|
Post by MinnesotaGM on Sept 18, 2015 19:36:12 GMT
I love it. 40 max active/reserve + farm. I am down
|
|
|
Post by Red Wings GM on Sept 18, 2015 21:48:29 GMT
I'm good with this too.
|
|
|
Post by St.Pats GM (Christian) on Sept 18, 2015 21:50:47 GMT
Sign me up as well.
|
|
|
Post by Penguins GM (Pat) on Sept 18, 2015 22:37:42 GMT
I'm for this. I would want to add to the waiver eligibility aspect of it, but approve
(1-0) or (4-0) if you count Minny, Detroit, and St. Pats also
|
|
|
Post by ltcompton(SharksGM) on Sept 18, 2015 23:01:35 GMT
Yes, I'll have some as well
|
|
|
Post by WhalersGM_Dan on Sept 19, 2015 14:56:52 GMT
Whoa, we're half way there...
whoooooa, livin on a prayer...
|
|
|
Post by Oilers GM (Julian) on Sept 20, 2015 2:06:23 GMT
Good suggestion Dan (6-0)
|
|
|
Post by Habs GM (Loïk) on Sept 21, 2015 12:21:58 GMT
7-0
|
|
|
Post by Blues GM (Trent) on Sept 21, 2015 22:47:36 GMT
To me this is a bailout for those that used the initial draft to build their farm. Don't get me wrong it's a valid strategy, and I love prospects as much as the next guy. I just don't think farms should be raised yet. Maybe a few years down the road, but not as soon as next year.
7-1
|
|
|
Post by WhalersGM_Dan on Sept 21, 2015 22:57:10 GMT
To me this is a bailout for those that used the initial draft to build their farm. 7-1 How so? It seems like it's actually the opposite: teams with weaker pools would want more slots to increase their probability. I don't see how this would hurt of help anyone. All it really does is allow people to go deeper down the prospect rabbit hole. Everyone would have equal footing. It would also help alleviate the issue of people having to wait 48-72 hours for FA bids when they have injuries: large farms means you can store young professionals on the farm for quick call ups. Again, it seems completely neutral as everyone would receive the same benefit.
|
|
|
Post by Canes GM (Devin) on Sept 22, 2015 2:38:58 GMT
Having a deeper minors is not going to do anything to alleviate injuries really. Most players on your minors squad will not be playing in NHL games. You can call them up but if they aren't playing in NHL games what good does that do?
|
|
|
Post by Blues GM (Trent) on Sept 22, 2015 5:13:06 GMT
To me this is a bailout for those that used the initial draft to build their farm. 7-1 How so? It seems like it's actually the opposite: teams with weaker pools would want more slots to increase their probability. I don't see how this would hurt of help anyone. All it really does is allow people to go deeper down the prospect rabbit hole. Everyone would have equal footing. It would also help alleviate the issue of people having to wait 48-72 hours for FA bids when they have injuries: large farms means you can store young professionals on the farm for quick call ups. Again, it seems completely neutral as everyone would receive the same benefit. Agree with Devin about the injury situation. Expanding the farm isn't going to help with that because the extra guys you are getting are going to most likely be at least a year+ from making an NHL roster. Not to single just you 2 guys out, but lets take you and Penguins as an example for building the farm through the draft. Both of you guys have 11 prospects already. Not sure about the cap situation for your farm teams, but its probably close to the cap. If the farm is expanded it now gives a bailout because you are now going to bid on more prospects that you wouldnt have been able to. Thus, making it so even fewer prospects that have any potential are left. I don't buy the argument that expanding of the farms also makes it so someone isn't going to be able to bid up your prospect and you can't do anything about it since you don't have cap. An owner who would bid up like that is also going to have enough cap space with the 20 million to bid it up even more. Again, Im happy with my team and don't plan on signing any prospects with the current rules. So, it's not like I'm worried about you guys taking prospects I want. I just don't see the point in expanding right now. Like I said I am all for expanding in a couple years.
|
|
|
Post by St.Pats GM (Christian) on Sept 22, 2015 15:10:17 GMT
If I'm not mistaken all rule changes are to be applied for the following season, no immediate change. So those who are near the "minors cap" would still be in the same situation for 2015-2016.
|
|
|
Post by WhalersGM_Dan on Sept 22, 2015 15:50:26 GMT
That's right Christian. By then, I expect half my farm to be empty anyway.
I don't want this because I think it benefits me, want it because it's a deep league and with the cap, prospects will become key long term. I just find it really fun to fill my farm with long shots and watch them grow. I see it as something that active GMs can take advantage of and less active GMs can ignore.
Everybody wins.
|
|
|
Post by WhalersGM_Dan on Sept 22, 2015 15:53:51 GMT
side note: if farms stay at 10, that means that with 3 rounds we will have a minimum of 72 prospects entering the league each year. In this scenario, the players you pick in the 3rd will become a wasted pick because you won't want to drop players you've waited on to make room.
A deeper farm makes 2nd and 3rd rounders much more relevant, which can only be a good thing!
|
|
|
Post by Blues GM (Trent) on Sept 22, 2015 19:51:25 GMT
side note: if farms stay at 10, that means that with 3 rounds we will have a minimum of 72 prospects entering the league each year. In this scenario, the players you pick in the 3rd will become a wasted pick because you won't want to drop players you've waited on to make room. A deeper farm makes 2nd and 3rd rounders much more relevant, which can only be a good thing! Like I said I am all for increasing the farm size in the 3rd year. So, during the 2nd year it would need to be voted on. Just don't see the need to in the 2nd year when we have only had 1 prospect draft. Also, I think something more like a $15 million cap would be more reasonable as 1st time increase than doubling to $20 million
|
|
|
Post by Blues GM (Trent) on Sept 22, 2015 20:19:29 GMT
That's right Christian. By then, I expect half my farm to be empty anyway. I don't want this because I think it benefits me, want it because it's a deep league and with the cap, prospects will become key long term. I just find it really fun to fill my farm with long shots and watch them grow. I see it as something that active GMs can take advantage of and less active GMs can ignore. Everybody wins. To me active GM's benefit more from a smaller farm system. It takes more knowledge and research to find the prospects that actually will blossom into NHL players because you have smaller room to make a bad signing. With a large farm system the bad signings don't mean anything because you can just keep adding more prospects that won't end up to be anything, and get rid of them when their contract is up
|
|
|
Post by Canes GM (Devin) on Sept 23, 2015 10:40:53 GMT
Exactly Trent. Having smaller minors makes it that much more important to do your homework/research on prospects so you hit on every pick or minors signing. Have a larger minors system is the complete opposite and it just turns into a crap shoot where guys don't have to do much research and can just pick up minors players left and right.
|
|
|
Post by Penguins GM (Pat) on Sept 23, 2015 11:42:53 GMT
Wasn't the whole point of this to solve the 72 hour UFA problem? Having waiver eligible guys who you can call up if your big league club has an injury. The difference between having $10m and $15m isn't significant enough to give anyone much of an advantage prospects-wise. You could also argue bigger minors give GM's who do their research more of an advantage, but, correct me if I'm wrong, that's not the point.
|
|
|
Post by Canes GM (Devin) on Sept 23, 2015 12:37:19 GMT
Pat, that was never my point of expanding minors and I'm against expanding minors this much. Expanding minors to counter act the 72 hour rule just isn't going to work. If you look at the make up of most teams minors system, you will see that there are not many players that can actually be called up to slide into an active spot for injured players. Most of these minors players are still in juniors or just getting their first taste of professional hockey in the AHL. These players will do no good for calling them up to insert into the active lineup.
I'm going to argue against your point that expanding minors makes it more difficult and I'm speaking from experience. In my other league we only have 10 minors spots. You really have to do your homework and research on players before signing because your spots fill up quickly and you can miss out on some potential players if you don't put in the time and effort to do the research. You can really tell in my other league the GM's who actually do research on prospects and the GM's who just sign players. I have been very fortunate that with my homework that I have done that I have hit on some pretty good prospects but I have also missed out on some as well. It makes it more challenging because you reall have to decide which prospects you think can make an actual impact in the NHL versus just signing throwin a bone out there and signing a bunch of prospects and hoping some of them make an actual NHL impact.
|
|
|
Post by WhalersGM_Dan on Sept 24, 2015 14:10:48 GMT
I appreciate everyone's input so far. Prospects are the #1 reason I am in dynasty leagues, so I am biased towards wanting more freedom. I understand Devin and Trent's concerns, however.
Hopefully we can get 4 more votes to expand the farms. I know it only adds enjoyment in my case so I would be excited to have another 10 spots to work with at next year's draft.
|
|
|
Post by Oilers GM (Julian) on Sept 24, 2015 18:59:12 GMT
For the record, any changes that affect the teams directly won't be applied until the season after the next(in this case 3rdseason). (I.e changing points for scoring, #benvh spots etc.)
This is to ensure teams have plenty of time to manage their teams for the change.
|
|