ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Dynasty NHL => NHL Leagues => Dynasty NHL: Archive => Topic started by: janesvilleaces on January 30, 2019, 09:07:44 AM
-
Being new to the league doesn't the rule that that you don't have to call up prospects once they hit 40 games if they started in minors encourage tanking?
-
Being new to the league doesn't the rule that that you don't have to call up prospects once they hit 40 games if they started in minors encourage tanking?
Sure does
-
But in the world of Free Dynasty, where the odds of dealing with flakes who are going to make bad trades and destroy their franchise are very high. And getting new people to take over those teams and rebuild them is tough. The strategy of storing away players in the minors is there to help GM's turn themselves around in a reasonable amount of time. At least that's been our experience.
But you bring this up at a good time because I've been waiting to discuss a draft lottery. I'd like to start it before next draft. Just haven't had the time to flesh it out.
It's a good opportunity to get your thoughts out there about that.
-
At the same time, tanking teams must start their starters who are not in the minors. That kind of tanking is not allowed.
-
I'd like to start it before next draft.
Not this year, but NEXT (2020).
-
10-4. I am onboard for a draft lottery. Makes it less appealing to tank if you aren't guaranteed lafriniere
-
10-4. I am onboard for a draft lottery. Makes it less appealing to tank if you aren't guaranteed lafriniere
Though, to that point, there's 10 playoff seeds, so nobody is guaranteed anything. That line of "to tank or not to tank" isn't as pronounced because of this.
-
We essentially already have a draft lottery since the available players in our draft are based on the players that aren't taken with our keeper picks and that is based on where the NHL teams get it pick, which has a lottery.
-
We essentially already have a draft lottery since the available players in our draft are based on the players that aren't taken with our keeper picks and that is based on where the NHL teams get it pick, which has a lottery.
There's always a very solid top 3-5 in the supplemental between foreign and undrafted players despite the fact that the Keepers put a dent in the overall pool.
-
There's always a very solid top 3-5 in the supplemental between foreign and undrafted players despite the fact that the Keepers put a dent in the overall pool.
I am with Gypsie on this one. We pretty already have a draft lottery and I really dont see much value in tanking although I see a lot of it.....
-
I am with Gypsie on this one. We pretty already have a draft lottery and I really dont see much value in tanking although I see a lot of it.....
It's true that it wouldn't change what I'm doing.
-
Now if you were to suggest we change the league from a standard points based to a Head to Head each category ...... I am all in!!
-
Now if you were to suggest we change the league from a standard points based to a Head to Head each category ...... I am all in!!
F that :P
-
But you bring this up at a good time because I've been waiting to discuss a draft lottery. I'd like to start it before next draft. Just haven't had the time to flesh it out.
I'd be okay with a lottery. Would also be fine with no lottery. But for the sake of a wrinkle a lottery could be fun.
I mean, still heavily weighting the last place team to get 1st pick of course, but still it could mix things up a little bit. Keeps things at least a tad interesting at the bottom end of the standings come draft time.
While of course there isn't a guarantee who is available, generally speaking there are some pretty good prospects in that top-3 to top-5 as Rob already mentioned. Be it an unowned team in our league's draftee, or an overseas or NCAA player who slipped by all of us in previous years.
For the most part however it seems like all the unowned teams are pretty good NHL teams (except maybe NJD this season), so the pickings sometimes can be slim.
Anyways, I'd be for a draft lottery.
But again I don't really care all the much so if the majority doesn't want it, so be it. It does give some excitement to maybe those 4th, 5th, 6th last place teams to give them some hope of moving up though!
-
Lottery :iatp:
-
I'm of the opinion that a lottery wouldn't really help things too much or make a noticeable difference in the league overall. I agree with Gypsie's take on the matter.
As for Snug's floating of changing from Points to Head to Head Cats, I wholeheartedly oppose that idea.
-
Totally forgot about this topic but want to chip in. I think that a lottery would curb active tanking which would be a shame. The key word here is active. I'm one of the more engaged players in the league precisely because I am able to work within the rules to improve my team. I won't be at the bottom for long so this won't always apply to me, but I would like to see the next basement dwelling GM have a shot at landing the top (supplemental) pick through active management within the scope of the rules. With a lottery it's just that much easier to accept mediocrity and put it on cruise control.
-
*Bump*
We doing a lottery next year? Still want input on the possible mechanics of that or are we letting it go?
-
*Bump*
We doing a lottery next year? Still want input on the possible mechanics of that or are we letting it go?
I've gone back and forth on it. And the feedback was sorta "meh" so I dropped it. I think in the end it would be a nice mechanic, but it wouldn't change what some would like to see changed. Personally I agree with your last post, Slack.
I am going for the #1 draft pick next year. And a draft lottery won't change my strategy one bit. I am enjoying the experience of building from the ground up, scouting out players I wouldn't have bothered with in the past. It's fun and I'm excited about the finished product. I don't see a problem with tanking in this capacity. It's good for the league...
-
I've gone back and forth on it. And the feedback was sorta "meh" so I dropped it. I think in the end it would be a nice mechanic, but it wouldn't change what some would like to see changed. Personally I agree with your last post, Slack.
I am going for the #1 draft pick next year. And a draft lottery won't change my strategy one bit. I am enjoying the experience of building from the ground up, scouting out players I wouldn't have bothered with in the past. It's fun and I'm excited about the finished product. I don't see a problem with tanking in this capacity. It's good for the league...
Sounds good to me. I'm building my whole team from the ground up so it's going to take awhile before players force themselves out of the minors and onto the main roster. As you say even if I can't land the 1st over-all supplemental I'll be aiming for high picks, and Snug was right in that the NHL lottery has a direct effect on who in our league get the top prospects anyway. I was lucky Jersey landed 1st over-all. Going into the NHL draft lottery I figured I had about a 36% chance at getting #1. The next best supplemental picks are at 5th and 9th.
-
The real cure to the supposed problem is to force players onto the NHL roster once they hit a certain threshold. 40PG or possibly higher. Doing this would be much more effective (if not as fun) as a draft lottery. Again, I'm still not recognizing a problem, but if it were a problem, this would be the solution.
And having said that, I'd like to announce that I wholly oppose that idea. :P
-
And having said that, I'd like to announce that I wholly oppose that idea. :P
:winner: