ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
ProFSL History Books => Dynasty NHL => NHL Archive => Dynasty NHL: Archive => Topic started by: Rob on April 09, 2012, 03:18:36 PM
-
I'm a little burnt out on rule changes for the moment, but I want you all to know I'm always open for change. If you think of anything that will make our league better please do not hesitate to bring it up. Here's a couple ideas I have that we can start discussing for the 13/14 season:
Prospect extension discount:
We won't be renewing any prospect contracts until after 13/14 when the first clocks expire. At that point we'll have a really good idea how our cap system is working out. With 30 man rosters, it's always going to seem tough to field a full team of productive talent. But, as we've discussed in the past, we can't start 30 players every night and our cap is mostly intended to be concentrated on our 17 starters with the other 13 roster spots intended for youth and bargain contracts. But, as we go on if we find the cap to be too restrictive, discounts on prospect contracts could be a good option to fix that. It also might be nice to reward teams that develop their own youth with cheaper contracts.
Cheaper defensive extensions:
D-men get paid in the real game. But their contributions just don't translate to fantasy all that well. There's a disparity in value between reality and fantasy. Since our extensions are based on actual contracts in the league this disparity is very pronounced. This is not something I want to change now, I'd rather see how things go this offseason. But, if our offseason FA is packed with good D talent that teams could not afford to extend, then I think it's something that we can look at doing next year.
-
I like them both, esp the Dman one, makes it hard when a guy is getting less than 1 fp/g and getting like 2M per yr haa... i think that would be a good thing to adjust for sure!
-
I also like both of these changes. Karlsson had a monster year and was still only the 22nd ranked skater, Weber was the 2nd best D-man at 48th. I kinda do like the price premium you have to pay to now to get a scoring d-man. Makes you choose between going another guy that might sit on your bench some nights because you only have 3 spots open each for centers and wingers or a d-man that would play every time because of the 6 spots open.
-
What if the extensions were based on Skater rankings instead of grouped out by position? That way the dmen would be ranked and priced according to their output.
that or you could make the dmen more valuable by adding in blocked shots as a scoring category.
-
What if the extensions were based on Skater rankings instead of grouped out by position? That way the dmen would be ranked and priced according to their output.
that or you could make the dmen more valuable by adding in blocked shots as a scoring category.
Both are good ideas. I'd have to mess around with the scoring to get BS to work right but that's definitely an option.
-
What if the extensions were based on Skater rankings instead of grouped out by position? That way the dmen would be ranked and priced according to their output.
This might be an even better idea since the site I use for this data no longer allows me to sort by position...
-
What if the extensions were based on Skater rankings instead of grouped out by position? That way the dmen would be ranked and priced according to their output.
that or you could make the dmen more valuable by adding in blocked shots as a scoring category.
:iatp:
-
What if the extensions were based on Skater rankings instead of grouped out by position? That way the dmen would be ranked and priced according to their output.
that or you could make the dmen more valuable by adding in blocked shots as a scoring category.
:iatp: Don't wait for next year.....
-
:iatp: Don't wait for next year.....
If it's changed it will be next year. Some people planned better for this offseason and I won't take away their advantage.
-
If it's changed it will be next year. Some people planned better for this offseason and I won't take away their advantage.
But with the minimum years, signing players this year to a long term at the current scale when players will be available next year for far less is not to anyone's advantage. At the very least the change in scale should be known up front for evaluation of long term commitments.
-
:iatp: of everything said. All are good ideas. As long as somehow dmen are cheaper I am fine however it is done.
-
Will we be going ahead with extensions based on skater ranking instead of ranking by separate positions?
I would like to know as it might affect some players I would prefer to extend now under the current system rather than wait for their contract to expire.
-
Will we be going ahead with extensions based on skater ranking instead of ranking by separate positions?
I would like to know as it might affect some players I would prefer to extend now under the current system rather than wait for their contract to expire.
I'm not sure. The problem with that method is we're going to inflate the value of average forwards. Middle of the road guys who cost 1-2m now will be MUCH more expensive. I'm thinking a straightup reduction for D-men would be better.
I was planning on opening it up for discussion again after the extension deadline. I know many of you want to know what's going to happen before you make decisions for 12/13. Unfortunately I don't want to make the decision until after extensions. I can tell you that I definitely want the reduction for D-men and will support the change. Like most other rule changes the process will be democratic. From the feedback on the subject so far I would guess there will be a reduction. I know that's not a lot to go on, but it is what it is, for now.
Other rule changes I've been contemplating:
-Discount for prospect contract extensions
-Discount on extensions for DNHL award winners. For example, the best LW award winner gets one LW extension with a 20% reduction. Of course this wouldn't apply for 11/12 award winners.
-
Other rule changes I've been contemplating:
-Discount for prospect contract extensions
-Discount on extensions for DNHL award winners. For example, the best LW award winner gets one LW extension with a 20% reduction. Of course this wouldn't apply for 11/12 award winners.
:iatp:
-
Other rule changes I've been contemplating:
-Discount for prospect contract extensions
-Discount on extensions for DNHL award winners. For example, the best LW award winner gets one LW extension with a 20% reduction. Of course this wouldn't apply for 11/12 award winners.
I am a fan of those rule changes above and just straight up reducing the cost of D-men (or D-people as they like to be called).
-
It will be interesting to see what teams banks look like after the Free agency. Seems like most of the teams are in really good shape financially (with a few exceptions) having between 2-3 million per open spot. then you have a 2 teams like anahiem with 20 million in space with a full roster.
Might not be a bad thing to inflate some of the middle tier players salaries so that the extensions are a harder decision.
-
I'm not sure. The problem with that method is we're going to inflate the value of average forwards. Middle of the road guys who cost 1-2m now will be MUCH more expensive. I'm thinking a straightup reduction for D-men would be better.
I was planning on opening it up for discussion again after the extension deadline. I know many of you want to know what's going to happen before you make decisions for 12/13. Unfortunately I don't want to make the decision until after extensions. I can tell you that I definitely want the reduction for D-men and will support the change. Like most other rule changes the process will be democratic. From the feedback on the subject so far I would guess there will be a reduction. I know that's not a lot to go on, but it is what it is, for now.
Other rule changes I've been contemplating:
-Discount for prospect contract extensions
-Discount on extensions for DNHL award winners. For example, the best LW award winner gets one LW extension with a 20% reduction. Of course this wouldn't apply for 11/12 award winners.
I dont like the discount for the award winners. This will only give the teams with the best players an advantage over the others.
discount for the prospect extensions is good idea because a young prospect can have 1 good year then a bad year and you really dont know what kind of player he is going to be. I have this problem with Jeff Skinner in another league, his rookie year was real good then his second year ws not so good so I have to resign him for 6.1M for 4 years or release him. the problem is if I resign him and it turns out his second year is what he does for the 4 years then it hurs my ability to improve my team because his cap number is too high.
I think redoing the dmen pay scale is a good idea and would sugest basing it on fantasy point per game as compared to the forwards. I will do some calculations and see what it looks like.
-
I think redoing the dmen pay scale is a good idea and would sugest basing it on fantasy point per game as compared to the forwards. I will do some calculations and see what it looks like.
That would be awesome!
-
this first part I looked at ppg for C, RW and D.
C = the top 20 scores range from 3.0 - 5.6 ppg, 21-40 was 2.6 - 3.0 ppg and 41-60 was 2.1 - 2.6 ppg
RW = the top 20 scores range from 3.2 - 4.3 ppg, 21-40 was 2.7 - 3.2 ppg and 41-60 was 2.0 - 2.7 ppg
D = the top 20 scores range from 2.0 - 3.5 ppg, 21-40 was 1.6 - 2.0 ppg and 41-60 was 1.4 - 1.7 ppg
I also looked at what rank the D were when compared to all skaters.
There were only 5 in the top 100. #22, 48, 53, 89, 91.
from 100-160 there are 12. #101, 105, 106, 110, 119, 125, 131, 140, 147, 150, 158, 160.
These numbers would sugest that the range for D should start around 3.5M but that is a really big change so making the top pay 5.0M might be the better change.
-
You encouraged me to do some math myself... Here's what I came up with:
Average total points for top 50 skaters at each position:
Center = 241.7
Left Wing = 241.3
Right Wing = 245.3
Cumulative average for forwards = 242.8
Defense = 161.2
This suggests that D-men score about 66% of what forwards score. A 66% reduction in extension price would mean the top D-man would earn $5m on the dot.
-
ye thats what I figured.