Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - favo_zomg

Pages: 1 ... 220 221 222 223 224 [225] 226 227 228 229 230 ... 234
2241
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: Rules Discussion
« on: March 04, 2011, 07:53:31 AM »
As long as I am being picky on rules, I am going to go a little bit into your play-off system (as I never really looked at it until now)... Why are we having 8 team play-offs with 9 team divisions? Seriously, just about ANYONE can make it in despite having a .500 winning percentage. We want to test our skills as much as possible, and how are we suppose to do it when 90% of the teams make the play-offs in each division.

I have two proposed systems:
 8-) System One  8-)
6 teams in each conference makes the play-offs. The top teams in each conference will be distributed across the top 3 seeds, and the last 3 spots will be wild cards, going out to the next top 3 teams (despite their division).

Week 1: 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5, 1 and 2 get byes.
Week 2: 1 plays lowest remaining seed, 2 plays second lowest remaining seed
Week 3: Winner of Week 2 play each other
Week 4: Conference winners battle for the CUP!

Pros: It gives a little more breathing space when it comes to making the play-offs while rewarding the GMs who worked hard to build a winning team. This will also reward competitive divisions, thus creating the possibilities of making a trade in your division a little deadly (like the real NHL).

 :afro: System Two  :afro:
4 Teams in each conference make the play-offs. The first three seeds will go to division winners while the final remaining spot (THE Wild Card) goes to the highest remaining seed in the conference.

Week 1: 1 plays 4, 2 plays 3
Week 2: Winners of Week 1 play each other
Week 3: Conference winners play each other for the CUP

Pros: We make the cut to the play-offs REALLY cut throat, thus increasing the competition in each division. We also add another week to the regular season, which will possible give us another week of trades and difficult decisions to make.

---------------------------------------------------------

I really like this league, but I HATE the play-off system you currently hold. I know you want to make this as close to the real NHL as possible, but 8 team play-offs in 9 team divisions is leaving no punishment for error or inconsistency. The NHL can do it because they have 15 teams in each division; while we only have 18 teams in the league period.

I honestly would hate to be the 1st seed and lose to an 8th seed that has more losses than wins on his record, as that would make my entire regular season look like a waste of time. So I say lets raise the stakes and cut the number of play-off contending teams down.

2242
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: Trade Discussions Chat System
« on: March 03, 2011, 04:01:08 PM »
Depends on the time.... I think the way we are doing this now is convenient, but a live chat gets stuff done faster.

2243
Backyard NHL / Re: Questions
« on: March 03, 2011, 03:58:49 PM »
As the commissioner you could easily stop a team from trying to do that. I like the idea of traded players automatically being placed on the NHL team. High salary players like Gaborik, or any player for that matter (who are only sent down in the first place to make cap room) are practically impossible to trade from the minor league squad since to be called up they have to go through the re-entry waivers, and having to take on half of any given players salary (for the duration of the contract) is great for the team that would claim him, but for the team wanting to recall him to potentially make a trade is to big of a risk in my opinion.

As someone who just got jacked by this rule, I like the idea... It also opens up more trade options.

2244
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: Al Montoya G (NYI)
« on: March 02, 2011, 12:42:14 AM »
2 year, 2.3M

2245
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: How Is The League?
« on: March 02, 2011, 12:03:37 AM »
This is a great league really enjoy the concept of mimicking the real NHL. My only problem is with the pay scale for extensions. I believe it is way out of wack.  Example is Jimmy Howard's extension. Real contract is 2 years at 2.25 Mil per year. On Backyard he is to be payed 4.6 mil per year on extension. Just one example. Could we address the pay scale please? Thanks

The major problem with trying to fix this is you have no one to haggle with... In the real life, you have a manager and a player to haggle against. In the game, the only thing we have access to is the numbers. The player might want to resign with his winning team, but there is no one saying "I wanna leave" or "I want more monies" in the game. Thus we have the contract numbers; those numbers IS the agent we have to haggle with. And if we do not accept his price, I guess we are out of a player.

Honestly, I have no problem paying a player a base amount based off of how well the guy is playing... If the player is a good player, than pay the salary and be happy you have a star in your roster. That is what I did with Howard and I am glad I did (because he makes the most points on my team).

2246
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: Rules Discussion
« on: March 01, 2011, 11:14:03 PM »
So let me get this right lets say I sign Hedberg to a 1 year deal to help my goaltending well Hiller is out now next week lets say Brodeur retires and the devils say that Hedberg will be the starting goalie next year now I get excited and want to sign him to a longer term deal now with this proposed rule your going to say I have to bid on him in free agency??? Now Drew lets say you have 4 million in cap space that you have put aside for a goalie and I have 2.5 million set aside and based on the extension post under the rules it should only cost 2 million to sign Hedberg so thats what I bid but Drew because you need a goalie you bid 4 million and I can not match but I have better offense and defense then you. I see how your trying to make this a lot like the real NHL but I think Hedberg would take less money if he had a better chance at winning the Stanley Cup. I don't like the rule that you can't resign 1 year contracts. :taco:

How about this: If you want to resign a player that you just signed to a 1 year contract off of FA that season, his contract has to be worth just as much as the contract he currently holds?

For example: I sign Hedberg to a 1 year, 2M dollar contract the beginning of the season. Brodeur retires, and the devils name Hedberg their new number 1 starter, thus getting me excited to resign the man for 2 years. Since his current contract is a one year deal, his extension has to be worth 2M per season.

Again, we will need to use something to designate the fact that these players have been signed to 1 year deals... But it will prevent people from signing 1 year deals with the intent of resigning them for cheap, as the player will no longer be cheap.

2247
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: Rules Discussion
« on: March 01, 2011, 09:49:03 PM »
This sounds like a pretty good idea. I think this should be implemented right away. Am placing this in rule discussion for a bit of insight from others first. This doesn't solve the 1 year thing though because it is the extensions on a 1 year deal that are a problem. Person could bid 10m for player A then give him an extension right away to cheapen it.

It does if you establish a rule stating that you cannot resign a player that you signed to a one year deal... And the easiest way to see the difference is to use asterisk. And if a player that has an asterisk on his name cannot be signed to an extension, that can be applied to both the minor league teams and NHL teams. Am I making sense? If not, I'll find a more technical way to explain it.

2248
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: How Is The League?
« on: March 01, 2011, 09:44:52 PM »
To add to my previous post: Would you really pay a man 8m a year to play for your minor league team?

2249
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: How Is The League?
« on: March 01, 2011, 09:22:57 PM »
There is a bone I do have to pick: Why are we aloud to resign experienced players that we send down to the minors to extensions? I would assume that if the player can get better playing time with another team why wouldn't he pursue that instead of playing with a bunch of rookies? I can understand if the player has not played 40 games in his/her career yet, but why should I be aloud to resign Tomas Fleishmen when all he is going to do is sit in my minor league system (cause I am definitely not making the re-entry mistake again)?

I know this move has been done already, but I feel like it is inconsistent with what would typically happen in the league. Maybe establish a rule stating that all players with an asterisk next to their name cannot be resigned? This can also help with the one-year contract problem that you mentioned earlier (place an asterisk next to the player who is only signed for a 1 year deal off of FA).

This will create a HUGE influx of FAs by the 14-15 season, as a lot of the higher priced players are sitting on minor league systems.

2250
Backyard NHL: Invalid Transactions / Re: LA and Buffalo make a trade
« on: March 01, 2011, 04:49:54 PM »
Exactly: I have 12 (soon to be 13) contracts to worry about next year. Paajarvi's contract is one year longer than Wheeler's current contract, thus cutting down on my load for next year. It definitely helps that both players are equal in skill level.

Good doing business with ya ^.^

Pages: 1 ... 220 221 222 223 224 [225] 226 227 228 229 230 ... 234

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Daddy: A lot. I think about $300 per season.
    Yesterday at 05:24:18 PM
  • Daddy: Added to the cable bill of like $200. That nobody ever used.
    Yesterday at 05:25:01 PM
  • Daddy: So i had DirecTV for 12 months to use Sunday ticket for 3 months and paid like 3 installments of roughly $100 added to my $200m bill.
    Yesterday at 05:26:18 PM
  • Daddy: For that i got two TVs that could watch any game any time any where. Problem is they getting played at the same times. You cant watch every game. Why you charging me for every game?
    Yesterday at 05:27:40 PM
  • Daddy: If thats the case i should have access to 32 different monitors. Right?
    Yesterday at 05:30:19 PM
  • Daddy: Or maybe 16. I would take 16. But two. Give me my bread back Mafia!
    Yesterday at 05:31:38 PM
  • Daddy: Making me watch  Bo Nix + Zach Wilson + Jared Stidham = you should be paying me
    Yesterday at 05:33:56 PM
  • Daddy: Me and coach Payton [link]
    Yesterday at 05:34:53 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Thats cap by the way. I pay for my own way to watch my team
    Yesterday at 05:41:55 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I dont have your account or login
    Yesterday at 05:42:07 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I used yours for 1-2 seasons.
    Yesterday at 05:43:32 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I used my mothers for a decade before that
    Yesterday at 05:43:46 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: But ive used my way for the past few years. Ill be paying attention like i said
    Yesterday at 05:44:27 PM
  • Daddy: She deserves a refund too
    Yesterday at 05:46:27 PM
  • Daddy: The point was DirecTV never got in your pockets and it was a rip-off but they had a monopoly on the product. Im not loving all the streaming games but DTV will be paying $$$.
    Yesterday at 05:48:22 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: The new iteration with Youtube TV isnt the greatest either but an improvement on Directtv version
    Yesterday at 05:48:37 PM
  • Daddy: And your grandfather used it every year besides those two :rofl:
    Yesterday at 05:49:26 PM
  • Daddy: I kept DirecTV and always willing to share. But thats my point.
    Yesterday at 05:49:47 PM
  • Daddy: If i had 3 monitors rather than two or four rather than two, either me or moms save money. Lots of it.
    Yesterday at 05:50:26 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Yea your point is just wrong is all. Theyve gotten into my pockets directly and indirectly
    Yesterday at 05:51:03 PM
  • Daddy: Oh, i was unaware. DTV must have got us all.
    Yesterday at 05:51:55 PM
  • Daddy: I know you dont endorse them. Never did. I paid for lots of crap i never used. Just for NFL Sunday Ticket.
    Yesterday at 05:52:45 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I dont and didnt endorse cable period. The irony is streaming is becoming cable now.
    Yesterday at 05:55:39 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I paid for directtv version 1-2 years when i had my apartment. Not as much as the 35+ crowd but they did
    Yesterday at 05:56:34 PM
  • Daddy: Still never watched a game on YouTube. I miss the days of CBS = AFC >> FOX/NBC = NFC >> ABC = MNF
    Yesterday at 05:56:42 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: There was no reason to have directtv outside of sunday ticket. My apartment couldnt get it so i paid ONLY for sunday ticket
    Yesterday at 05:57:04 PM
  • Daddy: I was ok with TNF & SNF.
    Yesterday at 05:57:43 PM
  • Daddy: Its all over the place now. So ive stuck with what i know. The Ticket. I can't miss a Rams game. Not gonna do it.
    Yesterday at 05:58:45 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Now they stream some games only on amazon and peacock. I need a streaming lawsuit
    Yesterday at 06:01:20 PM
  • indiansnation: Dont forget disney + soon u will stream games pn their
    Yesterday at 09:43:09 PM
  • indiansnation: Disney trying yo buy nfl network and using espn as part of the trade off nfl will own a certain % of espn. First deal eas 70m for nfl network but nfl turned that down real quick
    Yesterday at 09:46:43 PM
  • indiansnation: Anyone want to talk trade nfl live,mlb live,fgm,armchair
    Yesterday at 10:00:02 PM
  • indiansnation: And any other league that im in that i didnt post yet
    Yesterday at 10:00:35 PM
  • Daddy: They keep throwing insane money at the NFL to televise games and owners share those shiny pennies just enough with the players.
    Yesterday at 10:39:25 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: I'm available.  Not sure if we match up anywhere other than NHL Live, but let me know if there's something you're interested in @Brian
    Yesterday at 10:45:39 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: The other leagues for me are FGM, MLB Live and DNHL in case any-one else is looking to do a deal
    Yesterday at 10:49:01 PM
  • Daddy: Healthy mix. Couple baseball, couple hockey, different scoring options.
    Yesterday at 11:08:15 PM
  • Daddy: You probably kick ass in all of them although NHL LIVE hasnt officially started.
    Yesterday at 11:08:42 PM
  • Daddy: I respect your gaming options
    Yesterday at 11:09:54 PM
  • Daddy: I would for sure be an FGM or Armchair owner if i were here for baseball. Powerhouse too. Why not? Great leagues with better LMs.
    Yesterday at 11:16:38 PM
  • Daddy: DNHL must be 15 years old. Gotta be doing something right. Most leagues dont make it past 5. Very few make it 10.
    Yesterday at 11:20:45 PM
  • Daddy: I think Rob been running that league longer than ive been on profsl. Legendary LM.
    Yesterday at 11:22:42 PM
  • indiansnation: Jmntl82 pm important messave about armchair
    Yesterday at 11:45:05 PM
  • jmntl82: indiansnation-replied
    Yesterday at 11:48:26 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: thanks @daddy.  I hold my own
    Today at 12:05:43 AM
  • Braves155: Will be around today for deal talks - ANY sport
    Today at 10:12:32 AM
  • Daddy: You tellem @Braves!
    Today at 11:47:14 AM
  • IndianaBuc: Braves PM
    Today at 03:04:47 PM
  • Braves155: Back
    Today at 03:10:34 PM
  • IndianaBuc: Back
    Today at 03:19:17 PM