Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - snugerud

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 423
1
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: May 02, 2024, 11:05:02 AM »
Yea, I'm not completely unconvinced that both Shooter and SlackJack aren't AI...

What about a compromise like this:

1) 1st round draftees are NOT eligible as Keepers
2) GM's may keep any number of players drafted by their actual team from rounds 2 and beyond (no reason to limit to 3 - it's not like we have space to keep that many anyway)
3) Increase Supp Draft to 4 rounds
4) Adopt Corey's idea of limiting prospect extensions to 3 years, but Keeper's may be extended to 4 or 5.

By taking the 1st rounders out of the Keeper pool, a lot of the disparity we're talking about would disappear.  That and we'll make the Supplemental a lot more interesting.

I like it. 

2
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: May 01, 2024, 03:15:36 PM »
Someone mentioned home team draft. As the Ottawa Senators I think that has hurt my team in past seasons. They stink at drafting and now they will have to forfeit a future 1st because they failed to notify Vegas of Dadonov's no trade list.

I'm hoping the keep the first this year and then will consider finally changing franchises.

I get the principle of having a tie to the franchise, but it does create at least some minor disparity

I would be in favor of scrapping the team picks as well in favor of 1 or 2 additional picks in a rookie draft. 
If you want to keep a home town feel maybe look at a hometown discount on fielding roster players that play on the real life nhl team (10-15%) discount??

3
Dynasty NHL: Transactions / AVS Extensions
« on: April 29, 2024, 04:15:38 PM »
Michael Bunting - 22/23 (223.95 x 25k)  = 5598750 X Prospect discount = 3,919,125 - 5 years
Kevin Lankinen  - 23/24 (101)   --- prospect discount = 2 mill - 5 years
 


4
Dynasty NHL / Re: Coyotes repeat!!!
« on: April 29, 2024, 10:18:06 AM »
Nice win.  See you again next season.

5
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: April 29, 2024, 10:16:15 AM »
Teams hold onto their picks now because they were really the one and only way to keep your team in competition as you were never going to be able to do it via FA.  I think as teams re-adjust their strategies and FA becomes a bigger factor you will see guys more open to moving picks around and generating more trades.  Especially if it gets harder to hold together your dynasty for longer term.   GM's will have to "go for it" while their team is still in the hunt. 

6
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: April 26, 2024, 10:00:20 AM »
Referendum on "Dynasty" aside I think the changes we're talking about are minor but worth discussing.

1) Small static factor adjustment.

2) Cash trading cap.

3) Shorter contract extensions.

Points 2 & 3 would more than offset a $20k static factor.

I am good with discussing but none of these changes even if agreed upon should happen immediately.  Especially changes to extension rules.  They should always be delayed by a season. 

7
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: April 25, 2024, 11:57:09 AM »
All this said, I am fine with the current setup.  I like that players are getting too expensive to make the extend decision easily.  What we may want to look into is there a way to tie our extension factor to total league production.  For example this season there has been some crazy offense compared to others.  Having the same multiple of 25000 with higher league production and static cap is making many players extension costs more than what is reasonable given our cap has not changed.  Or alternatively maybe our cap number is based on total league production but we keep the extension factor of 25k the same.

Just for curiosity I totaled the Fantasy points for all players in the 23/24 season and then did the same for 22/23 and 21/22. 
23/24 season total was - 113912.95  x 25000 = 2,847,823,750

22/23 season total was - 114471.40 x 25000 = 2,861,785,000  (13,961,250 difference between 23/24) / 20 teams = 698,062.50

21/22 season total was - 113264.3 x 25000 = 2,831,607,500 


This surprised me as i would have thought 23/24 would have been higher and the difference between the two is negligible. 
 
23/24 season total was - 113912.95  x 20000  = 2,278,259,000  (569,564,750 difference when comparing multiples) / 20 teams = 28,478,237.50

22/23 season total was - 114471.40 x 20000  = 2,289,428,000





 

8
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: April 25, 2024, 10:02:12 AM »
Might need to change the league name then no?  Seriously I think there are other ways to encourage more turn-over. A cap on trading cash for example. Would like to hear more about your idea for extensions even if radical.

I would agree with you on the cap for trading cash.  There should be a max amount of additional cap a team can take on.  I would say we disagree on the definition of dynasty.  Dynasty for me is the ability to build and continue rebuilding my team to be competitive year in and year out while dealing with constant player movements/ changes.  The dynasty part is me as a GM , not the players being able to stay on my team from draft to retirement. 

For the extension thing, i am not suggesting it for this league as it just wouldnt work. I will give you the real short of how its setup though.  As a base line everything is managed by fantrax for contracts except for each team has 3 franchise tags to use per season.
Contracts initial length is 3 years.
Extension option year is after their 2nd year.  You have the option to extend for 0, 1 or 2 years.  Each year extended adds 1 million to the players salary contract.
After the option year players are not eligible to be extended unless the GM uses 1 of their franchise tags.  Franchise tags can be used to extend players for 1 or 2 more years.  (each year extended would add 1 million to their contract).  You can use a Franchise tag on a player more than once. So say you have connor mcdavid,  starts as a rookie at 700k ,   you choose to extend him on your option year. for 2 years. His contract would move to 2.7mill.  At year 5 his contract is expiring , you can tag him for another 2 years bringing him to 4.7,  at year 7 you can tag him again bringing him to 6.7 and so on. 

What this does is each season teams end up with a mix of players that are on expiring contracts that they have to decide if they are getting too expensive or teams that have made moves to win that season end up with too many expiring contracts to extend all of them. (They always have to options to trade them after playoffs and before roster rollover.) Teams that are out of playoffs tend to look for trade partners for their expiring contracts.  Teams in playoffs tend to take on expiring contracts as rentals knowing that those players will end up back in FA. 

This would not be possible to implement here since it would take way too many changes in all areas. 

Some aspects that maybe we could consider implementing -
shorter term contracts. 
Extensions that dont go down in value. (if player A is at 5 mill per year, has a couple of injury years before extension they would need to be extended at the 5 mill at minimum even though they would extend at 3 mill on chart). 
Contracts that are considered final contracts (non extendable after they been extended once) Would need a Ftag option here as teams should always have some options at their disposal. 
Maybe a max amount of extensions per team. 


All this said, I am fine with the current setup.  I like that players are getting too expensive to make the extend decision easily.  What we may want to look into is there a way to tie our extension factor to total league production.  For example this season there has been some crazy offense compared to others.  Having the same multiple of 25000 with higher league production and static cap is making many players extension costs more than what is reasonable given our cap has not changed.  Or alternatively maybe our cap number is based on total league production but we keep the extension factor of 25k the same.



9
Dynasty NHL / Re: Extension cost discussion
« on: April 24, 2024, 05:03:58 PM »
:iatp:

$25k is an arbitrary number designed to improve free-agency options and accelerate improvement of lower tier teams.

The trade-off is that teams are less able to retain talent. (No Dynasty for you!)

The second-order effect is a sluggish trade environment. Prospect contracts are more valuable than salaried point producers.

I support the intention of the change but have always argued against the the mechanics.

I see a time where others will join me in calling for tweaking the static multiplier slightly lower.

I dont think it has run long enough to really see the effect.  two seasons is barely enough time to start seeing the ripple.  I think the sluggish trade environment would only get worse lowering.  If anything we need a bit less dynasty and bit more more turnover of players year to year.  I pretty much support anything that pushes more players into free agency.   My vote is to leave it alone for another season or two.

I have my own ideas / preferences when it comes to extensions but my ideas would be seen as quite radical in the change section and far off the path that most leagues (all leagues) seem to use on profsl (I would love to divorce extensions from stats. Extensions should have their own mechanics).  Although I will say they setup does produce way more movement (in a 16 team league we had close to 120 trades last season)

10
Dynasty NHL: Processed on Fantrax / Colorado buyouts
« on: April 17, 2024, 10:13:53 AM »
Torey Krug, 3,300,000 x2 = 6.6mill

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 423

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Mt_Crushmore: Any YouTube viewers watching dynasty draft? Any your subscribed to?
    Yesterday at 04:31:02 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Lol
    Yesterday at 04:53:59 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I get like that too Eric. My goal every offseason is to do at least 1 trade with every gm. Why not? Its fun
    Yesterday at 04:55:00 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Some guys just dont trade for whatever reason. But the guys who dont arent championship contenders.
    Yesterday at 04:55:47 PM
  • Daddy: They trade, about as often as real teams do. For people that love year round trading, being in one league, one sport, its going to be difficult.
    Yesterday at 05:38:13 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Not everyone trades. But agreed, for one sport folk like myself. It requires patience
    Yesterday at 06:10:32 PM
  • Alpha5: NFL LIVE is the most difficult league for me and it's not even close
    Yesterday at 07:22:33 PM
  • Daddy: Cant just trade because its fun. There needs to be a purpose behind trading. Get guys you believe in or need to keep improving.
    Yesterday at 08:44:03 PM
  • Daddy: NFL LIVE has the toughest GMs & football is the toughest fantasy sport for DYNASTY. Redraft will always be King of football.
    Yesterday at 08:45:00 PM
  • Daddy: Baseball, hockey, basketball guys struggle with NFL LIVE because its just so damn fast (football careers, roster turnover etc.)
    Yesterday at 08:46:19 PM
  • Alpha5: Limited assets
    Yesterday at 11:05:53 PM
  • Daddy: We all have the same assets
    Today at 12:14:51 AM
  • Alpha5: If a team has 2 QB1s another team has none. If a team in baseball has 2 1B it doesn't leave a team without one.
    Today at 09:09:33 AM
  • Alpha5: That's what I mean by limited assets
    Today at 09:09:53 AM
  • Brent: And that's why I haven't traded Carr yet.  Someone doesn't have a QB or thinks they'll get one in FA/draft and might be left wanting.
    Today at 09:12:28 AM
  • Daddy: @Alpha if a team in MLB LIVE has two starting 1Bs then there is also a team without one.
    Today at 10:30:34 AM
  • ldsjayhawk: @jwalker I make like 2-3 trades a year for each of my baseball teams, maybe.  I'll tell you part of the reason I don't trade.  Every trade discussion starts out with the other team wanting my top prospect regardless of what I am trading for.  I am not trading Jackson Holliday for your backup catcher who is going to play 20 games this year.
    Today at 10:56:16 AM
  • Alpha5: Nah cause position eligibility. 1B/OF, 1B,3B etc
    Today at 11:02:48 AM
  • Daddy: CB/S >> DE/LB >> Taysom Hill QB/TE
    Today at 12:06:43 PM
  • Daddy: Football is just harder. You can build a team and 3 years later its irrelevant due to injury, retirement, roster turnover.
    Today at 12:07:41 PM
  • Alpha5: @ldsjayhawk I get the frustration but you're gonna have to get over that man haha
    Today at 12:29:52 PM
  • Alpha5: And maybe you should trade Jackson Holiday lolol
    Today at 12:32:00 PM
  • Brent: In an offsite league, I inquired about Mason Miller and the guy asked for Jackson Holliday.
    Today at 12:39:24 PM
  • dbreer23: Is it like a 4 team redraft league? :rofl:
    Today at 12:40:30 PM
  • dbreer23: Cris, there is a reason that you are a good owner, bc you can discern a value deal vs. a BS deal. Not all owners are that savvy. They will eventually leave...
    Today at 12:42:49 PM
  • Brent: Nope, 32-team contract league.
    Today at 12:49:09 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: I don't have Holiday.  Just used him as an example since he was the #1 prospect
    Today at 12:56:05 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: @Alpha I do make trades.  I am just not giving up the entire farm to land a guy I can get out of the FA pool
    Today at 12:59:21 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: Trading should be a win-win situation for both teams.
    Today at 01:00:32 PM
  • dbreer23: Agreed. I think the Devers deal in FGM is a good example of that. Devers gives SD some now (and future) pop, giving up substantial pieces to get him (Mayo, Keith, and one other).
    Today at 01:03:48 PM
  • Brent: I had Holliday in FGM before I stepped away.
    Today at 01:24:07 PM
  • Brent: I am glad I cut back on leagues, I was spread too thin.
    Today at 01:24:25 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: @idsjayhawk i understand that. To be clear, i wasnt judging anyone. I just know in NFL Live, you cant just draft 1-7 rds every year and sign a few FAs and be the champion. It wont happen
    Today at 01:52:08 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Trading isnt easy. But neither is winning
    Today at 01:52:22 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: If you made a list of the most aggressive gms to have stepped foot in nfl live, you will notice the champions will be among them
    Today at 01:53:06 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: You arent gonna win every trade and you HAVE to have a plan. Ive made some horrible trades. I have every year
    Today at 01:53:50 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Carolina has kyren williams right now cause i traded him for a 2nd and a 4th. Id rather have kyren today lol
    Today at 01:54:28 PM
  • Brent: Agreed.  I have Amon Ra St. Brown and Aiyuk because I traded JJ.  I couldn't have acquired a player like ASB where I was picking in the 1st so I down tiered at WR to make a trio of Chase, ASB and Aiyuk instead of JJ, Chase and fill in the blank.
    Today at 02:09:02 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: That is probably even more true in baseball since your drafts don't payoff for 5 years or so.  And I will admit my conservatism may be the reason I only have one championship here at ProFSL
    Today at 02:10:04 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: jwalkerjr88 is right
    Today at 02:25:49 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: on that u havat trade a bit here and there
    Today at 02:25:57 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: although my last draft class and fa class kinda lead me to a run so it can happen
    Today at 02:27:21 PM
  • Brent: Yeah, it does help to have a big draft class and available cap.
    Today at 02:36:56 PM
  • Brent: I'm contemplating doing a complete tear down in NFL Live and rebuild.  Honestly, I probably should have postered for it to be this season.  I still might, but I would legit need to go into the draft with 3-4 top 10 picks/+ many others.
    Today at 02:38:21 PM
  • Brent: postured
    Today at 02:38:35 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Yea nailing drafts and some key FAs helps too. But if you remember BAB you traded alvin kamara for the rams 1-7 draft picks. So the extra picks helped you nail the 2023 draft the way you did
    Today at 03:13:02 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Its the combination of all three that is required is what im saying
    Today at 03:13:31 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: And brent a tear down with you assets would look interesting. Personally i just think you need break one big asset down into 3 good ones and move carr and go from there. But you have an A1 nfl mind so im sure you will nail whatever it is you decide
    Today at 03:14:39 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: *your
    Today at 03:14:50 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: very good pt yes i did gain lot of capital which propelled me to make more moves from that trade
    Today at 03:34:25 PM