Cap Circumvention Debate

[letnry]

Can i make a suggestion if you already dont do it?

Peform an exit interview for those managers that decide to leave. Sounds like the high turnover is cause for concern. This thread makes us assume one of the reasons is the issue being discussed but that could be accurate or far from the truth. I am sure managers would be willing to participate in an exit interview if approached properly. Maybe its as simple as asking them to send a summary email of their thoughts of the league and why they are leaving.

There is usually a reason why someone leaves a league and if you can identify a trend that may be invaluable to the direction you want to take the league. This may allow you to identify changes that need to be made without looking for majority vote for the betterment of the league.

If you are already doing this thats great to hear. What kind of trends have you noticed?

Yeah, that is a good idea, and can still be posed to those who are decent enough to inform us of their departure. The guys that have left and notified me about it, none had to do with displeasure with or problems in the league. 3 were time related school commitments, and 2 were family related issues needing to take priority. The others, as asv27 pointed out, were a result of inactivity. In most cases attempts by myself to email them for reasoning, or see what is their situation was, received no response. I don't want to make assumptions as to their reason for disappearing, but unfortunately it happens.

I'd also like to point something else out. A picture has been painted that illustrates a league were there are an elite group of original teams and a group of bottom feeder replacement teams. That is really not the case as I see it. In the 2 full seasons that asv27 and golfguy1672 have been in the league, these are the regular season standings, with "o" meaning original team and "r" meaning replacement team, following by their placement in 09-10 and then 10-11.

o - Winnipeg Jets - 1st - 5th
o - Hartford Whalers - 2nd - 2nd
o - Edmonton Oilers - 3rd - 9th
o - San Jose Sharks - 4th - 3rd
o - Pittsburgh Penguins - 5th - 7th
r - New York Rangers - 6th - 14th
r - Middlesex Zebras - 7th - 6th
r - Montreal Canadiens - 8th - 1st
o - Colorado Avalanche - 9th - 4th
o - Vancouver Canucks - 10th - 10th
r - Chicago Blackhawks - 11th - 11th
r - Dallas Stars - 12th - 8th
o - Minnesota Wild - 13th - 13th
r - Carolina Hurricanes - 14th - 12th

Now I understand that there are many factors that can play into what happens to a team during the year (injuries, cap sacrifices, time devotion, etc), but nothing there really indicates to me an unhealthy league, or a clear separation of power. This looks about like the standings in the rest of my leagues. We see some consistency of teams (both original and replacement), some dropping of teams (both original and replacement), and some raising of teams (both original and replacement).

[asv27]

Running the numbers, original teams average 6th place and replacement teams average 9th place. That might not seem like a lot but 3 spots in a 14 team league is pretty high especially considering only 6 teams make the playoffs. Also, of the 12 playoff teams over the last two years (6 a year) 3 have been replacement teams and 9 have been original teams.

So the original teams do have an advantage over the replacement teams.

[TheRook]

Running the numbers, original teams average 6th place and replacement teams average 9th place. That might not seem like a lot but 3 spots in a 14 team league is pretty high especially considering only 6 teams make the playoffs. Also, of the 12 playoff teams over the last two years (6 a year) 3 have been replacement teams and 9 have been original teams.

So the original teams do have an advantage over the replacement teams.

If most of the turnover is due to inactivity you cant use these numbers to support your argument imo. Managers taking over for inactive teams assume that their is a possible rebuild in order, and therefore may not finish high in the standings on average.

[letnry]

If most of the turnover is due to inactivity you cant use these numbers to support your argument imo. Managers taking over for inactive teams assume that their is a possible rebuild in order, and therefore may not finish high in the standings on average.

Yes, exactly. The year before, the 6 teams that ended up being replaced, finished 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 13th, and 14th, so its expected that it'll take a bit of time for that average to climb, which it apparently has. Average standing in 08-09: 10.0, in 09-10: 9.66, and in 10-11: 8.66.

[asv27]

If most of the turnover is due to inactivity you cant use these numbers to support your argument imo. Managers taking over for inactive teams assume that their is a possible rebuild in order, and therefore may not finish high in the standings on average.

It's like the saying about the chicken and the egg. Are GMs inactive cause they're bad or are they bad because they're inactive?

Either way, the original teams have more NHL talent, start the year with more high paid players int he minors, and on average finish better at the end of the year than the newer GMs.

[TheRook]

It's like the saying about the chicken and the egg. Are GMs inactive cause they're bad or are they bad because they're inactive?

Either way, the original teams have more NHL talent, start the year with more high paid players int he minors, and on average finish better at the end of the year than the newer GMs.

the question you ask in your first sentence is why you would need to run a more complex statistical analysis than simply taking the average of the standings.

[PensInThree]

I haven't read the whole thread (though I have read most of it). I'm interested in seeing the average total salary (including minors, replacements etc) of the original teams and the replacement teams.

That would at least indicate the extent of the discrepancy.

[letnry]

I haven't read the whole thread (though I have read most of it). I'm interested in seeing the average total salary (including minors, replacements etc) of the original teams and the replacement teams.

That would at least indicate the extent of the discrepancy.

So I starting trying to calculate this all out for you, and besides taking way too long, I wondered how this would really help. Some teams that are rostering the likes of Gomez and Horcoff, where as others who have ELCs, isn't necessarily very representative. The relationship between salary average and team strength isn't necessarily a directed correlation. As well, there are teams with unsigned players such as Doughty that will also not be represented. Finally, being that it is still the middle of the offseason, there are teams working to get themselves cap compliant and so more player movement is anticipated in the coming month. That said, I like the idea and will probably try to take a closer look at this (time permitting) as we approach our roster finalization deadline. Maybe Andrew or Sheldon will be willing to take on the task for the time being.

These are the numbers of the first 5 teams I did:
original: $1,990,600 average for 50 players. Also has 9 unsigned player/prospects.
original: $2,696,462 average for 53 players. Also has 7 unsigned player/prospects.
replacement: $2,216,283 average for 50 players. Also has 5 unsigned player/prospects.
replacement: $2,577,043 average for 44 players. Also has 6 unsigned player/prospects.
replacement: $1,918,622 average for 52 players. Also has 11 unsigned player/prospects.

[asv27]

Going by the rosters that GMs currently have posted (most still have last seasons cap hits) most origional GMs are up against the cap and most replacement's are not. It's hard to say for sure because a lot of the teams/GM have changed since then and not everyone's team page has been updated but the 6 replacement GMs cap space last years was roughly:

Middlesex ~15M in cap space
Carolina ~10M in space
Montreal ~5M in space
Dallas ~20M in space
Chicago ~7M in space
New York - Can't find their page as they've changes GMs and team names



Also, we replaced 4 of the bottom 6 teams last year because of inactivity. These teams were neglected and has guys who have retired or have signed in Europe on their rosters. Now the 4 new GMs had a dispersal draft with only the players owned by those teams, which wasn't much. That in addition to the horrible FA pool (because no one is ever dropped) is going to make it extremely hard for the new GMs to be competitive w/o the loophole fixed. Many of those 15+ NHL players that get a free pass to the minors would greatly help the new teams who have little to no depth.

Here are the players selected in rounds 10-20 of the draft and keep in mind that we have a 25 man NHL roster:

::Round 10::
37. Dan Girardi
38. Valtteri Filppula
39.Patrice Bergeron
40. Mike Smith

::Round 11::
41. Alexander Salak
42.Mike Murphy
43. 2011 26th Overall Entry Draft Pick
44. Jason Labarbera

::Round 12::
45. Niclas Bergfors
46. Jonas Gustavsson
47.Andrew Ladd
48. Ales Hemsky

::Round 13::
49. Ryan Ellis
50.Wayne Simmonds
51. Nick Leddy
52. Alexei Ponikarovsky

::Round 14::
53. PA Parenteau
54. Joel Ward
55.Stefan Elliott
56. Marcus Johansson

::Round 15::
57. Calvin de Haan
58.Joey MacDonald
59. Simon Despres
60. Stephane Robidas

::Round 16::
61. Luca Sbisa
62. Andrej Meszaros
63.Luke Adam
64. Max Pacioretty

::Round 17::
65. David Booth
66.Brad Boyes
67. Curtis Glencross
68. David Perron

::Round 18::
69. Mats Zuccarello
70. Ryan McDonagh
71.Emerson Etem
72. Mark Streit

::Round 19::
73. Ian White
74.Tuomo Ruutu
75. Drew Stafford
76. Brian Gionta

::Round 20::
77. John Moore
78. Chris Kunitz
79.Justin Faulk
80. Alex Steen

[asv27]

reading over the league rules it seems like (to me) that the rules actually support my argument:

Waivers

At anytime during the pre-season, regular season and playoffs a team may put a player on waivers. When a team puts a player on waivers, that player will have a 48 hour period in which other teams may claim him. If that player clears waivers (48hrs) then the player is assigned to that teams minor affialiate or released out right. To post such a waiver, go to the "Waivers Drops" forum and post the player, the salary and whether he will go to the minors or be released out right. Once a player is released OUTRIGHT, he becomes a UFA. Waivers are in effect for players that are "sent down" not called up.

Any player that has a salary of $1.5M or less can be sent down without going through the waiver process. All players above $1.5M are subject to following the waiver process...

It clearly says that waivers apply in the "pre-season", which is exactly what I am asking for.