Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

CDCGML 2020-21


canuck2xtreme
 Share

Recommended Posts

Something that could be done, and I think would work well would be...

 

If you dont hit a certain point threshold you lose your 1st round pick.

 

So if you tank too hard sucks to suck lol

 

Also makes bottom feeder look for those vets if they're struggling to hit threshold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Crabby said:

1 more thing. Its bad and frustrating enough for me. Imagine being @da.mooseWho just traded value for a pick thats value just dropped harder than GNUS did for me last year :lol:

Considering it was a nearly 30 year old pending free agent forward sold as a franchise player who never produced more than 53 points in a season AND based off the very minimal value pending free agents have in this league for some reason and that the acquiring team didn't even bother asking for permission to see if the player may even sign. I am going with a " da.moose makes that trade 11 out of 10 times before Andre Leplum realizes what just happened lol "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Crabby said:

1 more thing. Its bad and frustrating enough for me. Imagine being @da.mooseWho just traded value for a pick thats value just dropped harder than GNUS did for me last year :lol:

Considering it was a nearly 30 year old pending free agent forward sold as a franchise player who never produced more than 53 points in a season AND based off the very minimal value pending free agents have in this league for some reason and that the acquiring team didn't even bother asking for permission to see if the player may even sign. I am going with a " da.moose makes that trade 11 out of 10 times before Andre Leplum realizes what just happened lol "

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

Considering it was a nearly 30 year old pending free agent forward sold as a franchise player who never produced more than 53 points in a season AND based off the very minimal value pending free agents have in this league for some reason and that the acquiring team didn't even bother asking for permission to see if the player may even sign. I am going with a " da.moose makes that trade 11 out of 10 times before Andre Leplum realizes what just happened lol "

Well I didnt go back and look at deal I just assumed he paid a fair bit for that pick LOL

 

I know yall (me included) hate Toronto, but I mean...

Come On Man GIF by memecandy

Edited by Crabby
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sergei Bobrovsky said:

Although this revision will for sure create some unfortunate circumstances for a select few of GMs, I don't see this change being made due to those teams, even though these teams are either top of the league or in the middle of a rebuild, in the whole grand scheme of things, this change doesn't really impact them nearly as much as the teams that I personally think this change is directed to.

 

The only teams that are truly gutted by this change are the ones that have built their house made out of straws by gaining assets thru lottery picks at the expense of icing a competent roster. By the sounds of it from reading recent public posts made by execs, the exec wolf has been howling for years now and unfortunately all to deaf ears. As a GM who has been here for more than 5+ years now, I too have witnessed these strawhomes being built. And unfortunately, the neighborhood that once had just a couple of strawhomes now have multiplied. It really is unfortunate as I think it's gotten to the point where some GMs just think it's okay and even normal to proceed in doing that but it clearly goes against the CBA you accepted and chose to abide by when being given a team to GM. You have goal A and have justification B to build your team a certain way but that doesn't mean justification B allows you to go against the CBA. I think this breeze that knocked down your home now forces you to take ownership of what you built. The execs can't force you to make a trade or sign a player but you must follow league rules like how the other teams do, so something had to be done.

 

I challenge you to look at your peers who are also rebuilding. Within this group of rebuilding teams, how is it fair for a certain group of rebuilding teams miss out on top picks because they chose to follow the rules and then have their peers who don't follow the rules win lottery pick after lottery pick. I know there are 1st timers who are here so it's not like you've constantly been doing this but that doesn't mean what you're doing is fair/within rules. If anybody is getting slapped in the face it's these teams who are honorable and want to play the game as realistic as possible that are getting canned year after year from a lottery pick. I think a part of the problem is the the fact that tanking has become so mainstream nowadays that people think it's an effective way to run an org. From what I have read so far about this topic the few times it's been made public is that all the exec wants you to do is just to ice an NHL roster. A fwd group, a blue line, starter and a back up etc etc but the most important thing being that they are actual NHL players.. the GML is a game based off of the NHL not the AHL.

 

The most effective way in tanking is to get AHL talent on your main roster yes but this league derives from the NHL and your first job as any other NHL GM is to have an NHL calibre product which means for us is to ice a full NHL team. If these real life GM's don't then they lose their jobs. This same concept of getting AHL players who don't have NHL status/just lack of NHL players in general has gotten out of hand now as throughout the years there has always been a revolving door of 5 or 6 or so teams that choose to take this approach. The number was never that big from what I can recall when I first started my tenure but it's surely isn't diminishing which isn't healthy for the league. This notion of not icing an NHL squad needs to be removed and I for one think this is the healthiest way to go about it as it seems the exec is done asking and just going to lay the hammer. Sucks for first time GMs but again, I am pointing back to the CBA.

 

It's unfortunate that this ruling has to exist in this fashion but I can see why it's necessary and needs to be done. The only .2c I have to input is to maybe find a way to have genuine playoff teams who just missed the playoffs not have the exact same odds as somebody who is rebuilding? Tiered odds maybe? Overall I like this idea of adding an extra layer of entropy to punish intentional bad behaviour.

This.  For the love of God, THIS!  I mean, all of it.  But especially the bolded.

 

The teams at the bottom need help?  Sure.  But lets take one of those stripped down, nothing left teams.  Now put Alex Lafreniere on them.

 

Still a dumpster fire. 

 

ONE guy does not make a team.  Look at Jack Eichel in Buffalo. 

 

I get that some teams are going to be frustrated.  But the majority of those teams actually see their odds go UP (though it may not feel like it at the moment).

Honestly, this is not as monumental a shift as some here are making it out to be.

Edited by canuck2xtreme
  • Like 2
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random thoughts:

 

good chats and voices in this room.
 

Tanking is the greatest sin in the GML. It’s in the CBA, and the league is built around that principal. I believe Its historically the fastest route to not being in the GML.
 

Ive been at the very bottom. You stay up late and scour rosters and media for free agent prospects, you negotiate and make deals and claim off waivers. You ice a team, because that’s the price you pay to hang out in this room. You owe us all that.

 

I’ve had first overall (Sam Reinhart)... Tarasenko at 8 I think... Schwartz in the 20+’s... i also have taken first rounders that never played or fizzled out fast... I love listening to everyone talking about draft picks as fixed value :lol:.

Edited by greensman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, greensman said:

Random thoughts:

 

good chats and voices in this room.
 

Tanking is the greatest sin in the GML. It’s in the CBA, and the league is built around that principal. I believe Its historically the fastest route to not being in the GML.
 

Ive been at the very bottom. You stay up late and scour rosters and media for free agent prospects, you negotiate and make deals and claim off waivers. You ice a team, because that’s the price you pay to hang out in this room. You owe us all that.

 

I’ve had first overall (Sam Reinhart)... Tarasenko at 8 I think... Schwartz in the 20+’s... i also have taken first rounders that never played or fizzled out fast... I love listening to everyone talking about draft picks as fixed value :lol:.

Our first entry draft I took Nicklas Jensen 10th overall.

 

Then the Canucks selected him.  And I looked like a genius.

 

How'd that work out?

 

:picard:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, da.moose said:

I totally understand the leagues desire to create parity in the league. I think that rule changes that force all teams to ice competent rosters could create a more competitive and realistic league. I can assure you that I love seeing bottom tier teams hire active GM's who ice competitive rosters as much as anyone. With that being said making a rule change of this magnitude mid season is TOTAL BUSH LEAGUE in my honest opinion.

 

I know I just acquired a lottery pick so my opinion may seem like it is coming from a bias place but that is surely not the case. When I suggested changes to the scoring system I made it quite clear and it seemed to be fairly agreed upon that teams would need time to adjust and mold their teams appropriately according to the teams in the league.

 

This must just be a total shot to the gut to teams like Vegas, NYR, Minnesota, Carolina etc who are all active members that have strategically rebuilt their teams to give them a strong chance at a very high end prospect this season. For these organizations that are most dependant on their lottery picks as one of their most valuable assets to build around this new rule implemented at this particular time is blatantly unfair in my personal opinion.

 

I hate being in this position where I feel like I'm disrespecting our valued team of executives who contribute so much to this league year after year but I also feel as though it is my responsibility as a long tenured GM to speak up and have these discussions because our depth of membership and commitment and patience from the bottom as well as the top is part of what makes this league so great.

 

Once again, this is not me saying that this rule couldn't benefit the league if implemented for the 2022 draft. I see the benefits. However the timing of this for the teams that have structured their organizations, depth charts, salary terms, etc based on the potential talent that is available at the top of the draft compared to say 10 - 14 overall is unjust; once again in my personal opinion. 

Bold point #1: There have not yet been any changes made to the scoring system, and if/when there are, teams will be given ample notice. It will not be implemented mid-season.  This is being implemented now because it effects the off-season, not play during the season, and there is over 5 months until the draft.  Teams have plenty of time to adjust accordingly if they so choose.

 

Bold point #2: I'm not taking a direct shot at anybody, but I know at least one of those teams is very much in favour of this change.  Wanting to land a high pick is totally fine, but nothing was ever set in stone as far as draft lottery odds.  We've seen teams with very long odds jump up in the draft lottery already.  Look at the Rangers last year. Made the play in round, still got 1st overall.

 

This change rewards teams for trying, even if they miss the mark.  Make a push to make the playoffs or better your roster.  If you still miss, you didn't hurt your draft lottery odds. It provides incentive for these teams to build rather than wait for one draft pick to magically save them.

Edited by canuck2xtreme
  • Like 2
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Crabby said:

I have absolutely 0 issue at all with the rule, and honestly I love it. However its a major rule change implemented immedietly that completely screws me. 

 

Fox wont resign

 

My chance my top 5 pick drops dramatically.

(Fox replacement/Possible help for Fox) 

 

I have not been moving everyone for picks. I have traded for numerous almost full time young guys because I want to compete soon and not wait 5+ years for 100 picks to develop. There are a couple teams that do seem to love drafting more than competing and I can see how that is a huge problem

 

Ive also signed guys like Beagle, Chara, Howard, Weber, etc in hopes to try and atleast ice an NHL roster. My team fell horribly after a surprising start, so yeah, I moved vets for futures. Thats just smart GMing imo. 

 

However doing so made it impossible for me to sign a key cornerstone guy in Fox, and now basically being forced to move my #1 Dman, and having my top pick most likely turned into a mid round pick makes it very hard and frustrating for someone who has worked the phones EXTREMELY HARD to have a QUICK REBUILD done. Its really frustrating for me and im sure many others.

 

Imma still stick it out and have fun either way, but I really believe yall need to make this start next year  and give us an offseason to prepare for it. Its really a huge slap in the face to have a rule lile this implemented immedietly and completely screws so many GMs over. Ive done nothing but try and better this team. Idc about drafting 1st OA every year. TBH drafting #32 would be a hell of a lot cooler B)

 

Anyway thats my 3rd and final rant on the subject, but honestly the idea to make it immediate is even worse than the way the Canucks are playing this year

 

Seriously! :bigblush:

Issue #1 - Fox won't re-sign, being 'forced' to move my #1 Dman.

 - First, he didn't say he "won't re-sign", he told you exactly why he was hesitant to consider an extension at the moment, and I'm pretty sure it had something to do with the roster tear down and the fact that you don't have any goaltending behind him.  So this is a self inflicted wound.  It's also an easily fixable one, and now there is zero deterrent to you doing just that.  Nobody is forcing you to move him.  If you do, that's on you, and nobody else. 

 

Issue #2 - Odds of top 5 pick drops dramatically/"My lottery pick just got thrown in the trash"

- Let's examine this shall we?  Your team is currently 4th last, which according to Tankathon, would give the NHL team in that position (ironically Vancouver... yay?) a 9.5% chance at the 1st pick.  Giving teams all even odds reduces your odds to 6.67%.  So not even a 3% drop.  In fact, the odds only drop at all for 5 teams currently in play (6 if you count Seattle) and only 2 of those 5 teams drop more than 3%.  That's hardly throwing it in the trash.  But hey, if you don't want it, I'm happy to take out the trash for you. ;)

 

Issue #3 - Completely screws so many GMs over.

- See answer #2. 

 

Issue #4 - Major rule change implemented immediately is a bad idea

- This is not a major rule change, and it's impact is not as far reaching as you seem to think.  The numbers bear this out.  And it's being implemented nearly half a year before the entry draft.  It does adversely effect a couple of teams, which is unfortunate, but this is usually the case with any adjustment that is made.  Make no mistake, we've made adjustments in season before, ones that I would argue are far more significant than this one.  However, there is plenty of time to adjust, as I've mentioned before. 

And finally, can we all remember that these are only lottery odds???  You still have to win the damn thing. Ottawa had great odds to pick 1-2 last year, and ended up picking 3 and 5.  Were they disappointed? Sure.  But did they still have a pretty damn good draft day?  Yeah they did.  Hell, right now I think most people take Stutzle over Lafreniere anyways.

Edited by canuck2xtreme
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Azzy said:

I have no horse in this race, but I'm more concerned about the potential for a very good team that finishes a point outside the playoffs now having an equal shot at #1. So rather than ask for it to come in for the 2021/22 season, can I ask for it to just never happen? :lol:

The way I see it is that if a team just missed the playoffs by one point, they would be gutted (assuming they were making a real attempt to get to the playoffs). They should indeed be rewarded (potentially) for their efforts because at least they tried and I believe that's the goal for this.

 

A team could still "tank" if they choose with the knowledge that they are still getting a top 16 draft choice, which isn't anything to scoff at, and still get the top picks in the subsequent rounds. They can still load up on picks and simply make good draft choices, just not handed a top 5 pick or whatever. So then it becomes the choice if it's worth it.

 

So I still see teams tanking, but I think this is motivation for more teams to try and the teams that do and just miss out still have a chance to further their team for their efforts.

  • Like 2
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

So I still see teams tanking

You make very good points, but just hung up on this one... 

 

Tankers will get fired before they ever get to execute their picks (obviously, first warning and discourse). Teams may not do well, and rebuilding teams may produce less points, but tanking is a deal breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think GM’s just need to understand that not icing a complete NHL roster is not going to provide you with assets the following year that is going to turn your team around. It’s going to provide you with one guy of 23 who will be a bit better than the guy you would have drafted if you didn’t tank. 
 

If a GM isn’t actively making an effort to put a minimum of 12 NHL forwards 6 NHL Defenceman and at least 1 NHL goalie that GM isn’t following the CBA that everyone should read every season and isn’t doing his job. If they can’t figure that out they should be fired from that team. I’m not saying they should be banned from the league. I’m saying they should be let go from that team and free to be hired by another team if an opening came up in the league in the future. Just like in the NHL in real life. 

Edited by ActionJax09
  • Like 2
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an impacted club, what with my little hovel down here being built slowly out of the swamp with sticks and wattle over many years. I am another club that is impacted but likes the rule. My 'analyst' hat from yesteryear is on now, not my GM of the Rangers hat from today. 

 

In real life, tanking is mitigated by the clubs need to keep bums in the seats or lose out on 75% of revenue, but in GML revenue doesn't exist so we need incentives to keep competitive (which i guess is actually mentioned a few times and places in the CBA as it was written to start each season already)

 

Our game is solely predicated on the wish to be in the post season. If you miss by 1 point right now you are punished for trying because the guy who finished dead last has a better shot at the best pick(s) which we all know are the McDavid's the Sedins and the Matthews'.

 

It is a great fix to give every non playoff team the same odds which dis-incentivizes losing all your talent at the end of a bad year, which is arguably making your job that much harder for next year. I also think that it is a great move to do our equal odds lotto first to then seed our ties to the actual NHL draft lotto which is very exciting year over year for fantasy keeper leagues to partake in. 

 

I too thought that perhaps this was best announced for a future year, and went and re-read our CBA and there was plenty of mention that generally tanking is not a permitted function of a GM. In the spirit of that already existing rule, I don't see a way to now complain that not letting me finish tanking somehow abridges my rights. (I am uniquely qualified to say that having the better odds doesn't always work anyway: never won the lotto and have always been pushed out of 3rd or 4th overall by those who DO win the lotto) Shrug. I am okay with this being implemented right away, because it fixes a real problem that exists not here now because of a few people: but a problem that would exist in any keeper league as successful as to survive a decade and still be going strong. 

 

I just at the end of the day don't see this as against anyone, but for the entire league. Incentive to make the playoffs is the only incentive the fantasy keeper league should have. I may not have had this opinion when i began as a keeper GM, but I have always been a keen fan of fairness. I think this is much more fair to the vast majority of players and hate to say it, much more fair to brand new Gm's of the future. It is extremely tough to come into this league and do well. No matter when or what year the rule is implemented 5 Gm's will be the 5 who are at the bottom and the most impacted, it is just that this year, I happen to be one of them. WHy I don't really care though: we are only talking about the seeding odds from 1st to 15th or whatever. if the old odds were 18% and the new odds are 6.66% for the worst team in the league: then the entire change is only for a few people, the loss of 12% odds of winning the lottery, but for 10 people, your odds just went up. 

 

No biggie. now lets get to the hits and blocks, haha. 

 

Edit: because you know I can't shut up... Just occurred to me while I was scanning for typos all the teams in the lotto are still getting the picks 1 thru 15, right? It is a very small deal indeed to make this equity and parity minded change and as was pointed out it doesn't affect scoring so really doesn't matter when it is brought in. 

 

2nd edit: better to bring it in on a year where there is no clearcut top tier number one concensus draft pick like Matthews, McDavid or Crosby, haha, that would be a worse time i bet, lol. 

 

3rd and last edit: looking over the top 32 prospects lists on several sights just now; I think right now this is the very best possible year to include this rule change. Small silver lining to covid interruption is that so much hockey has been interupted, jumbled and delayed that this coming NHL entry draft has the top talent listed all over the map. It is a 'scramble' as it is even with our old rules in this one coming draft relative to all the others. So much interuption makes the slight interruption of the lotto rule change much easier to digest. Much more so than any other year, IMO> 

 

K no more edits, moving my thoughts onto my revamped team sheet, it is the small things in life, haha. 

Edited by Primal Optimist
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Anaheim Ducks activate goaltender Alex Stalock and send goaltender Craig Anderson down to the California Golden Seals

 

Updated lineup

 

Hall-Couturier-Palmieri

Kreider - Lindblom - Byron

Zucarello - Grant  - Raffl

Nash - Sutter - Bastian

Haas

 

Defense

Murray - Doughty

Severson - Carlo

Gilbert - Haakanpaa

Greene

 

Dubnyk

Stalock

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, greensman said:

You make very good points, but just hung up on this one... 

 

Tankers will get fired before they ever get to execute their picks (obviously, first warning and discourse). Teams may not do well, and rebuilding teams may produce less points, but tanking is a deal breaker.

Tanking is a legit NHL strategy. We have seen it. I see nothing wrong with a team wanting a full tear down and starting over especially now that it's no guarantee that you'd even get the top 5 picks. The main issue as @canuck2xtreme seems to be peeved about is icing a full roster. I see no excuse to not be able to ice a complete roster even a crappy one and that is where the unrealistic portion happens IMO. Of course injuries and covid play a part, but most teams should have some depth (again part of GMing). I have a list of about 8 unsigned players that are playing moderate games with a few of them as regulars for the most part in the NHL and they could be had for free without burning assets.

 

So I guess if we are talking "tanking" as not icing a full roster, then yes. But I think teams selling off players (as long as they can replenish bodies) is a perfectly fine strategy if the goal is to start fresh, which IMO is still tanking but fair in the scope of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...