ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Dynasty NHL => NHL Leagues => Dynasty NHL: Archive => Topic started by: Tubbs on December 06, 2016, 07:48:51 PM
-
I love this league but I wonder why we don't switch back to a straight up rookie draft - and ditch the rookie retention rights of each team.
Yes, as a cellar dweller this change would benefit me, but the draft is such an exciting time in any league, and gives cellar dwellers the hope that they can rejuvenate their team quickly- like a real life NHL GM. That excitement is lacking here given the current set up.
Just throwing this,out there and would like to hear others' thoughts. :toast:
-
I'm personally a fan of retaining team picks. And it's done nothing but hurt me overall since the real life Bruins are TERRIBLE at drafting. I think it's a nice wrinkle, if not always completely fair. I also believe that it makes our Supplemental even more fun, having to dig deep for those players who went unnoticed in previous drafts, or those that have outplayed their draft position in the minors or overseas. Having a small Minors roster makes this draft very compelling, to me.
-
I've said it previously as well, similar to what Tubbs is saying.
I get that this is the way it's been done for a while in DNHL though.
But what if say, my Panthers, or Tyler's Ducks, or Shooter's Blues were the Leafs or Oilers, and we got handed a free star player like Mathews or McDavid that makes our already good teams that much better?
Luckily for Vancouver and Arizona, those real life NHL teams will get good picks this year, but for Pittsburgh and Montreal, they aren't so lucky.
It also sucks for teams that don't even get a free 1st rounder if the NHL team trades theirs away.
But yes Rob, it sucks for you since Boston wasted those three 1st rounders a couple years ago, haha.
Maybe a wrinkle could be to leave all of the actual NHL 1st Round draft picks in the supplemental draft pool...
The top maybe 10 or 12 would go in that order, but for some people there might be a player with 38 NHL games that they would like instead of the 14th overall 18-year old prospect in that year's draft.
Also this way, the teams finishing lower in the standings get a shot at a really good prospect, instead of a 25th-30th overall prospect.
Still give the option for GM's to take their real NHL team's 2nd, 3rd, 4th rounders if they choose to though.
It would make the value of 1st Round draft picks a lot higher for trading chips as well, since the worst they would be equivalent to would be 20th overall NHL draftees if it was the league champion's 1st rounder.
Even 2nd round picks become more valuable since there would be at least 10 NHL 1st rounders left to be drafted in the 2nd round.
Just a thought - not totally taking away what's been in place, but adding a twist.
I think it makes it more fair for bottom end teams, especially if their franchises are good year over year.
-
"Protected" first rounders is a very interesting idea. I like it. But if i had to vote I'd vote to keep it like it is. There's no doubt that it's not entirely fair. Good teams have received far better draft talent in the past than they deserve. And vice versa obviously. But it's not making the difference between good teams and bad in this league. It's a wrinkle, a speed bump so to speak that you have to navigate. It also heavily rewards those GM's who do their research and know the game from college and on up by thinning the supplemental herd. I really like that element, even though I'm not the best in that category. That draft is probably my favorite part of this whole thing. That and losing in the finals.
So my take is clear, i think. This has always been a democracy, so lay it on me. If a change is consensus a change will occur.
And don't get me started on the Bruins drafting. They f**king drafted Trent f**king Frederic in the 1st f**king round this year.
-
"Protected" first rounders is a very interesting idea. I like it. But if i had to vote I'd vote to keep it like it is. There's no doubt that it's not entirely fair. Good teams have received far better draft talent in the past than they deserve. And vice versa obviously. But it's not making the difference between good teams and bad in this league. It's a wrinkle, a speed bump so to speak that you have to navigate. It also heavily rewards those GM's who do their research and know the game from college and on up by thinning the supplemental herd. I really like that element, even though I'm not the best in that category. That draft is probably my favorite part of this whole thing. That and losing in the finals.
So my take is clear, i think. This has always been a democracy, so lay it on me. If a change is consensus a change will occur.
And don't get me started on the Bruins drafting. They f**king drafted Trent f**king Frederic in the 1st f**king round this year.
At least you still have first rounds picks haha. We love to trade them away. I like the protected idea. I think I would still vote to keep it the same until that idea is more fully developed. As for for people like me who have the team I actually root for, it's fun to always have some hawks in the system or on my team. I do think we need more minors roster spots with 3 keepers and 3 draft spots a year, but that's a debate for a different thread.
-
Who in the hell is Trent Frederic....
-
Who in the hell is Trent Frederic....
Exactly
-
I dont think it would change much. I kind of like it since it minimizes the benefits to tanking. I had a different thought which would be to increase the minors games played to 80 versus the current of 40.
This would keep more surprise standout rookies available for drafting. Usually if there is a surprise standout player they made the team out of camp or in the first half of the season and are very likely to hit their 40 games before they ever make it to our draft. So instead of the players being available for draft they end up being bid on halfway through season which kind of waters down the whole reason for having the rule. If I remember correctly the no bidding on minors was so that teams couldnt cherry pick minors players and it was devaluing our draft picks.
A great example that I can think of was John Klingburg. Surprise player that I dont think many if any had on their radar. Would have be nice to see him make it to the draft , instead a bottom team still had to bid on him to the tune of 6mill per year.
-
I dont think it would change much. I kind of like it since it minimizes the benefits to tanking. I had a different thought which would be to increase the minors games played to 80 versus the current of 40.
This would keep more surprise standout rookies available for drafting. Usually if there is a surprise standout player they made the team out of camp or in the first half of the season and are very likely to hit their 40 games before they ever make it to our draft. So instead of the players being available for draft they end up being bid on halfway through season which kind of waters down the whole reason for having the rule. If I remember correctly the no bidding on minors was so that teams couldnt cherry pick minors players and it was devaluing our draft picks.
A great example that I can think of was John Klingburg. Surprise player that I dont think many if any had on their radar. Would have be nice to see him make it to the draft , instead a bottom team still had to bid on him to the tune of 6mill per year.
I'm not sure that will keep any more players in the draft. I would guess that just as many players hit 40 in-season as will hit 80. Of course we'll have a more clear indication if the player is the real deal, which will increase their draft stock, but it will also increase their FA value if they hit the threshold mid-season.
-
I kind of like it since it minimizes the benefits to tanking.
It certainly does. You can't rely on a nice player falling in your lap. There are still benefits to tanking, but you have to know your sh!t to do it right, instead of having it handed to you.
-
I'm not sure that will keep any more players in the draft. I would guess that just as many players hit 40 in-season as will hit 80. Of course we'll have a more clear indication if the player is the real deal, which will increase their draft stock, but it will also increase their FA value if they hit the threshold mid-season.
I would agree with you there however players hitting 80 would most likely have already been passed over in a draft. At 40 games many of the players never make it to a draft.
Just do a quick player search via Rookies on fantrax and I can pick at least a dozen players that have just started getting mins this year but will surpass their draft eligibility.
-
Rob, you say it's not "entirely fair" and call it a wrinkle. So then why to try to fix or revamp...iron out the wrinkle? And Isn't the point of the league to create an experience (as a GM) that mimics the NHL?
Look, I am not expecting any changes based upon the fact that this is the way it has been done, and I am fine with that. I simply don't buy into the arguments in support.
My lap remains open. :toast:
-
Rob, you say it's not "entirely fair" and call it a wrinkle. So then why to try to fix or revamp...iron out the wrinkle? And Isn't the point of the league to create an experience (as a GM) that mimics the NHL?
Look, I am not expecting any changes based upon the fact that this is the way it has been done, and I am fine with that. I simply don't buy into the arguments in support.
My lap remains open. :toast:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not even arguing your points, you make perfect sense. My only contention is that I LIKE that wrinkle. And I like the effect it has on other aspects of the league. The part I would argue is that the supplemental is better because of that wrinkle.
But I'm not so stubborn that I would refuse change just because this is the way we've always done it. We've changed a lot of rules over the years to make this a better league and if a majority of the league feels a change should be made, then I'm on board too.
Of course, this kind of change would have to happen after the next draft - so we're talking about changing effective for the 2018 draft if we do anything. We have plenty of time to hash it out here and listen to everyone's thoughts. Once people have time to consider and give input, and once the conversation dries up, I'll take all the opinions we've collected and go from there.
-
I dont think it would change much. I kind of like it since it minimizes the benefits to tanking. I had a different thought which would be to increase the minors games played to 80 versus the current of 40.
I think this would have some negative side effects with minors players on our rosters. It would take twice as long for their prospect contract clock to start, and some players could take 4 years before they hit 80 games. Plus a lot of good players could easily just miss 80 games and get an extra year on a prospect contract. McDavid is an example because he's still not at 80 games but is easily a top 10 player in the league right now and should be paid like one sooner rather than later.
-
I like Snug's idea as an "option" if we were to implement change.
I think any ideas are good ones at this point and there isn't really a right or a wrong suggestion, since they're just that - suggestions.
Sure, players might hit that 80 game mark, but as I recall, doesn't FA close well before an NHL team's 80th game?
I can't remember who, but a goalie was at around 38 games last year before the FA deadline, so couldn't be bid on. But then because there was still season left, went over the 40 game mark and also couldn't be drafted in the Supp Draft and was available to everyone in FA in the summer. Maybe it was Domingue?
For what it's worth, it definitely makes drafting a lot more difficult as a lot more research has to be put in to find potential players who will make an impact.
Past players who might be doing well in their 20-year old year in Junior, or a college kid who is hitting his stride at 23-years old or an AHL guy that did well in the minors for the past year or two.
But even then, they're not sure things to make it, it's all still a crapshoot. Heck, I'm a Canucks fan and I never thought Troy Stetcher would be as good as he is, let alone make the team this year - Philip Larsen (RIP to his brain) was supposed to be the offensive gem for the Canucks this year. He's done squat.
But as Snug mentioned - there is going to be a bidding war in 12-15 games or so for players like Brandon Carlo and Nic Dowd in all likelihood. They'll most likely be overpaid which doesn't help weaker teams with cap space in the long run either though..
-
I can't remember who, but a goalie was at around 38 games last year before the FA deadline, so couldn't be bid on. But then because there was still season left, went over the 40 game mark and also couldn't be drafted in the Supp Draft and was available to everyone in FA in the summer. Maybe it was Domingue?
Yup, Domingue
-
I think this would have some negative side effects with minors players on our rosters. It would take twice as long for their prospect contract clock to start, and some players could take 4 years before they hit 80 games. Plus a lot of good players could easily just miss 80 games and get an extra year on a prospect contract. McDavid is an example because he's still not at 80 games but is easily a top 10 player in the league right now and should be paid like one sooner rather than later.
This is a good point...
He'll also get 30% the regular extension price on a 5-year contract, so McD isn't going anywhere.
I think there will be pros and cons to anything that comes up though. Either that or there will have to be accessory rules to have to be added, such as the prospect contract still starts when they've hit 40 games played.
So when you draft the player, he gets the rookie contract right away instead of the (n/a) one (but in that case, after 80 NHL games he'll 99% be sticking in the NHL full-time and he'll be plugged into the roster right away)
-
As far as alternatives go, I prefer protecting 1st round picks to the 80 game threshold, so far.
-
As far as alternatives go, I prefer protecting 1st round picks to the 80 game threshold, so far.
I know it's my idea, but I do like it.
Not only does it allow for the weaker teams to draft a good prospect via draft, it also ensures every team gets a 1st round NHL draft pick and we don't have to worry about our teams trading away draft picks.
It should also stimulate more trading activity, since 1st and 2nd round draft picks will become much more valuable.
Especially closer to the trade deadline where teams will know if they are buying or rebuilding.
-
I know it's my idea, but I do like it.
Not only does it allow for the weaker teams to draft a good prospect via draft, it also ensures every team gets a 1st round NHL draft pick and we don't have to worry about our teams trading away draft picks.
It should also stimulate more trading activity, since 1st and 2nd round draft picks will become much more valuable.
Especially closer to the trade deadline where teams will know if they are buying or rebuilding.
If we do protect first round draft choices, we would have to do it in a few years or offer some sort of compensation to teams like me who have handed out my first rounders like candy for the next.
-
If we do protect first round draft choices, we would have to do it in a few years or offer some sort of compensation to teams like me who have handed out my first rounders like candy for the next.
Right, it would have to happen effective 2019 - so that none of these picks have been traded.
-
If we do protect first round draft choices, we would have to do it in a few years or offer some sort of compensation to teams like me who have handed out my first rounders like candy for the next.
Yes - Earliest would be the 2018 draft so not for a year and a half... Not many of those picks have been dealt, and the only 1st rounder that was traded, you actually have received!
-
I'm a big fan of protecting 1st round picks. I've been screwed and benefited from it as the real life Canes have traded away and received 1st rounders and nothing sucks more than knowing I'll miss out on a top prospect because Jim Rutherford wanted to have all the Staal brothers on a team.
Speaking of changes; this might not be the place, but since we are basing future salary cap limits partly on unspent cap in our league we should have a cap floor. We lost 2 million for next year just as the NHL's cap is increasing almost entirely because the Coyotes are sitting on 40m.
-
I'm a big fan of protecting 1st round picks. I've been screwed and benefited from it as the real life Canes have traded away and received 1st rounders and nothing sucks more than knowing I'll miss out on a top prospect because Jim Rutherford wanted to have all the Staal brothers on a team.
Speaking of changes; this might not be the place, but since we are basing future salary cap limits partly on unspent cap in our league we should have a cap floor. We lost 2 million for next year just as the NHL's cap is increasing almost entirely because the Coyotes are sitting on 40m.
I feel like there's always going to be a team rebuilding and sitting on cap. There has been every year so far. But I am not opposed to a cap floor. I just haven't thought through how to implement/enforce it.
-
But on the other side of that, the real life Cane's are sitting on a ton of cap which lifted the NHL average quite a bit. Not to the same relative amount, but enough to not make our system anomalous, this year at least.
-
Yes - Earliest would be the 2018 draft so not for a year and a half... Not many of those picks have been dealt, and the only 1st rounder that was traded, you actually have received!
In that case let's start it next year! I knew I had two but I honestly didn't think I had mine anymore. Glad I do because I'm going to be BAD real soon.
If we did want to implement a protected first round pick sooner, I'm willing to work with you guys to get Philly his pick back and start it in 2018
-
The one thing that I like about the Draft Keepers is that it helps keep all teams stocked with prospects. Not to pick on anyone but Philadelphia and Anaheim have both recently traded away the majority of their supplemental draft picks but were still able to add some decent prospects thru draft keepers. I think that this rule helps keep all teams somewhat stocked and it will be less likely that a team is completely run into the ground.
I don't think that the system is completely fair to all the teams but like Rob I do like the wrinkle that it provides. I haven't been very fortunate as the blues since they have been a good team and have drafted pretty low in most drafts (They traded a first round pick away for Jay Freaking Bouwmeester!). I think the best Draft Keeper that I have so far is Robby Fabbri.
I think if we eliminated the draft keepers then our Supplemental draft would get deeper but this would just lead to more players being passed over in the draft and being signed as FA's during the year. Right now there are probably 1.5 draft keepers for each team which would be 45 each offseason. The supplemental draft allows us to select another 60 players each year which leaves us with roughly 100 players added each offseason. This will end up pushing more players to FA and prevent teams from acquiring young cheap productive players which every team needs to fill out their roster.
-
I feel like there's always going to be a team rebuilding and sitting on cap. There has been every year so far. But I am not opposed to a cap floor. I just haven't thought through how to implement/enforce it.
Maybe we don't have to have a real one, as I'm not a fan of making teams acquire players they don't want. They could just sign any random free agent to a one year deal to get them to the cap floor. That doesn't add anything to the league. The NHL has the salary floor set to 16m below the cap. Maybe we could just use that 16m for equation purposes and make that the largest free cap allowed when figuring it out. Wonder where that would set our cap for next year???
-
The one thing that I like about the Draft Keepers is that it helps keep all teams stocked with prospects. Not to pick on anyone but Philadelphia and Anaheim have both recently traded away the majority of their supplemental draft picks but were still able to add some decent prospects thru draft keepers. I think that this rule helps keep all teams somewhat stocked and it will be less likely that a team is completely run into the ground.
My suggestion was that only the NHL 1st Rounders not be available for us.
Every team would still have the option of picking up 3 of their parent team's NHL draftees, drafted in round 2 through 7 in the NHL draft.
Some teams might have three 2nd rounders, others might have a 2nd rounder and then a 5th and 6th or something like that.
But to your point, there would still be 3 players added each year "for free" to the minors for each team, plus 3 draft picks if they don't trade them away - 1 of which will be an NHL 1st rounder; 2 of which will be 1st rounders if the team in DNHL finishes 11th or worse (2nd round would be picks 21 and up, so 21-30 are still in the real NHL draft 1st round).
-
My suggestion was that only the NHL 1st Rounders not be available for us.
Every team would still have the option of picking up 3 of their parent team's NHL draftees, drafted in round 2 through 7 in the NHL draft.
Some teams might have three 2nd rounders, others might have a 2nd rounder and then a 5th and 6th or something like that.
But to your point, there would still be 3 players added each year "for free" to the minors for each team, plus 3 draft picks if they don't trade them away - 1 of which will be an NHL 1st rounder; 2 of which will be 1st rounders if the team in DNHL finishes 11th or worse (2nd round would be picks 21 and up, so 21-30 are still in the real NHL draft 1st round).
I think this is the best solution.
-
Maybe we don't have to have a real one, as I'm not a fan of making teams acquire players they don't want. They could just sign any random free agent to a one year deal to get them to the cap floor. That doesn't add anything to the league. The NHL has the salary floor set to 16m below the cap. Maybe we could just use that 16m for equation purposes and make that the largest free cap allowed when figuring it out. Wonder where that would set our cap for next year???
One thing that I just recently thought of is that our extension values in this league are based off of real life contract values. The Real NHL contract values are set up based on a 30 team league (soon to be 31 teams) each spending up to there cap of 73 million. This would come out to a pool of 2.19 Billion dollars as the maximum that can be spent on players (jumping to 2.263 Billion dollars when Vegas is in the league). Our league currently has 20 teams with a cap space of 79.3m per team. This equates to a 1.586 Billion dollar total salary pool.
I know that it isn't a fair comparison since we have prospect contracts and prospect extensions which keep some salaries down in our league as well as Defenseman contracts being decreased to 66% of actual contract values. I think it is still important to note that these extension values are being set my a league that has a lot larger pool of money to spend. I think that this may have the effect of inflating the extension values of the best players. I think that over time as more teams re-sign there players and don't let them go to FA that more and more cap space will be used up and it will become more and more valuable in our league. I know that the past couple of years teams are having a harder and harder time of resigning all there FA's.
-
My suggestion was that only the NHL 1st Rounders not be available for us.
Every team would still have the option of picking up 3 of their parent team's NHL draftees, drafted in round 2 through 7 in the NHL draft.
Some teams might have three 2nd rounders, others might have a 2nd rounder and then a 5th and 6th or something like that.
But to your point, there would still be 3 players added each year "for free" to the minors for each team, plus 3 draft picks if they don't trade them away - 1 of which will be an NHL 1st rounder; 2 of which will be 1st rounders if the team in DNHL finishes 11th or worse (2nd round would be picks 21 and up, so 21-30 are still in the real NHL draft 1st round).
I think this approach would just shift more of the value to the teams that keep their draft picks and takes some value from teams that rely more on the draft keepers to fill up there minors. Honestly with only 12 player minors any player that isn't drafted in the 1st round is hard to keep around until they are much closer to the NHL. With this arrangment we are just going to spend the 1st round and half of the 2nd round of the supplemental draft picking players from the first round of the rookie draft and having less picks to use on those players that have fallen thru the cracks from the past drafts and are closer to the NHL. This will just lead to more quality players ending up in FA where they need to play 40 games before they can be signed. Pushing up the contract values they get signed for.
-
I think this approach would just shift more of the value to the teams that keep their draft picks and takes some value from teams that rely more on the draft keepers to fill up there minors. Honestly with only 12 player minors any player that isn't drafted in the 1st round is hard to keep around until they are much closer to the NHL. With this arrangment we are just going to spend the 1st round and half of the 2nd round of the supplemental draft picking players from the first round of the rookie draft and having less picks to use on those players that have fallen thru the cracks from the past drafts and are closer to the NHL. This will just lead to more quality players ending up in FA where they need to play 40 games before they can be signed. Pushing up the contract values they get signed for.
I'm not so sure on this point...
I know personally being a team that is in the hunt for a playoff position, this year in the Supp draft I passed on the NHL draft's picks 10+ in the 1st round in favour of players who were decent in the AHL and I was hoping that would make an impact in the NHL this year.... Versus waiting for that 18-year old for 2-3 years to become a fantasy asset.
Older AHL/college/junior players I took a gamble on who definitely have a lower ceiling than the 2016 NHL draftees, but who might contribute a lot sooner than those 2016 NHL draftees. (By "older" I mean 20-23 years old versus 18 years old).
To be honest it is still a strategy I would use for the next couple years while my team is competitive. I don't see a point in my stashing a player who might be in the NHL in 2-4 years putting up 1.5 fanpts per game, when I could have that same player putting up 1.4 fanpts per game this season or next for me kind of thing.
-
I'm not so sure on this point...
I know personally being a team that is in the hunt for a playoff position, this year in the Supp draft I passed on the NHL draft's picks 10+ in the 1st round in favour of players who were decent in the AHL and I was hoping that would make an impact in the NHL this year.... Versus waiting for that 18-year old for 2-3 years to become a fantasy asset.
Older AHL/college/junior players I took a gamble on who definitely have a lower ceiling than the 2016 NHL draftees, but who might contribute a lot sooner than those 2016 NHL draftees. (By "older" I mean 20-23 years old versus 18 years old).
To be honest it is still a strategy I would use for the next couple years while my team is competitive. I don't see a point in my stashing a player who might be in the NHL in 2-4 years putting up 1.5 fanpts per game, when I could have that same player putting up 1.4 fanpts per game this season or next for me kind of thing.
Some teams will draft based on where they are at in the standings. Contenders may add more immediate impact talent where rebuilding teams may prefer to add higher upside players that are farther away. Having all the first rounders available in the draft will mean that 20 players who would typically be kept as draft keepers will now be going in the draft which will push 20 other players out. You can't argue that it won't.
This will just increase the available talent in the FA pool of rookies and more players will get signed during the year after they have played 40 games.
-
Some teams will draft based on where they are at in the standings. Contenders may add more immediate impact talent where rebuilding teams may prefer to add higher upside players that are farther away. Having all the first rounders available in the draft will mean that 20 players who would typically be kept as draft keepers will now be going in the draft which will push 20 other players out. You can't argue that it won't.
This will just increase the available talent in the FA pool of rookies and more players will get signed during the year after they have played 40 games.
I don't have a problem with this, personally, as the FA pool is very thin (look at it today).
That, and people in the 3rd round of our draft are scrounging for the most part, or just taking the next available NHL draftee who is a 3rd or 4th rounder.
This is the 3rd round from this year's draft:
Round 3
1) :BUF-NHL: D Nikita Tryamkin
2) :FLO: RW Seth Griffith
3) :VAN: G Tyler Parsons
4) :TBL: G Garret Sparks
5) :FLO: RW Anton Rodin
6) :BUF-NHL: G Mantas Armalis
7) :TOR-NHL: G Wouter Peeters
8) :EDM: MISSED
9) :VAN: G Jared Coreau
10) :DET-NHL: C Jonathan Dahlen
11) :MON-NHL: G Evan Smith
12) :BOS-NHL: D Jack Dougherty
13) :BUF-NHL: G Igor Shesterkin
14) :MON-NHL: LW Kirill Kaprizov
15) :WAS-NHL: RW Tobias Lindberg
16) :VAN: C Tyler Graovac
17) :STL-NHL: D Jacob Larsson
18) :LA: C Maxim Letunov
19) :CAR-NHL: D Joe Hicketts
20) :CAR-NHL: LW Dmytro Timashov
How many of those players realistically are going to be on a fantasy roster in 2-3 years still? There's a lot of C-level fantasy talent mixed with a lot of hit or miss players with the percentage being like 5% hit, 95% miss.
Tryamkin was a nice pick, but how fantasy relevant will he be? Your Larsson is a nice prospect, but again, how fantasy relevant will he be.
He would be available to be drafted in the next Supp draft in all likelihood, but would he be? Not sure.
I took complete fliers on Griffith and Rodin. They've worked out splendidly for me so far :rool:
Given that we get 3 new prospects a year for free, I see a lot of these players being dropped off full minor league rosters as the new draftees come in.
So, again to get back to you point, these are the 20 players that would get pushed out if we were to change something with the draft. I'm not sure we would be missing a lot...
-
Let's expand our minors roster to 15. Gives teams the extra flexibility to let players mature in the minors, but isn't overkill and won't completely dry out our FA prospect pool.
-
Maybe we don't have to have a real one, as I'm not a fan of making teams acquire players they don't want. They could just sign any random free agent to a one year deal to get them to the cap floor. That doesn't add anything to the league. The NHL has the salary floor set to 16m below the cap. Maybe we could just use that 16m for equation purposes and make that the largest free cap allowed when figuring it out. Wonder where that would set our cap for next year???
That is a great idea. I'll do the math tomorrow.
-
One thing that I just recently thought of is that our extension values in this league are based off of real life contract values. The Real NHL contract values are set up based on a 30 team league (soon to be 31 teams) each spending up to there cap of 73 million. This would come out to a pool of 2.19 Billion dollars as the maximum that can be spent on players (jumping to 2.263 Billion dollars when Vegas is in the league). Our league currently has 20 teams with a cap space of 79.3m per team. This equates to a 1.586 Billion dollar total salary pool.
I know that it isn't a fair comparison since we have prospect contracts and prospect extensions which keep some salaries down in our league as well as Defenseman contracts being decreased to 66% of actual contract values. I think it is still important to note that these extension values are being set my a league that has a lot larger pool of money to spend. I think that this may have the effect of inflating the extension values of the best players. I think that over time as more teams re-sign there players and don't let them go to FA that more and more cap space will be used up and it will become more and more valuable in our league. I know that the past couple of years teams are having a harder and harder time of resigning all there FA's.
I'm just catching up here since it appears I missed a few posts, so I'll respond in order...
When we started the salary cap was set to $70m. The NHL salary cap at the time was $59.4m. From there our settings have been updated relative to the league, including cap and extension costs. Based on your numbers, with 20 teams we should be around $1.46 Billion in total cap space, if we're staying relative. If we're at $1.586 Billion in total salary pool that means we're over by $126M, which is $6.3M per team.
Our starting point was +$10.6M over the league average and we're now at $6.3M over. The measures we've taken have so far brought us closer to reality.
However, we have 30 player rosters. An NHL team has 23. So our average should sit slightly above the league average, I think, even with the decreased D cost and affordable prospect structure.
In the end, we're in the ballpark here. And I think the cap equation will keep us there, especially if we include Corey's suggestion (which I haven't done the math on yet - I'll have that later).
-
Also when doing these numbers it's important to compare our current season numbers to the NHL's prior season. As we're basically always 1 year behind. So the total payroll numbers are a little off, but still workable.
-
Honestly with only 12 player minors any player that isn't drafted in the 1st round is hard to keep around until they are much closer to the NHL.
Exactly. I rarely keep anyone other than 1st rounders. I feel that I can get better players in the Supplemental than whoever the Bruins draft after the first round (though I could just be a victim of circumstance...). It would be different if we had larger Minors rosters, but I feel the smaller roster size adds more benefit to the league in the end.
-
I'm not so sure on this point...
I know personally being a team that is in the hunt for a playoff position, this year in the Supp draft I passed on the NHL draft's picks 10+ in the 1st round in favour of players who were decent in the AHL and I was hoping that would make an impact in the NHL this year.... Versus waiting for that 18-year old for 2-3 years to become a fantasy asset.
Older AHL/college/junior players I took a gamble on who definitely have a lower ceiling than the 2016 NHL draftees, but who might contribute a lot sooner than those 2016 NHL draftees. (By "older" I mean 20-23 years old versus 18 years old).
To be honest it is still a strategy I would use for the next couple years while my team is competitive. I don't see a point in my stashing a player who might be in the NHL in 2-4 years putting up 1.5 fanpts per game, when I could have that same player putting up 1.4 fanpts per game this season or next for me kind of thing.
I think you're making Shooter's point.
-
I don't have a problem with this, personally, as the FA pool is very thin (look at it today).
That, and people in the 3rd round of our draft are scrounging for the most part, or just taking the next available NHL draftee who is a 3rd or 4th rounder.
This is the 3rd round from this year's draft:
Round 3
1) :BUF-NHL: D Nikita Tryamkin
2) :FLO: RW Seth Griffith
3) :VAN: G Tyler Parsons
4) :TBL: G Garret Sparks
5) :FLO: RW Anton Rodin
6) :BUF-NHL: G Mantas Armalis
7) :TOR-NHL: G Wouter Peeters
8) :EDM: MISSED
9) :VAN: G Jared Coreau
10) :DET-NHL: C Jonathan Dahlen
11) :MON-NHL: G Evan Smith
12) :BOS-NHL: D Jack Dougherty
13) :BUF-NHL: G Igor Shesterkin
14) :MON-NHL: LW Kirill Kaprizov
15) :WAS-NHL: RW Tobias Lindberg
16) :VAN: C Tyler Graovac
17) :STL-NHL: D Jacob Larsson
18) :LA: C Maxim Letunov
19) :CAR-NHL: D Joe Hicketts
20) :CAR-NHL: LW Dmytro Timashov
How many of those players realistically are going to be on a fantasy roster in 2-3 years still? There's a lot of C-level fantasy talent mixed with a lot of hit or miss players with the percentage being like 5% hit, 95% miss.
Tryamkin was a nice pick, but how fantasy relevant will he be? Your Larsson is a nice prospect, but again, how fantasy relevant will he be.
He would be available to be drafted in the next Supp draft in all likelihood, but would he be? Not sure.
I took complete fliers on Griffith and Rodin. They've worked out splendidly for me so far :rool:
Given that we get 3 new prospects a year for free, I see a lot of these players being dropped off full minor league rosters as the new draftees come in.
So, again to get back to you point, these are the 20 players that would get pushed out if we were to change something with the draft. I'm not sure we would be missing a lot...
2016 is hard to judge, but I think we can start to judge 2013 pretty well.
Round 3
1) :PIT-NHL: PASSED
2) :CLG: C Rocco Grimaldi
3) :EDM: RW Mark Stone
4) :BOS-NHL: D Matt Bartkowski
5) :ANA: G Reto Berra
6) :BUF-NHL: SKIPPED
7) :WAS-NHL: C Jacob de la Rose
8) :ANA: G Sami Aittokallio
9) :EDM: G Philippe Desrosiers
10) :COL-NHL: RW Matej Stransky
11) :ANA: D Frank Corrado
12) :LA: LW Anthony Camara
13) :LA: RW Josh Nichols
14) :TOR-NHL: G Jaroslav Janus
15) :DET-NHL: LW Matt Puempel
16) :STL-NHL: C Johan Larsson
17) :STL-NHL: G Connor Hellebuyck
18) :EDM: D Shea Theodore
19) :STL-NHL: G Juuse Saros
20) :CAR-NHL: LW Pat Maroon
Now just look at those late St Louis picks and you'll probably understand Bob's perspective... hahaha
-
I don't have a problem with this, personally, as the FA pool is very thin (look at it today).
That, and people in the 3rd round of our draft are scrounging for the most part, or just taking the next available NHL draftee who is a 3rd or 4th rounder.
This is the 3rd round from this year's draft:
Round 3
1) :BUF-NHL: D Nikita Tryamkin
2) :FLO: RW Seth Griffith
3) :VAN: G Tyler Parsons
4) :TBL: G Garret Sparks
5) :FLO: RW Anton Rodin
6) :BUF-NHL: G Mantas Armalis
7) :TOR-NHL: G Wouter Peeters
8) :EDM: MISSED
9) :VAN: G Jared Coreau
10) :DET-NHL: C Jonathan Dahlen
11) :MON-NHL: G Evan Smith
12) :BOS-NHL: D Jack Dougherty
13) :BUF-NHL: G Igor Shesterkin
14) :MON-NHL: LW Kirill Kaprizov
15) :WAS-NHL: RW Tobias Lindberg
16) :VAN: C Tyler Graovac
17) :STL-NHL: D Jacob Larsson
18) :LA: C Maxim Letunov
19) :CAR-NHL: D Joe Hicketts
20) :CAR-NHL: LW Dmytro Timashov
How many of those players realistically are going to be on a fantasy roster in 2-3 years still? There's a lot of C-level fantasy talent mixed with a lot of hit or miss players with the percentage being like 5% hit, 95% miss.
Tryamkin was a nice pick, but how fantasy relevant will he be? Your Larsson is a nice prospect, but again, how fantasy relevant will he be.
He would be available to be drafted in the next Supp draft in all likelihood, but would he be? Not sure.
I took complete fliers on Griffith and Rodin. They've worked out splendidly for me so far :rool:
Given that we get 3 new prospects a year for free, I see a lot of these players being dropped off full minor league rosters as the new draftees come in.
So, again to get back to you point, these are the 20 players that would get pushed out if we were to change something with the draft. I'm not sure we would be missing a lot...
There were only 2 players selected in the 3rd round of our supplemental draft this year that were picked from this years draft rookies. That would be Tyler Parsons (2nd round goalie) and Wouter Peeters (3rd Round Goalie). So your statement that people are just picking the next 3rd or 4th round draftee is completely inaccurate.
Its a little early to judge the 3rd round from this years draft isn't it? We do have drafts from 2 and 3 years ago that we can look at though to see how many players picked in this round will still be on rosters.
2013 Supplemental Draft:
Round 3
1) :PIT-NHL: PASSED
2) :CLG: C Rocco Grimaldi Calgary Dropped Grimaldi, He was selected again in the 2014 draft by St. Louis and eventually dropped.
3) :EDM: RW Mark Stone Still with Edmonton and ranked as the 32nd best RW
4) :BOS-NHL: D Matt Bartkowski Currently an FA
5) :ANA: G Reto Berra Currently on Anaheims Roster
6) :BUF-NHL: SKIPPED
7) :WAS-NHL: C Jacob de la Rose Currently an FA
8) :ANA: G Sami Aittokallio Currently an FA
9) :EDM: G Philippe Desrosiers Currently in Edmonton's Minors
10) :COL-NHL: RW Matej Stransky Currently an FA
11) :ANA: D Frank Corrado Currently In Anaheim Minors
12) :LA: LW Anthony Camara Currently an FA
13) :LA: RW Josh Nichols Currently an FA
14) :TOR-NHL: G Jaroslav Janus Currently an FA
15) :DET-NHL: LW Matt Puempel Currently on Anaheims Roster
16) :STL-NHL: C Johan Larsson Currently on Buffalo's Roster
17) :STL-NHL: G Connor Hellebuyck Currently on St. Louis Roster
18) :EDM: D Shea Theodore Currently Edmonton's Roster
19) :STL-NHL: G Juuse Saros Currently on St. Louis Roster 15th Ranked Goalie
20) :CAR-NHL: LW Pat Maroon Currently on Carolina Roster as 19th Ranked LW
10/18 are still on a teams roster after 3 years. This was actually a pretty good third round in the first supplemental draft and has produced a couple of good wingers and a starting NHL Goalie. There are still a couple of highly regarded prospects as well that could make this look even better in the future.
2014 Supplemental Draft:
Round 3
1) :COL-NHL: LW Nicolas Deslauriers Currently on Vancouver's roster
2) :CLG: PASS
3) :BUF-NHL: LW Adam Lowry Currently on Arizona's Roster
4) :DET-NHL: RW Oliver Bjorkstrand Currently on Detroit's Roster
5) :STL-NHL: C Rocco Grimaldi Currently an FA
6) :PIT-NHL: C Joakim Nordstrom Currently an FA
7) :PHO: G Brandon Halverson Currently in Arizona's Minors
8) :MON-NHL: C Victor Rask Currently on Toronto's Roster
9) :TOR-NHL: PASS
10) :PHO: from G Brent Moran Currently on Philadelphia's Minors
11) :WAS-NHL: D Christian Folin Currently on Carolina's Roster
12) :EDM: G Ville Husso Currently in Edmonton's Minors
13) :CHI-NHL: PASS
14) :DET-NHL: F Pavel Buchnevich Currently on Detroit's Roster
15) :COL-NHL: C Ryan Spooner Currently on Colorado's Roster
16) :DET-NHL: D Alexey Marchenko Currently on Arizona's Roster
17) :CAR-NHL: LW Vladislav Kamenev Currently in Carolina's Minors
18) :COL-NHL: LW Kenny Agostino Currently in Colorado's Minors
19) :STL-NHL: D Mike Matheson Currently on St. Louis Roster
20) :DET-NHL: D Alex Petrovic Currently on Detroit's Roster
15/17 are still on a roster after 2 years. This years 3rd round doesn't have as much star power as the 2013 3rd round but there are some solid young players across the board. In a year from now some of these players might advance to the same level as Stone and Maroon...
So, again to get back to you point, these are the 20 players that would get pushed out if we were to change something with the draft. I'm not sure we would be missing a lot...
I really disagree with this. This will decrease the amount of prospects that teams are acquiring on cheap prospect contracts which really helps all the teams in our league. I prefer to keep younger players being acquired thru the supplemental draft and draft keepers instead of thru FA.
-
Let's expand our minors roster to 15. Gives teams the extra flexibility to let players mature in the minors, but isn't overkill and won't completely dry out our FA prospect pool.
We just did that! I was against going to 12 out of fear of thinning the draft pool. But I was outvoted then. So we may as well add it to the agenda, lol.
1) Potential changes to Keeper structure
2) Adjustments to cap equation
3) Minor league roster size
4) I think there was something else...
-
Any easy solution, if we were to protect 1st rounders, is to add a round in the Supplemental.
-
To Shooter's Point:
I see where you're coming from, I just think that increasing the quality of the players for our supp draft pool would be a good thing, or at least we GM's will have a much better idea of if those prospects have a legitimate shot at the NHL soon - that 2013 and 2014 draft, did we really know if those kids were going to develop into solid NHL prospects? Let alone have any impact in fantasy scoring.
Here's the thing though, the way the last round of supp draft benefits GM's is if they really do homework and scour the internet sites that list the prospects. I mean, it's not that hard to find some lists of prospects 300 players long, it's taking the time to go through and see who's been drafted already in our league and who hasn't.
Not everyone has the time to do that - so it is the dedicated GM's (like yourself Shooter), that benefit the most. The guys that are in here for the fun of it and maybe don't take it as serious couldn't be bothered as much.
Again, I do see where you're coming from, and I like having 3rd rounders myself, to take fliers on players that are hit or miss (ie. Anton Rodin).
I just think it would be good to increase the quality of players in the supp draft a little bit more, making draft picks a little more valuable as trade chips.
And as mentioned, ensuring everyone has a chance to acquire an NHL 1st rounder in the supp draft (unless they trade their 1st rounder away)... and also ensuring people can choose that 1st rounder and not be stuck with a great hockey prospect, but bad fantasy prospect - such as a Dman who projects as a shut-down D with no offensive upside at the top level.
To Rob's suggestion:
I think this would be a logical suggestion. I could see some teams skipping the 4th round picks as well here if they've already kept 3 draftees, and then drafted 3 more in the first 3 rounds, so I don't know if it would be a huge deal to do this. I'd be for it.
-
To Rob's suggestion:
I think this would be a logical suggestion. I could see some teams skipping the 4th round picks as well here if they've already kept 3 draftees, and then drafted 3 more in the first 3 rounds, so I don't know if it would be a huge deal to do this. I'd be for it.
I can't see too many teams keeping all 3 if 1st rounders aren't available to keep. IMO there's better options even in that last Supp round.
-
To Rob's suggestion:
I think this would be a logical suggestion. I could see some teams skipping the 4th round picks as well here if they've already kept 3 draftees, and then drafted 3 more in the first 3 rounds, so I don't know if it would be a huge deal to do this. I'd be for it.
You can potentially look at giving GM's the option of taking a 3rd keeper from their NHL team or a 4th round pick. The pick can be untradable to keep things from getting messy. This way we are still only adding 6 prospects.
-
Or just make it 2 keepers from each NHL team and add the 4th round
-
I can't see too many teams keeping all 3 if 1st rounders aren't available to keep. IMO there's better options even in that last Supp round.
That's very true.
Myself I'd probably only keep the 2nd rounder given how my minors always seems to be full anyways.
This suggestion wasn't so much about the Supp Draft I think, as it was to help the bottom teams gain a better prospect if they keep their 1st Round Picks.
I mean, it comes down to the Supp Draft with our suggestions, but helping the lower teams have an "easier" time to rebuild by adding a top-valued prospect was the main goal.
-
That's very true.
Myself I'd probably only keep the 2nd rounder given how my minors always seems to be full anyways.
This suggestion wasn't so much about the Supp Draft I think, as it was to help the bottom teams gain a better prospect if they keep their 1st Round Picks.
I mean, it comes down to the Supp Draft with our suggestions, but helping the lower teams have an "easier" time to rebuild by adding a top-valued prospect was the main goal.
I agree with rob that most teams would keep their 2nd round pick and that is all (Unless they don't have a full minors, don't have any supplemental picks or their team took a goalie in the 3rd-5th round).
I'm not against having the 1st rounders unprotected and available in the draft. I would just like to see a 4th round added to the draft in this case so that the same number of new prospects can be acquired each year by teams. I think this would be a better way to spread out the talent in the draft to the teams that really need and also still allow teams to acquire the same amount of prospects.
These are the changes that I would personally like to see.
1. Change it so teams can keep up to 2 players from their teams actual rookie draft (except 1st rounders) instead of the current 3.
2. 1st Round players are unproctected and need to be selected in the supplemental draft
3. Add a 4th round to the supplemental draft.
4. Draft lottery used to select the pick order of 1st-5th picks in the draft to prevent tanking and add some more excitement to the draft
5. Increase minor league roster size to 15 to allow more time for prospects to develop
-
These are the changes that I would personally like to see.
1. Change it so teams can keep up to 2 players from their teams actual rookie draft (except 1st rounders) instead of the current 3.
2. 1st Round players are unproctected and need to be selected in the supplemental draft
3. Add a 4th round to the supplemental draft.
4. Draft lottery used to select the pick order of 1st-5th picks in the draft to prevent tanking and add some more excitement to the draft
5. Increase minor league roster size to 15 to allow more time for prospects to develop
I would be 100% on board with all 5 of these suggestions.
Although I already know Rob hates #5...haha
-
I agree with rob that most teams would keep their 2nd round pick and that is all (Unless they don't have a full minors, don't have any supplemental picks or their team took a goalie in the 3rd-5th round).
I'm not against having the 1st rounders unprotected and available in the draft. I would just like to see a 4th round added to the draft in this case so that the same number of new prospects can be acquired each year by teams. I think this would be a better way to spread out the talent in the draft to the teams that really need and also still allow teams to acquire the same amount of prospects.
These are the changes that I would personally like to see.
1. Change it so teams can keep up to 2 players from their teams actual rookie draft (except 1st rounders) instead of the current 3.
2. 1st Round players are unprotected and need to be selected in the supplemental draft
3. Add a 4th round to the supplemental draft.
4. Draft lottery used to select the pick order of 1st-5th picks in the draft to prevent tanking and add some more excitement to the draft
5. Increase minor league roster size to 15 to allow more time for prospects to develop
How do we fairly and transparently implement a draft lottery?
I'm on board with all of them, I just want to hear thoughts on the above.
-
How do we fairly and transparently implement a draft lottery?
I'm on board with all of them, I just want to hear thoughts on the above.
There are alot of online simulators that would pick the order randomly. Someone could always record this process so that teams could verify it was done correctly and post the video somewhere.
-
The lottery could even be extended for all 10 teams that don't make the playoffs but weighted heavily to the last place teams. Could do it similar to the NHL where one team moves up or the NBA where the top 3 are decided and then the rest are in order of the standings...lots of ways to format it.
-
I would be 100% on board with all 5 of these suggestions.
Although I already know Rob hates #5...haha
I'm against changing any of this! lol
-
How do we fairly and transparently implement a draft lottery?
I'm on board with all of them, I just want to hear thoughts on the above.
This is easy, there's website out there that will do it all on their side and email the results to everyone at the same time. That's totally do-able.
-
The first question is whether to change at all. The next question, if the answer is yes to change, is how. And if the answer is yes, I like Shooter's proposal. But I'm going to let this topic simmer for a while before I start polling everyone.
-
I think some opinions from GMs of teams that are currently rebuilding should be heard. Do they feel shorted by our current drafting structure? Personally, I think we'd benefit from all the changes Shooter made, but they are big changes.
-
I would be 100% on board with all 5 of these suggestions.
Although I already know Rob hates #5...haha
Me too. That is, on board with 5 suggestions.
-
I am with Rob, so far I am not convinced there is a need to change anything. I like the current setup because I have always been against rewarding people for losing.
i think Cally said something about making the draft easier for casual players/gms,,, baloney this is a dynasty league if someone wants casual easy they should probably go join a yearly pool.
If the whole discussion is really about finding a way for low totem pole teams to rebuild quicker, we should look at ways to infuse more talent going into FA. I still say FA is where seasons should be made and lost.
-
I am with Rob, so far I am not convinced there is a need to change anything. I like the current setup because I have always been against rewarding people for losing.
i think Cally said something about making the draft easier for casual players/gms,,, baloney this is a dynasty league if someone wants casual easy they should probably go join a yearly pool.
If the whole discussion is really about finding a way for low totem pole teams to rebuild quicker, we should look at ways to infuse more talent going into FA. I still say FA is where seasons should be made and lost.
:iatp:
Although, you're not going to like my cap post as it relates to infusing more talent in FA...
-
On the subject of excluding 1st rounders - I would exclude each teams 1st pick as some might have multiple picks and teams like Chicago never have a 1st rounder to give up.
But overall I am happy with the current setup.
-
I like it the way it is. I don't think we need any changes.
-
I ike the actual way of drafting so I will vote for no change. I think we will need a poll to clarify the situation since everybody has a different opinion
-
I ike the actual way of drafting so I will vote for no change. I think we will need a poll to clarify the situation since everybody has a different opinion
Probably. I usually like to splatter thoughts against the wall before I move to a poll, but this thread is getting crazy long. I'll do it sooner rather than later.
-
I love this league because it is different than a typical league. It's adds a much different aspect to how we draft and how we build our teams. I like having "homegrown" talent on my own team and that was my exact thought when I started in this league with my Avs.
-
Per Rob's request for comments ...
If it were up to me I would let teams have dibs on only *one* of the real life team's draft picks and let all the others fall into the supplemental draft.
That preserves some of the connection to the real life team (for those of you that own the team you root for), but let's a little more talent available in our draft.
I'd also like to see our minors roster bumped up to 15 from 12.
-
one way to increase the number of players in FA is to reduce the major roster size to 23 or 25, then you can increase the minor roster size to say like 20.
-
one way to increase the number of players in FA is to reduce the major roster size to 23 or 25, then you can increase the minor roster size to say like 20.
That would be a big change...especially depending on how teams are built now. Some like philly build on star power others like myself build on depth.
I would be a huge negator on that idea.
-
This has always been a depth league. That idea would change the entire philosophy.
-
Imagine how excited papps would be? He'd be a lock for the finals. I bet if we put a poll up for that he would create 30 new ProFSL accounts to vote fraudulently for the change.
-
I'm against decreasing majors roster size. This is a depth league.
-
Imagine how excited papps would be? He'd be a lock for the finals. I bet if we put a poll up for that he would create 30 new ProFSL accounts to vote fraudulently for the change.
LOL!!! :thumbsup:
-
This has always been a depth league. That idea would change the entire philosophy.
that also then should apply to changing the draft. the way we are tied to the real life teams is part of what this league is all about. it would be a major philosophy change if we change that so we should be sure that any changes that are made is for the good for the health of the league and not just the most vocal owners. if we are going to concider changes because its not like real life then we need change all the things that are not like real life.
IMO this league is running fine and we dont need to make any major changes.
-
IMO this league is running fine and we dont need to make any major changes.
:iatp: Nothing is broke, so why mess with a good thing?