Comish Dynasty Rules Discussion 2010

[Chinny]

I would prefer not to add or change any stats, FOW is a stat i don't like at all, it just comes down to who has the most players that have a RW or LW position that actually play C in games.
Hits are also to random in how they are recorded

[ultrawhiteness]

I would prefer not to add or change any stats, FOW is a stat i don't like at all, it just comes down to who has the most players that have a RW or LW position that actually play C in games.
Hits are also to random in how they are recorded

agreed!

the more i think about it, the more i like the roster to float up to 30 after the 5-round draft until the end of the playoffs (or season, whatever). that would make the draft (and draft picks) somewhat more important.

[Chicleteur]

agreed!

the more i think about it, the more i like the roster to float up to 30 after the 5-round draft until the end of the playoffs (or season, whatever). that would make the draft (and draft picks) somewhat more important.

That's definitely one of the reason I like the 5 players increase. It seems that only the 1st and the 2nd round is important as of now and having the opportunity to carry 5 extra guys to see how to develop is really interesting.

[The Comish]

all in all, i would caution against too much change here, Russ. i introduced a few changes in my pool last summer, thinking it would make things better, but it has resulted in more confusion and dissatisfaction than anything. this pool is great as is: incredibly challenging and deep enough. in my own opinion, the only evolution we need to work on is to continue to acquire dedicated participants.

Yeah, I just wanted to float all the suggestions/thoughts I've collected/thought of throughout the year and see where the discussions went. I never really envisioned having all of the proposals go through - some aren't my ideas, but ones I got from other owners here.

I have my own issues with FOW and to a lesser extent Blocked Shots and Hits. I really like the TOI stat as it goes directly to how valuable a player is to his NHL team. Of course, I would still be happy if we didn't add any categories. Like I said, let's see where the discussions take us and I'll decide what to put up for a vote based on what I see.

one note about manually changing positions in Fantrax - i did this last season and i found it very annoying. setting a good threshold for when a guy gets new eligibility was tricky. having some of the more attentive (read: anal) owners contact me every two weeks because one of their LWs was listed on dailyfaceoff.com as a C and on fantasyhockey911.com as a RW was just a pain in the ass. next season we're going back to just letting Fantrax handle the positions.

Honestly, I would only use the positions as determined by Fantrax, SPECIFICALLY because of what you mention - I can see where that would be cumbersome.


Great comments so far - I love how honest and passionate the comments are. That's what I was hoping for when I put this out. Still looking for one new owner...I'll give it until the end of the weekend and then I'm going to put something here in the forums looking for one owner.

[NordiqueFan]

Now i really wish i didn't look at what the standings would of been if we played it with our regular season roto stat cats!

Those who have discussed this with me before know i was pushing for this all year, not just because i have seen the final result!

why pts are not from 1 to 13...

[NordiqueFan]

1- no problem switching to fantrax

2- stay with 3rw/3c/3lw maybe harder but more challenging

3- no problem with the add 5 player

4- play off prefer pts only

5- no problem when the trade deadline is

6- ok with the 3 day for pick-up

7- okay maybe add 25$ to the max salary for the farm

8- ok to add category but stay the same ratio 2/3 forward 1/3 goalie since i give a lot to have a good goalie i want that the ratio stay the same

[jL67s]

1) No problem of switching to Fantrax as well. If this allows us to see all 30 teams along with any drops or pickups that occur, Fantrax sounds awesome.

2) I also prefer keeping 3 of each forward position. Switching to 6 of any type of forward may open trading up a little more, but I like the strategy of having the 3 separate groups of forwards.

3) No problem with lowering FA pick-ups.

4) Going roto with playoff scoring would make the non-goal or assist scoring players have a little more value, but with goaltenders counting for so much on their own, once someone loses a goaltender early, then so goes their chances. Points based still sounds good to me.

5) Trade deadline a couple weeks after NHL deadline sounds good to me.

6) Extending waiver period from 2 to 3 days sounds good. Gives GM's more time to submit claims.

7) Adding a farm system would be interesting. My team is kind of built like that already as I have a fair amount of prospects. I do like expanding to a 10 player farm team after the draft as it allows us to keep our drafted players for at least the season. Makes the decision on who to keep and who to drop from the farm at the end of the playoffs more interesting.

8) I agree with what Nordique says in if a few more categories are added I would like to see the ratios stay the same. I drafted Lundqvist with my first pick based on how much a goalie was worth.

[Chinny]

why pts are not from 1 to 13...

used my old sheet for all 30 so i didn't have to redo a sheet just to fill my need to see how i would of done!

i think to get 1-13 points we just need to subtract 81 points from everyone, but the position everyone is in wouldn't change

[Chinny]

It doesn't look like the roto playoffs are getting much support, i just don't understand why we go all year with roto only to switch to points only for playoffs. But that is just my thought.

[iamlilc]

1. I don't mind switching to Fantrax if it will make our lives easier.

2. I'd rather keep the forwards the same. It makes wingers more valuable and full lineups more challenging. Also, by changing it 3 years later or even after the initial draft; it only really benefits the teams who can't play 3 at each spot.

3. I'm cool with lowering the FA pickups.

4. I like the current playoff system, but I wouldn't be totally against doing the Roto style. The only thing is that the goalies who make the finals would have a huge advantage because they would most-likely get the most wins, saves and possibly GAA. If you only count wins and GAA that might be better.

5. Moving deadline is fine with me.

6. Increasing waiver period is fine with me.

7. Farm team would be interesting. I wouldn't mind either way.

8. It could be interesting to add a few categories, but I don't like "Time on Ice" - Superstars would be even more valuable. Blocked shots and hits wouldn't be bad though. And I agree with the Player/Goalie ratios being the same.

[Chinny]

4. I like the current playoff system, but I wouldn't be totally against doing the Roto style. The only thing is that the goalies who make the finals would have a huge advantage because they would most-likely get the most wins, saves and possibly GAA. If you only count wins and GAA that might be better.

It sounds like this is the concern for most, and because i want it to be roto i will debunk this theory as well

the top goalie team (also the top overall team), Fear the Penguin got 108 points, 48 of them were goalie points, 4 teams got 0 points a gap of 44 points

in a roto format the top goalie team again Fear the Penguin got 84 points , 35.5 of them were from goalies (for those of you wondering i redid the roto standings to get it with proper points) the bottom goalie teams, again 4 of them, got 7.5 goalie points a gap of 28, considerably less than a points only format.
The top overall Roto team Great Wall of Chinny got 100 points, 34 of which came from goalies, which is only a gap of 26.5 to the bottom goalie teams again much less than the 44 points it was in points only.

so in saying that i think it shows goalies going far is ideal in either format but is actually a bigger advantage in Points only, not Roto

[Dean Youngblood]

I am new to the league so you can take my opinions with a grain of salt if you wish:

1. Not a huge fan of Yahoo from the past so Fantrax is fine with me. I haven't played with Chinny's salaries but they look fair to me and as an old minor hockey teammate, I will trust Chinny.

2. Yes to F over wingers. I am just speculating from my experience in a 20 team league, but in a 30 team league I would guess that it becomes very difficult to get all guys to make trades (some guys probably make more than others). Having the flux to deal with straight F's would definitely help facilitate trades and encourage it.

3. Sounds like lowering free agents to 25 makes sense. My guess that the pick ups are usually those who heat up out of no where or guys you "hope" to heat up so I doubt you could find 700 (30 x 40) of those in a season.

4. Playoff Scoring - I don't see why the scoring should be any different from the regular season. No big deal to me though (yet haha)

5. Trade Deadline - no biggie to me as long as it's after the NHLs

6. Yes to a 3 day waiver period. Busy people, more time = always a good thing

7. Yes to the Farm. I think this aspect of "managing your team" is why we should play in fantasy leagues. If you switch to Fs this makes a farm even more enticing as it is a bit of a give and take relationship. You give up the winger designation for the sake of easier trades and Take on a new responsibility of managing your farm.

8. I will pass on voting on the new categories but I would lean towards NO. I see the point of both sides. Again, adding new scoring cats could help facilitate new trades and roster movements as certain guys become more "valuable" but the opposite could be argued to - it devalues other guys.

Quick response to this comment,

Additionally, I have another rule change I would like to propose. I would propose that the playoff winner get the 1st overall pick. Maybe give the regular season champ the 2nd overall pick and then the new teams get #3 and 4. I look at this like the NHL expansion rules. An expansion team never gets the top pick. Lets reward the "champs" with the top picks.

As a new owner who was offered two options:
1. To take over Dat Sooks team
or
2. To become a new relegation owner

I believe that you would have a difficult time recruiting GOOD (key word)new owners for the relegation teams if you didn't offer up a top pick. Looking through the available players for the relegation draft there were few players who made owning one of those teams worthwhile (Luongo was by far the best obviously but then the next is Horton).

In the end, I chose to take over Dat Sooks team because it had more depth to work with in regards to trades etc but there is no way I would have even considered taking the relegation team without one of the top 2 picks. Obviously, I know that this league is a Gem and that's why I joined but you need still need to entice new GOOD owners somehow and high picks does that.

[Dean Youngblood]

2. going to 9F - HELL NO. i'm sorry, but this would remove a lot of the fun and strategy for me. i don't want to go over the top here, but i might lose interest. i haven't played in a F/D/G pool in years and i'm quite happy about that. also - it seems to me that a lot of the motivation for trades has been using a strong position to fill a weak one. combining 3 positions into 1 would seem to strip that motivation away.

example: i have 4 decent, active centers but only 2 1/2 RWs right now. this summer i need to address that by trying to move a C or LW for a RW. if it was all F, i would be content to just sit on my ass and let my young guys develop.
[/i]

Before posting, I didn't get through all of the thread's posts. After reading this section of Ultrawhiteness' post, he may have pursuaded me about the No 9 F. I play in a few F leagues and he's correct that many guys just sit on their asses and watch their teams "develop". Good point.

[Chinny]

Grain of salt noted!

"Dean" any opinions you have are more than welcome for this league, you are a respected Dobberite and your addition will only make this league better.

I can't take full credit for the salaries, it was Russ' idea and i just ran with it! He is a great Comish (hence the name) and deserves the best for the league and members like you will only help him make this the league he first envisioned.

A few more comments from me (sorry i said i would chime in as things came to mind)
- I am still on the fence about a Farm system, part of the skill in this league is managing your roster with proper youth and pro players. Do you take the chance and load up with pro's or build around youth and risk your standing in the league? Finding the right mix is what makes this league what it is. Having a depth young player step up with a big year is a great reward, having a top prospect stay as only a prospect hurts, but it is all part of managing your roster.

9 forwards instead of 3/3/3 isn't an idea i would like to pursue, like it has been mentioned, trading to fill your positional needs is a great way to keep activity up, with everyone trying to keep enough depth to fill a full lineup positional trading is a very key part of the league.

[smack]

Here's my take on the big 8 questions.

1. I'm a big fan of Fantrax as I commish a league with my friends on their and have found them to be the best site around. So definitely no complaints from me on moving there.

2. I like how the positions are now. I think many of us have made many trades based on positions and have passed over many trades. I was in 1 league with just forwards and I honestly was not a big fan of that so I vote to leave it as is.

3. I don't see anything wrong with moving the pick ups to 25. I was one of the guys who used at least 20 pick ups I think, but 25 should be more than enough.

4. On playoff scoring, I'm pretty good either way. It's really one thing that unless you've got some complaints about, I wouldn't change it just for the sake of changing it. If there have been a lot of people wanting to change it, then I'm ok with that.

5. 2 weeks before the end of the season is good with me.

6. Yeah, to be fair to everyone getting a chance, moving it to 3 days is good.

7. I like the idea of a 20 man roster with 5 farm. Just a question. Will it be easy to call up players or send down players to the farm. . . without waivers? If you have to call up the farm players, then I don't think their salaries should count toward the cap if you can't use them, but I don't see that being a big deal since most farm players probably have a $5 salary. Increasing it to 10 farm for the draft is another good plan that I don't see changing the dynamic too much. And 24 should be old enough as an age limit, imo.

8. Player/goalie ratios should stay the same so I don't really want to add more than 1 category for each. The only offensive categories I'd be for adding are hits, BS, and there might be one more that I can't remember right now. For goalies, I guess sv %. But if we keep the cats as is, I'll be ok with that.

I hope that's everything and love the discussion on this.