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

Recommended Posts

So, listen, all of those goaltender comments are true, and there are lots of great thoughts here...

 

Main points are:

Point A - common sense. You know perfectly well if you have an unfair advantage 

Point B - teams change. Goalies are always rising and falling. If you have two established and time proven starters, you already know it, and so do we. 
 

If you are in violation, make plans. Start now, before you are forced to do it under pressure. If there is message from the exec coming to you, you already know it. Fact. When you do get the message from the exec, it won’t be a negotiation or a chat, and you won’t be given months. It will come in the form of player demanding a trade, or players refusing to play. Get on it :metal:

 

Ive said this a thousand times... not one person on the exec wants to be a cop or a mom... we detest it, and it’s the worst part of the job. If you make them/us take action, not only will action be swift, but it will be definitive. You won’t like it, probably on par with how much we as exec don’t like having to send it. Don’t go there. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Sedinery 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

^

|

|

 

I moved Lehner for this very reason. I knew I couldn't keep both as they had both proven themselves to be starters for their respective teams. Sucks moving a good goaltender but sometimes we have to do what's not enjoyable for the parity of the league. 

 

I want as much realism as possible and I know a fantasy league can only go so far to enforce such things in a fun league. We just need to take account of what we have be semi realistic about it. Agent did the same with vas as many others have done before.

 

Good goalies cost a good return though. Just look at Vas and Lehner they both cost a pretty penny.

 

On a side note. Big save Dave has claimed markstrom's throne in Calgary for a short time. Fingers crossed the flames former 1A starter can put together some good results. Would love to see Seattle take a flyer on him irl.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, greensman said:

So, listen, all of those goaltender comments are true, and there are lots of great thoughts here...

 

Main points are:

Point A - common sense. You know perfectly well if you have an unfair advantage 

Point B - teams change. Goalies are always rising and falling. If you have two established and time proven starters, you already know it, and so do we. 
 

If you are in violation, make plans. Start now, before you are forced to do it under pressure. If there is message from the exec coming to you, you already know it. Fact. When you do get the message from the exec, it won’t be a negotiation or a chat, and you won’t be given months. It will come in the form of player demanding a trade, or players refusing to play. Get on it :metal:

 

Ive said this a thousand times... not one person on the exec wants to be a cop or a mom... we detest it, and it’s the worst part of the job. If you make them/us take action, not only will action be swift, but it will be definitive. You won’t like it, probably on par with how much we as exec don’t like having to send it. Don’t go there. 

I will say, I don’t think the OTTS situation deserved him being forced to trade..Ian Cole was it?

 

I don’t think that was an issue with having a star player on the 4th line. 
 

and the more I think about it, the more that I believe the salary cap is all we need. There is no “unfair” advantage, everyone has the same cap constraints. 
 

 

  • Vintage 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont look now, but my back-up, Jonathan Quick (signed as a UFA in the offseason) now has more points than Price, my starter.

 

And I passed Sharpy in the standings.

 

Hellfire awaits.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rush17 said:

^

|

|

 

I moved Lehner for this very reason. I knew I couldn't keep both as they had both proven themselves to be starters for their respective teams. Sucks moving a good goaltender but sometimes we have to do what's not enjoyable for the parity of the league. 

 

I want as much realism as possible and I know a fantasy league can only go so far to enforce such things in a fun league. We just need to take account of what we have be semi realistic about it. Agent did the same with vas as many others have done before.

 

Good goalies cost a good return though. Just look at Vas and Lehner they both cost a pretty penny.

 

On a side note. Big save Dave has claimed markstrom's throne in Calgary for a short time. Fingers crossed the flames former 1A starter can put together some good results. Would love to see Seattle take a flyer on him irl.

Yep, after his first stellar season Binnington made me have to move Bishop. It was obvious, and I made the deal long before the league needed to talk to me. 
 

again, you already know... you don’t need to be told. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Tony Romo said:

I will say, I don’t think the OTTS situation deserved him being forced to trade..Ian Cole was it?

 

I don’t think that was an issue with having a star player on the 4th line. 
 

 

 

1264CEA4-7B55-4822-93FA-88F997A18061.gif
 

ps - Ian Cole averaged 19:45 atoi that year and was slated to be on a third pairing. Details matter. If someone did that today, I’d happily draft the letter myself. 

Edited by greensman
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, luckylager said:

@Rush17

How are the divisions stacking up? I'd try to figure it out for myself if you didn't create such awesome info-graphics. (And I'm lazy)

I'll do another one soon-ish.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tony Romo said:

I just think that was nitpicky. He got him at the deadline, and he was a cup favourite. I think a player like Cole in real life would be pumped to go to a contending team at the deadline even if he’s on the 3rd pairing. 
 

I also don’t think ice time is a good measure , I wouldn’t bat an eye if a team had Tyler Myers on the 3rd pairing and he averages 20 minutes a game irl
 

also I’m pretty sure Sergachev or Mcdonagh is on the 3rd pairing in Tampa Bay. The whole goal is to have a good 3rd pairing that you can fit under the salary cap. 

We spend an entire season waiting to see where players match up, and by the TDL each year things become very clear...

 

Before any letter is sent where a player is demanding a trade, the GM is contacted. If a GM chooses to completely ignore warnings from the exec, guess what the outcome would be :picard: . Now imagine if the same GM did this repeatedly, year after year... 

 

We would never let a team go to the playoffs with 6 top 4 d-men. Maybe make sure you know the whole story. 

 

The rules are on page 1. Balancing a team is a GM’s job. Cap is not your only limitation. Im very confused by this whole conversation... you aren’t new :blink: this is the GML. Same rules have a been fine tuned and applied for over a decade. MANY letters and discussions have been sent during that time regarding player balance.


Ps - Ian Cole and the Av’s went 0-4 in the first round that year, and Cole got 2 points. The exec did him a favour anyways... :lol:

Edited by greensman
  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to have done some comparative work with tendies in another league that has a list of starters yiu can only have one of. 

 

Three of the top ten teams in that league had zero from the starters list, 5 teams in the top half! Meanwhile I think it was 3 of the 19 or 20 starters were in the bottom ten clubs. 

 

Reason: generally, if you spen 12 million on goalies, or more, that is almost 1/7th of your cap. Adding one awesome suoerstR forward for 10m and a dman of similar caliber and your left with cheap filler at the other 19 positions. Generalizing, the cost of stacking the crease is its own drawback to stacking the crease. Not to mention the headache of the real starters list changing a lot all Eason long while a fantasy league could have a guy withb3 starts so far locked into that list. Lastly, expansion draft will generally force one of two vet goalies to move, so this particular year, it should solve itself, if anyone still thinks thee is an advantage to which goalies are in the crease. 

 

Generally I like fairness, but in GML there is a lot of checks and balances on tendies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, greensman said:

 

1264CEA4-7B55-4822-93FA-88F997A18061.gif
 

ps - Ian Cole averaged 19:45 atoi that year and was slated to be on a third pairing. Details matter. If someone did that today, I’d happily draft the letter myself. 

Even then, Cole wasn’t the issue. Mete was, skating near 20 minutes a night in Montreal’s top 4, but being assigned to the minors because he had 8 other defenceman playing 18-20 minutes a night, along with 2 playing 25 minutes. So yeah, it was absolutely justified. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tony Romo said:

I don’t think it’s a big deal, and will rarely be an issue, more of a theoretical argument. 

As the person who deals with these issues? Let me tell you that it’s not theoretical, and it’s very frequently an issue. 
 

If it were rarely, it would be much easier to manage. 

Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...