!

How would we go about this, a vote?

[Rob]

Brian and I talked about having the cap at $75m originally and I thought with prospects so cheap it made sense to lower it to $70m.  Personally I like it where it is.  I think in general all teams involved have had maneuverability cap-wise, save maybe papps.  With so much activity here we've all had opportunity to fix some of our problems. I don't think $75m is unreasonable but I'm a fan of the smaller cap.  I think it more often rewards teams that make the best decisions long-term.  Furthermore I don't like the idea of changing it this season.  Some teams may have planned better than others and might have made different decisions if they knew they had an extra $5m coming their way, like extending players that they decided not to extend.  If one GM decided to save a certain amount of cash to bring to FA bidding and perhaps not draft a player they would have drafted to do this, we'll be nullifying their advantage.  If we do increase the cap I think it should happen for the 12/13 season. 

[snugerud]

Have you thought about reducing the roster to 1 active goalie a night?  With 20 teams in the league it means that only half the teams can really have 2 actual starting goalies.  The rest are left to piecing together backups for that 2nd starter position.  might be giving an unfair competitive advantage to some teams.

I am running a 16 team league now and we still only run at 1 active.  Makes it a strategic/hard choice on who to start on any given night. 

I wouldn't recommend changing it right away due to messing up peoples strategies but just a thought for maybe a year or two from now.

[Rob]

Have you thought about reducing the roster to 1 active goalie a night?  With 20 teams in the league it means that only half the teams can really have 2 actual starting goalies.  The rest are left to piecing together backups for that 2nd starter position.  might be giving an unfair competitive advantage to some teams.

I am running a 16 team league now and we still only run at 1 active.  Makes it a strategic/hard choice on who to start on any given night. 

I wouldn't recommend changing it right away due to messing up peoples strategies but just a thought for maybe a year or two from now.

It's not a bad idea.  Though some have stocked up on goalies for exactly this reason so I'd hate to screw them over.  Maybe we can see how year 1 goes then revisit this in the next offseason and see how people feel about it.

[snugerud]

Though some have stocked up on goalies for exactly this reason so I'd hate to screw them over.

Now who would have stocked up on goalies ,,,,, ahem anahiem...cough cough.... 

I will be curious to see what kind of advantage if any it gives the teams that did.  Being a points based league there may not be that much advantage.  I am used to playing head to head category leagues where it can potentially have a big impact.

[Rob]

Now who would have stocked up on goalies ,,,,, ahem anahiem...cough cough.... 

I will be curious to see what kind of advantage if any it gives the teams that did.  Being a points based league there may not be that much advantage.  I am used to playing head to head category leagues where it can potentially have a big impact.

I think it will definitely be an advantage for teams who have 2 starting goalies.  Though, teams without 2 starters can mitigate the difference by picking up backup goalies and paying close attention to when they're playing and starting them in those games. 

[-BA-]

For what its worth, I think maybe a 3rd  of NHL teams will have kind of that 60/40 or 65/35 split on goalies. I think the days of guys like Brodeur playing 75 games a year is slowly shifting.

[GypsieDeathBringer]

We are now halfway through the draft and free agency is sort of close, so I was wondering if there was a maximum number of years we can sign a guy to?  Are we going to allow some DiPietro contracts of 15 years or have a max number?