ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => ProFSL Dynasty Hockey => NHL Leagues => ProFSL Dynasty Hockey: Archives => Topic started by: Vik on January 04, 2021, 07:35:54 PM
-
With most teams being at or close to minor limit and we know plenty of guys take several years to develop and make NHL debut, wondering if there is support to increase the roster.
Pretty straight forward but if you do want to see increase figured I'll put 2 options, I kind of like doing it only in 2 years when we are more established but if there is support and don't want to wait so long totally cool making change as early as next offseason.
-
100 % good with increasing roster limits. I'd even rather see a 10 player increase next year and then 10 players the next (50 total) NHL teams have like a 80 or 90 man reserve list . So why not keep it growing lol
-
100 % good with increasing roster limits. I'd even rather see a 10 player increase next year and then 10 players the next (50 total) NHL teams have like a 80 or 90 man reserve list . So why not keep it growing lol
Interesting, if there is support for 40 starting next year I'm all for it. I just don't want to increase too much too soon. Do think increase is way to go but still some strategy having to work with cergain number of spots.
Maybe middle ground is a one time 10 spot increase next and then 5 more in 2 years to 45 (and then reavaulate from there going forward)
-
I was part of a baseball league once with unlimited minors. it would be fine if we really limit major league players in the minors. but an increase of 7 a year until we get to the limit we choose would be good since we are drafting 7 every year.
-
I was part of a baseball league once with unlimited minors. it would be fine if we really limit major league players in the minors. but an increase of 7 a year until we get to the limit we choose would be good since we are drafting 7 every year.
This makes sense. I went 10 as a simple round number but 7 to match picks works for me. 37 starting next year, 44 in 2 years is a good middle ground and then go from there.
-
Not a fan of having massive minor league rosters. It depreciates the available field of players and reduces the level of strategy; not forcing GM's to make tough decisions and strategic planning. It also dumbs down the draft - not allowing for deep picks aside from entry level players. To me, the minors here are already too large.
I'm very much opposed to this and wish there was a conversation BEFORE the poll, which doesn't give this kind of change any context. Changes like this should be discussed, digested, opposed, supported and eventually we regurgitate an update that we all agree on, if necessary.
The playoff change is more palatable given the circumstances we're under. It's temporary. This is permanent with lasting effects.
-
Not a fan of having massive minor league rosters. It depreciates the available field of players and reduces the level of strategy; not forcing GM's to make tough decisions and strategic planning. It also dumbs down the draft - not allowing for deep picks aside from entry level players. To me, the minors here are already too large.
More in favor of this approach. Not a fan of having a minor roster bigger that our NHL roster.
-
I can adjust to any size minors but this league is suppose to be different than other leagues on here so here are a couple of things to think about. because the leagues only have 16 to 20 teams compared to 31 in real we have bigger rosters than real life. we also have 2 active goalie spots but no extra active spots for the other positions so it doesn't make sense to me to have a much smaller minor league which is the opposite of what we do in other areas of the league. some say a smaller minor makes you have to tough decisions but I feel its easier because your just going to keep the higher rated ones and your probably not going to try to find the sleeper prospects, it also makes 18 year old goalie prospects less likely to be drafted and spend 5-7 years in your minors. just like if it was unlimited it would be easier too so there is a sweet spot that I think is maybe around 40-45. part of a dynasty manager is drafting all types of players, sleepers, young goalies and the top rated guys and is harder to scout all these players than if your just picking guys by someone's ranking or where they were drafted.
the other thing is having a small minors can limit the value and trade partners for prospects and picks. In DNHL 15 player minors and 3 round draft(and 3 keeper picks), because only 15 minor slots, most teams have them full and cant even use their draft and keeper picks and you cant trade any of yours to most teams because they dont have room unless its a really high pick or a top prospect.
going back to being different type of league I think having minors between 40-45 makes some sense for us for the reasons I have pointed out maybe going to 37 next year and seeing how that works, then look at if we should increase again.
-
the other thing is having a small minors can limit the value and trade partners for prospects and picks. In DNHL 15 player minors and 3 round draft(and 3 keeper picks), because only 15 minor slots, most teams have them full and cant even use their draft and keeper picks and you cant trade any of yours to most teams because they dont have room unless its a really high pick or a top prospect.
Disagreed on that. Every team uses their supplemental picks. Most teams use all 3 of their keepers too. Unless your team has a crap draft (I run the Bruins and know ALL about this). Those picks often fall off in favor of supplementals, but they still serve their purpose. The trade value of those picks is enormous, particularly on the eve of the draft. That will not be the case here (even without roster expansion). Often times tough calls need to be made on who to keep, but that keeps it interesting. And it keeps the draft STOCKED with talent and makes for a great time. And it also allows for players to fall through the cracks, hitting their FA eligibility and initiating bidwars. That will never happen with expanded minor league rosters. If a player pops out of nowhere, in all likelihood someone will have him stashed away.
Not that DNHL has anything to do with this. This is a different league with different rules, different scoring, etc etc. I'm not trying to emulate the DNHL equation in any way. I've played in many franchise/dynasty leagues and I think huge minor league rosters are always bad for the league, regardless of the format.
-
Going to say see both side of coin but increase of minor player is nice and same as NHL in a way had to look up but as one said so far NHL team can have 90....
What is the 90 player reserved list?
Each team has a reserved list of 90 players, which is essentially the total number of players that are attached to their organization. The 90 players include all of the players that are on their roster, are under contract and in the minors, the players they have drafted and are playing in junior but have not signed, and players who are playing in Europe who they have rights too but have not signed.
An NHL team is not allowed to exceed the 90 player limit.
now hold on we do not of course need a 58 player minor to have same 90 as NHL but as one other say so far that we have half of teams that NHL have in this league we are in here!! i also do think draft pick would be more value with more minor spot....you can keep all your player or most of them each year and this makes these late draft picks we have higher value due to as of now alot of team i think would not use said picks. plus as one other say so far that these hockey prospect palyer take longer time to develop not like NBA where all of 1st round player step in and play right away it is a long long wait.....and as put the goalies take more time than this even!! and remember we can in here keep adding to our minor with signing to RC contract if we see some we fancy during the season so more spots for this makes it fun for all does it not! i like to see if my gamble on bidding on said in season player would pay off instead of dropping said player by draft!!!
-
I think we should stick with 30. You have to evaluate the players in the minor and drop some of them or trade your draft picks to ensure you don't go over the limit.
It will also keep up the value of draft picks and should increase the quality of the choices we are face with in the draft.
-
I think we should stick with 30. You have to evaluate the players in the minor and drop some of them or trade your draft picks to ensure you don't go over the limit.
It will also keep up the value of draft picks and should increase the quality of the choices we are face with in the draft.
for me what will happen when the teams are about at the minor limit the value for 1st and 2nd rnd pix goes up and the later pix become almost worthless because those are the pix that need time to develop and no one will have the space to let them do that. yes 30 seems like it should be enough but its not. In backyard we have a 30 player minors and a 5 round draft and its not really enough if you want to let your pix have the time to develope and thats with 5 rounds. we have 7 and I know with the 30 minor guys I have I dont see myself cutting any of them to draft 7 guys next year.
anyways I think it would be a good change from the other leagues if we can have well developed minor leagues. since we have RFA here that the other leagues dont have so I dont think restricting minor leagues and get a few extra FA because of it is worth it
-
Nice to have a healthy discussion here. Discussion is more important than poll for sure, I just figured getting a poll initially helps get a quick sense of where everyone stands but those are not firm options especially with feedback so far. For now I want to say no decision will be imminent either way, as I see both sides and taking into account what is best for league health. Unlike playoff change, which I think I am more set on with my last post, here we can take more time for sure. Maybe in the coming weeks right around when season starts I can a new poll with additional options brought up and ultimately decide among those. Ultimately no impact until next offseason at the earliest anyway.
I do realize not everyone might be happy with decision 1 way or another and that is totally fair and expected. Since I knew some would oppose increase in general, was thinking maybe only doing so in 2 years would be a fair compromise as it would allow for more time to adjust and less of a immediate impact on picks (though I think making picks more valuable can't hurt). I will say, I do also like the 7 spot increase starting next year and going from there on a year to year bases.
Backyard is a good example brought up to show differences because there it is very difficult to actually improve your minors with bidding not allowed on guys with zero NHL experience. Specs can only be obtained through draft or bid on eventually when they make their NHL debut and as such less spots makes a lot more sense. If you trade picks you are stuck with a weak minors for most part in BY. With our setup not only do we have full 7 rounds of picks but the fact we can then also bid RC via FA opens up many ways to build minors, so my thinking was no harm in giving more wiggle room to wait on some guys you would otherwise be forced to drop. Even with a increase of say 5-10 spots there will still be plenty of tough decision to be made. Also you really never know who will actually pan out but having a little more room to wait on some guys who are 2-3+ years away and question marks in terms of what they become doesn't hurt. I am sure most of us see upside and like potential in all our minors which is why we own who we own, but how many will become true stars is anyone's guess in in a few years we will all have guys we held for a while that will never even make it up. My thinking is why not allow for a few more spots for long shots but within reason (I agree a huge increase especially immediately is also not way to go).
-
Good stuff. Glad to hear the poll is not binding. If a majority of the league agrees with a change then we should implement that change. But I do prefer to see topics like this hashed out like we are now - so that the voters understand all the intricacies, positives and negatives to both paths, before they cast their vote. In lieu of casting a kneejerk vote without really considering the full extent of the change.
-
I don't think the value of our draft picks is ever going to depreciate if the minors stay at 30. Every player in the NHL draft will be in our draft each year. If there are good players in that there will be value for our picks. Especially with half the NHL teams being represented here. Our 7 rounds is just 3.5 of the NHL draft.
I echo Rob's sentiment that a smaller minor roster lets some guys slip through the cracks so to speak. Maybe they aren't drafted, or maybe they are cut from one of our teams and then go on to have a breakout year. It also reduces the hoarding and makes teams actual evaluate their players every year.
-
Realize this is still somewhat open topic for discussion. At this point in time I am thinking we should stay at 30 and if anything implement an increase starting next year.
However, also open to further off season discussion and can easily get a new poll and/or proposal if there is enough support via feedback to make any changes this off season (for this specifically, but also always willing to listen to resonable rules changes in general)