Dear Dynasty

[SlackJack]

Is the playing field level enough and/or is there enough incentive to win? Would love to hear what others have to say. Think this could be a fairly wide ranging convo. Why I ask is that it generally seems that there are only a couple of real contenders each year and even those teams tend to prioritize the future over the present.

For me this is highlighted by John Carlson being made available for picks and prospects by a team ranked 3rd over-all in the standings. Not being critical of the GM and I get that Carlson is on an expiring contract, but really?

I also understand that there is a trend in the real NHL towards youth. Real GM's are increasingly reluctant to part with picks etc. Eliot Friedman's latest 31 thoughts comes to mind. But still.

I'd rather see a powerhouse like Winnipeg go for all the marbles and keep Carlson as an own-rental. The same with Pittsburgh. Sure losing Guentzal is tough but is there not enough parity in the league to still try and compete? Is there not enough incentive or are the two front-runners so clearly ahead that it isn't realistic to try?

The issue runs deep in keeper leagues. GM's love the potential of youth and I am no exception, but that can't be the greater motivation in building a team. There should be more desire to win.

[shooter47]

I don't see any issues with Winnipeg putting Carlson on the block. If Carlson keeps up his current pace and plays in 82 games he is going to have an $8.6m resign next year (could be higher when blocked shots are factored in). Winnipeg put Eric Staal on the block last year (when he was going to have a high resign) but didn't end up trading him even though he was his 5th best center on his team. If he can get more long term value for Carlson by trading him I think its the prudent thing for him to do knowing there is a chance he will lose him this next offseason for nothing. This is how teams get to the top and stay there. They think ahead and see these issues before they happen and maximize long term value.

I do the same thing myself. Its why I traded Nino Niederreiter when I did. His future resign value didn't fit in to my teams plans and instead of losing him for nothing or trading him when I had less leverage I moved him before the season started.

http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=332967.msg1343183#msg1343183

[SlackJack]

I don't see any issues with Winnipeg putting Carlson on the block. If Carlson keeps up his current pace and plays in 82 games he is going to have an $8.6m resign next year (could be higher when blocked shots are factored in). Winnipeg put Eric Staal on the block last year (when he was going to have a high resign) but didn't end up trading him even though he was his 5th best center on his team. If he can get more long term value for Carlson by trading him I think its the prudent thing for him to do knowing there is a chance he will lose him this next offseason for nothing. This is how teams get to the top and stay there. They think ahead and see these issues before they happen and maximize long term value.

I do the same thing myself. Its why I traded Nino Niederreiter when I did. His future resign value didn't fit in to my teams plans and instead of losing him for nothing or trading him when I had less leverage I moved him before the season started.

http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=332967.msg1343183#msg1343183

Sidestepping my point here Shooter. I already conceded that Carlson was on an expiring contract and all that comes with that. My question to you is do you honestly feel you have enough competition at the top? Is the playing field level enough from your lofty perspective?

[WestCoastExpress]

I'm 100% guilty of this. I'm more content to be a good team and "have a chance" each year rather than throw all the marbles on the table for 1-year but lose my good prospects.

I started changing that thinking this year a bit, but nothing has come up so far trade-wise that makes sense.
I'd rather be trading a Turcotte, Kupari or Boqvist for a player who has at least 2 years left, not expiring this year and due for a huge pay-day.

The one team that I do think is all-in all the time is Philly. Hats off to Pappy for just going for it year after year.
But the problem comes up like his team is that keeping all of those star players he traded for, their re-signs are super high.
Philly's got what, 5 C's (some have W elig. though) taking up literally half of his cap space (Crsoby, Malkin, Stamkos, Kopitar, Pavelski = $44.7m).

Part of the reason I parted with Ryan Johansen with a couple years left on his rookie contract - didn't want to pay money on him.
I also though John Carlson was just an average D-man even with top PP minutes with OV following 2 years of under 40-points, and sold him off for pennies on the dollar to get rid of that $4.3m cap hit. Oops....


To Slack's point a bit... I think it's tough for there to be a lot of competitiveness when there are always 2-5 teams in total tank mode and don't care about anything other than prospects and picks, and will win FA's and pay their contracts to the highest bidders. Top teams are usually good because they draft well (and also get lucky their parent club either sucks and gets high picks or drafts well in real life).

I also think that this is a more laid back, free salary fantasy league so we aren't all hardo's for fantasy hockey. Even for me, I've taken a step back the past year and a half and mostly just show up in the off-season for things, and then set my lines during the season. So there's that. Seems a lot of guys are like that even more so. Off-season to set up their roster and then just let things play out.

[shooter47]

Sidestepping my point here Shooter. I already conceded that Carlson was on an expiring contract and all that comes with that. My question to you is do you honestly feel you have enough competition at the top? Is the playing field level enough from your lofty perspective?

Lets look back at the 2017-2018 season. I finished the regular season in 2nd and faced Anaheim in the 2nd round (top 8) of the playoffs as the 2 seed vs. 7 seed. Looking back at the regular season I had outscored Anaheim by 1000+ points (4326.75 to 3308.05). I had outscored the 2nd highest scoring team that year (Winnipeg) by 500 points that season. And when I talk points here I'm talking the season stats and not the standings page which would show these as twice as big since we play two matchups each week.

If you do the math I had been outscoring Anaheim by 45 points a week for the entire year and they still pulled the upset. Its the playoffs and anything can happen in a one week matchup. So yes I think any of the teams that make the playoffs can win the whole league on any year. That year Colorado made a run from the 5 spot and won the whole thing. So when Detroit and Pittsburgh say they don't think they can compete this year I don't really agree. All it takes is your team to get hot at the right time and you can win the league.

[SlackJack]

Interesting points guys. Basically make the playoffs and anything can happen but no point going for broke.

I wonder if there were greater incentive to win how much that would change. Obviously good GM's will always manage their assets but we'd see more deals for rental players if there was a prize or purse. Not really wanting to open the money-league debate but yeah if there's a way to stimulate competition I'd be in favour.

Prize idea's that don't give undue advantage to the winner?

[WestCoastExpress]

Interesting points guys. Basically make the playoffs and anything can happen

Its the playoffs and anything can happen in a one week matchup... All it takes is your team to get hot at the right time and you can win the league.

This has really always been the case for me.
More than ones I've finished 1st by a landslide in leagues only to lose in the 1st round of playoffs (2nd round since 1st week is generally a bye for top-2 teams in leagues I'm in).
It's weeks like those when guys come out of the wood-work and put up an 8-point week and you're like "where in the hell did this guy come from?" Some 3rd liner puts up 8 points this week to bring his season total to 25, in 69 games... or something along those lines. (Look a N.Accari on real life FLA ... Anyone thing he keeps that pace up the rest of the season on 45% shooting %? Unlinkely...)

Other times I've finished on the playoff bubble and won the darn thing, with no expectations to even win a round. When all the "middle-of-the-pack" players end up putting up a point per game all at once when they've been going at like 0.6 ppg all season.

In a league like this all it takes is a few good weeks for your goal-scorers to put up big stats and goalies not to get totally shelled, and you can beat any team. Take a week such as this one. Pastrnak is out there doing his thing like he has all season, but had a hat-trick last night and Kucherov finally woke up and is scoring goals now too. On the flip side all it takes is an injury or two to guys such as those and my playoff-week would be ruined. Never know what can happen in a 1-week match-up!

As for prizes, not sure on that. I don't really like the "win and you get a % off a re-sign" or something like that. Just helps the "good" teams that much more.

[GypsieDeathBringer]

I think there is more competition this year than in many years.  Especially when the Ducks had a monster 3 season run and were basically unbeatable. 

I mainly put players on the trading block just to drum up some hockey talk not really because I don't think my team has a chance to win.  Any team that makes the playoffs has a chance.

When Colorado won I think their highest scoring player those 2 finals weeks was Kevin Connauton.  You never know what will happen.

All in all I think this past offseason, with the incredible number of trades has shown this league has a great number of active GMs doing what they think can produce a winner.  Some push the chips all in and some are playing the percentages.   

I had a fancy champagne ice bucket that with a base would look like a righteous trophy.  Trophy's are always the best prize for lording over people.

[SlackJack]

I think there is more competition this year than in many years.  Especially when the Ducks had a monster 3 season run and were basically unbeatable. 

I mainly put players on the trading block just to drum up some hockey talk not really because I don't think my team has a chance to win.  Any team that makes the playoffs has a chance.

When Colorado won I think their highest scoring player those 2 finals weeks was Kevin Connauton.  You never know what will happen.

All in all I think this past offseason, with the incredible number of trades has shown this league has a great number of active GMs doing what they think can produce a winner.  Some push the chips all in and some are playing the percentages.   

I had a fancy champagne ice bucket that with a base would look like a righteous trophy.  Trophy's are always the best prize for lording over people.

I like the idea of a desktop sized trophy. Something small and easy to ship with an engraving that says something like "Reigning Dynasty NHL Champion". Previous champ responsible to ship top the new. 

[shooter47]

I like the idea of a desktop sized trophy. Something small and easy to ship with an engraving that says something like "Reigning Dynasty NHL Champion". Previous champ responsible to ship top the new.

I had thought about getting a beer mug and having all the past winners engraved on it and then you could ship that to the next champion. A trophy would work as well.