Vote: Possible Goaltender Limit

[Drew]

Everyone please vote on this. Comment if you feel necessary.

[SlackJack]

I voted in favour of 3.

[norrya66]

I just think we have all built our teams around 4 goalies, and I'm not sure this is going to help with parody in the league (which I believe was the original basis).

It's actually going to hurt the lower end teams, because a team like mine has essentially 4 backups or goalies that don't get a 1A number of starts.  If I have to drop to 3, that is going to really hurt.

But, a powerhouse team that has Crawford and Howard for example, it isn't going to hurt them as much to drop their 4th goalie.

I understand this will put more goalies in FA, and maybe help the lower teams, but it's not like the Rasks, Crawfords, or Niemis of the world are going to get dropped.

[SlackJack]

I just think we have all built our teams around 4 goalies, and I'm not sure this is going to help with parody in the league (which I believe was the original basis).

It's actually going to hurt the lower end teams, because a team like mine has essentially 4 backups or goalies that don't get a 1A number of starts.  If I have to drop to 3, that is going to really hurt.

But, a powerhouse team that has Crawford and Howard for example, it isn't going to hurt them as much to drop their 4th goalie.

I understand this will put more goalies in FA, and maybe help the lower teams, but it's not like the Rasks, Crawfords, or Niemis of the world are going to get dropped.

Quote from: favo_zomg on January 09, 2014, 05:39:30 AM
Should we have another conversation on goalies?

After looking through all the rosters, you can definitely see a huge difference between the top of the league and the bottom of the league in regards to goalie ownership. I know I was a huge advocate in not going below 4 goalies, but maybe I was wrong. What if we went to 3 goalies per team next season? With a total of 60 goalie jobs in the NHL available per season, I think it is preposterous for our league to have more slots available then there are actual goalies in the NHL.

With our current set up, we have a total of 72 goalie slots available. That is 12 more slots then actual NHL jobs. If we cut it to 3 goalies per team, we would have a total of 54 goalie slots. That is 6 less slots then actual NHL jobs. We might even have more FA goalies available when a goalie gets injured!

I feel a move like this is needed in order to help create parity in the league. A move like this will not punish a team that has traded or drafted well, because that team can move one of their excess goalies for a pretty solid bounty. When a young goalie on your team has finally earned the starter position or has proven to be a solid back up, you can always move one of your other goalies to make room for him.

I really enjoy the competitive atmosphere in the league, but I find it can be a little disheartening when teams are saying right now "I don't see me winning this year, so I am going to start selling" and the trade deadline is more then a month away. And I feel that lowering the goalie limit to 3 will help with this.

72 Goalie slots for 18 teams really is too much. I know that perceived starters will continue to be hoarded but it wasn't long ago names like Bishop, Varlomov, and Bernier were considered second tier. Dropping down to 54 active goalie slots will improve chances to acquire next years fresh minted number one goalie!

[norrya66]

I completely agree, but 4 spots also gives the lower tier teams more slots to acquire 2nd tier guys and take chances on them.  I just don't think this move is going to necessarily help the lower tier teams.

[SlackJack]

I completely agree, but 4 spots also gives the lower tier teams more slots to acquire 2nd tier guys and take chances on them.  I just don't think this move is going to necessarily help the lower tier teams.

I hear what you are saying but there won't be any limit to the talent we can hold in our feeder teams. Kuemper for example could be sent down and stashed allowing Scrivens to be resigned.

Keep in mind how much talent is already hoarded on the top teams now.....this move will force Chicago (for example) to release talent immediately.  Anyhow, everyone has a right to an opinion. Personally I think that the move specifically helps the lower end teams now and levels the playing field moving forward.

[Tony]

I vote No! 

[Tony]

I don't think there should be a cap for goalies at all. Also on a unrelated topic I would like to see the 10 points for a goal by a goalie removed and reduced back to 2. 

[Tony]

This vote is rigged     the last two choices are basally the same.

[norrya66]

I hear what you are saying but there won't be any limit to the talent we can hold in our feeder teams. Kuemper for example could be sent down and stashed allowing Scrivens to be resigned.

Keep in mind how much talent is already hoarded on the top teams now.....this move will force Chicago (for example) to release talent immediately.  Anyhow, everyone has a right to an opinion. Personally I think that the move specifically helps the lower end teams now and levels the playing field moving forward.

I agree with your thinking on Kuemper, but here is my issue.  If I do re-sign Scrivens, then if Kuemper, M. Jones, or even Hackett get a chance, I would either have to find a trade partner, for a goalie that isn't a starter (Scrivens, Bryz, or Neuvy), which is unlikely.  Or I would have to cut one of those guys to make room for a young guy.

I just think the way it is gives us the most flexibility as owners, and gives us the ability to be able to call younger, 2-way contract guys back and forth as they get their chances.

Listen, I'm fine either way.  I love this league, but I just think this may be taking away some of the flexibility of the position.