ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => NHL Leagues => Franchise NHL => Topic started by: Daddy on October 14, 2017, 03:23:33 PM
-
FNHL proclaims to follow the NHL model as close as possible to provide the most realistic fantasy experience as a full 31 team league.
In my opinion it picks and chooses what aspects are true to life. For example we allow scoring from minor league players to count when those players are not under contract to the team or any contract at all.
That's just one aspect.
Currently a team with 30 active players on the NHL roster can sign a FA (or even more than one) to an NHL contract and then would have 24 hours to post a corresponding move(s) to get back to the 30 player limit. However this is not allowed to occur via trade only FA.
Proposal #2
Being able to trade players that put you above the 30 player max and having 24 hours to post a corresponding move(s) to get to the 30 player limit
Why this is allowed to occur only via FA is baffling. Allowing 24 hours to be roster compliant would seem to make more sense if it were across the board transactions (FA, draft, trade) or simply not allowed at all.
In the current format a team with 28 players on the active roster cannot make a 1 for 4 trade but what if a team wants to cash in a superstar talent for depth across multiple positions. I.E. trade a Goalie and get a C/LW/RW & D in return under this roster size scenario?
-
:veto:
It chooses which elements from real life BECAUSE THIS IS A FANTASY LEAGUE
Do you want to add waivers, 2 way contracts, RFA, etc. No, that is not feasible in a fantasy league or at least not worth the time.
Maybe we should drop to 23 man roster and add 3 rounds to draft with your insistence on following the NHL.
-
:veto:
It chooses which elements from real life BECAUSE THIS IS A FANTASY LEAGUE
Do you want to add waivers, 2 way contracts, RFA, etc. No, that is not feasible in a fantasy league or at least not worth the time.
Maybe we should drop to 23 man roster and add 3 rounds to draft with your insistence on following the NHL.
haha don't offer up a draft extension, I would be all in on that one. however it would create too much change with the milr at 30 players would have to double it almost. We good
-
The FNHL setup is not trying to mirror the real thing. We simply want the best parts that work in a fantasy setting where every transaction is manually processed. FNHL is trying to be a challenging deep 31 team cap league with pro ownership and ppl who want to throw their hky knowledge out there.
This proposal implies 2 adults cant work together while understanding how basic rules work thus leading to an agreement to push the 1 of the 2 teams over a set limit that just about everyone else can adhere to.
It is a way to create order in a fantaay environment. A line was drawn that made sense... not necessarily meant to be
perfect but functional.
-
I agree that teams should get 24 hrs after a trade is posted to get their rosters compliant. NHL teams make trades all the time that put them over the roster limit but you will always see a corresponding move (like putting a guy on waivers) to comply with league rules. Don't know why it should be any different here sense it doesn't really put any undo burden on anyone to change it.
Anyway just my thought on it and that's the last you'll hear from me on it.
-
I agree that teams should get 24 hrs after a trade is posted to get their rosters compliant. NHL teams make trades all the time that put them over the roster limit but you will always see a corresponding move (like putting a guy on waivers) to comply with league rules. Don't know why it should be any different here sense it doesn't really put any undo burden on anyone to change it.
Anyway just my thought on it and that's the last you'll hear from me on it.
Thank you for weighing in on this topic with an honest opinion.
It should be okay to express thoughts without it being controversial. Agree or not, whats wrong with talking? Thanks Halo. :toast:
-
But as you said, isnt your question biased Daddy?
Why not propose we stop allowing 24hr grace period for FA signings when they impact roster count?
As I stated, sometimes we need to draw a line in the sand so everyone knows where it is.
-
But as you said, isnt your question biased Daddy?
Why not propose we stop allowing 24hr grace period for FA signings when they impact roster count?
As I stated, sometimes we need to draw a line in the sand so everyone knows where it is.
Honestly because I feel it should be allowed. Real NHL team's do it and in our league you would need to release a player then bid a FA and not know for sure you were going to get him.
Nothing wrong with having a 24 hour window to make corresponding moves imo.
Real team's do it and every fantasy league ive ever been a part of does it. I will take it a step further even because say your is at 30 players, i feel you should be allowed to make say a 4 for 1 trade and release 3 players within 24 hours. What's wrong with that?
I don't understand the need to draw a line here and restrict the ability to be a GM and be creative.
-
I agree with Daddy on this issue> Free agency and not trades? Both should have a 24 hour limit to fix your roster.
-
I agree with Daddy on this issue> Free agency and not trades? Both should have a 24 hour limit to fix your roster.
Again thank you JoJo, I think open discussion is good.
Let me give this example for people who see talking as a word ryming with itching.
The :TBL: have 30 players on the active roster. Under the current setup :TBL: couldn't trade a Stamkos in a 5 player deal for just him and get back 4 players that can upgrade other positions essentially cashing in a superstar for multiple gap fillers.
Why? Because they are GM enough to have a full roster and maximize point potential. Does that make sense?
There are multiple players on every team that have some color flag on the active roster, a 4 for 1 would allow replacing 3 of them with serviceable players.
Add to that fact that teams are allowed to exceed 30 for a FA signing, and it just makes sense to vote on updating what seems like an archaic rule to begin with.
What's the big deal, are people discouraged from even discussing rule improvements except the ones posed by mods?
-
Again thank you JoJo, I think open discussion is good.
Let me give this example for people who see talking as a word ryming with itching.
The :TBL: have 30 players on the active roster. Under the current setup :TBL: couldn't trade a Stamkos in a 5 player deal for just him and get back 4 players that can upgrade other positions essentially cashing in a superstar for multiple gap fillers.
Why? Because they are GM enough to have a full roster and maximize point potential. Does that make sense?
There are multiple players on every team that have some color flag on the active roster, a 4 for 1 would allow replacing 3 of them with serviceable players.
Add to that fact that teams are allowed to exceed 30 for a FA signing, and it just makes sense to vote on updating what seems like an archaic rule to begin with.
What's the big deal, are people discouraged from even discussing rule improvements except the ones posed by mods?
Quoting your dad to prove a point. That is pretty deep.
-
Quoting your dad to prove a point. That is pretty deep.
Thanking JoJo and Halo for chiming in, along with PR for having mature dialect. You should try it. Having something to add to discussion is how progress is made or at the very least all sides are understood.
You just seem to want to badger, but some people are weighing in with actual opinion, which was the purpose.
Kinda tired of immature BS.
-
Again thank you JoJo, I think open discussion is good.
Let me give this example for people who see talking as a word ryming with itching.
The :TBL: have 30 players on the active roster. Under the current setup :TBL: couldn't trade a Stamkos in a 5 player deal for just him and get back 4 players that can upgrade other positions essentially cashing in a superstar for multiple gap fillers.
Why? Because they are GM enough to have a full roster and maximize point potential. Does that make sense?
There are multiple players on every team that have some color flag on the active roster, a 4 for 1 would allow replacing 3 of them with serviceable players.
Add to that fact that teams are allowed to exceed 30 for a FA signing, and it just makes sense to vote on updating what seems like an archaic rule to begin with.
What's the big deal, are people discouraged from even discussing rule improvements except the ones posed by mods?
I always want there to be open discussion in the league and think all rule changes should be a discussion, if not also a vote.
I wouldn't mind there being consistency in this rule, but I would argue 24 hours makes since for FA because you don't know for certain if you'll win a FA until the second you win.
If you're talking trade, you know when you reach an agreement before anything is posted. If you're talking a 5 for 1 trade, you should either be in other trade talks to gain roster space before you post or you can pay buyouts literally 1 second before posting the trade and it's fine.
-
I always want there to be open discussion in the league and think all rule changes should be a discussion, if not also a vote.
I wouldn't mind there being consistency in this rule, but I would argue 24 hours makes since for FA because you don't know for certain if you'll win a FA until the second you win.
If you're talking trade, you know when you reach an agreement before anything is posted. If you're talking a 5 for 1 trade, you should either be in other trade talks to gain roster space before you post or you can pay buyouts literally 1 second before posting the trade and it's fine.
All very good points
Having said that, when a trade is posted it doesn't mean it's an auto approve, also drops are not always processed the same time as trades because of the 48 hour minimum it takes trades to be fully updated. Voting & Processing of trades have taken a full week give or take to go through.
Your points are no less valid. Still the 24 hour window doesn't seem to hurt.
:toast:
-
I understand why there was that exchange between Daddy and PPG.
This series of suggested rule changes is pushing an exercise in pushing buttons.
The way I see it, there are 30 players on a team's roster in Franchise NHL.
The NHL only allows 23.
7 extra players to work with sounds reasonable.
-
I understand why there was that exchange between Daddy and PPG.
This series of suggested rule changes is pushing an exercise in pushing buttons.
The way I see it, there are 30 players on a team's roster in Franchise NHL.
The NHL only allows 23.
7 extra players to work with sounds reasonable.
Appreciate the feedback.
I never meant to step on toes. That's not what it used to be like. To me leagues evolve in this manner.