PUCKS R US fantasty league predraft discussion

[barman]

To Managers in the newly formed RxFriends PUCKS R US league

BUSHAY mentioned that there is a method on the League site where we can each cast our votes For or Against a specific stat category.

Can we get that up and going?

Suggest that we only use categories approved by at least eight managers.


Some personal feedback on the default categories:


+/- is imho a specious statistic and is certainly one that is very difficult to manipulate as a management strategy.

===

Suggest we include G, A, PIM, PPG, SHG, SOG for Skaters

For Goalies - W, SV%, SO, GAA

And FOW for the 11th category to break ties in weekly head2head

=======

 

[barman]

VERY strong suggestion based on my active play in other fantasy sports leagues

We need to either have a cap on:

Games Played By Position (customarily 82)

OR

Free Agent Transactions (I've found that about one every other day average is pretty fair, so in this case "90" would apply).


IF one of the above restrictions is not put in place, managers will be forced into a more relentless day to day roster manipulation in order to keep up with the other managers who may choose to use their bottom four or five OnIce slots to constantly rotate fresh bodies in thus building a huge edge in overall Games Played.

To be more specific....Manager X fills his first week roster's bottom five slots with players who are scheduled to play 3in4 days, Mon-Thur. Then he drops them for five other players who are playing 2in3 on Fri-Sun, thus getting a net of FIVE appearances in each of those slots for the week. Over a 22 week season, that would be 110 game appearances in each of those slots.

Any manager not employing this kind of roster shuffling would be at a disadvantage if they kept their overall roster more stable and only got 82-90 games per slot.


All of that noted, we can go without one of the two above restrictions, but please be fully aware of the subsequent need to really do a lot of Transactions each week.

 

[barman]

To clarify my above post with regard to a Head2Head league.

Each week, you and your opponent will enter Monday with 22 starters on your roster.

Presuming the NHL average of 3.15 games per week, this means you could get scoring for about 70 "player appearances" per week.

However, with no restrictions on either Games Played By Position or Transactions, a manager could manipulate his lineup by taking three or four lower ranked starters; using them for Mon, Tue, Thu and then trading them in for three or four other starters whose NHL team is playing 3in4 late in the week.

The net effect is that this manager could get up close to 80 Player Appearances vs his fantasy league opponent who only has 70 because he's not employing the heavy transaction strategy.

Several of the scoring categories are not impacted by Volume of play, but rather by percentages. PIM is one governor against heavy transaction strategy because you would rack up more.

Above food for thought as we get ready for Monday night's draft.

Thanks for your indulgence in reviewing the information and for any usable feedback.

 

[artiesliver]

Personally a fan of the +/- stat.

As for the other ideas--makes sense, haven't given it any real thought but will do so (but ultimately I defer to what the league wants to do).

 

[barman]

Cool.

If we employ the +/- along with the ones I listed above we have 12 categories

I'm a fan of odd numbers so as to almost assure no ties in weekly H2H

 

[wannabewhale]

The league currently has 12 that I picked--they are up for discussion--like Faceoffs won as this can force teams to have a center that may not be a scorer. Not really a fan of the SHG as it may be 0-0 soem weeks
We will put in something about games played per your suggestion

How MANY PLAYERS should be on each team??

 

[barman]

The players per team would likely work better if we eliminated the F position and went with 2 Centers, RW and LW + 6 Defense, 2 Goalies, six bench and either one or two DL slots

The 10team league I'm in uses that, so we collectively drew the "top" 200 players

If we stick with the default 22 at ESPN x12 teams, then of course we're playing with 244 players.

Back in office this evening. Thanks for feedback so far

BTW, agree with criticism of SHG stat...It's pretty marginal as well.

 

[Bushay]

Im against the 6 defencemen suggestion but FOR dropping the F but I only like 4 Defencemen. My other ESPN league is a 14 team league and we go 2C, 2 LW, 2 RW, 4 D, 1 UTL, 3 bench and 2 IR. and the draft went real well. I suggest maybe we try and add 2 more teams. Our stats are G,A,+-,PIM, PPG, SOG, Wins,SV% and GAA. I like it a lot. So Far.

I also agree about the cap on position games. Last season we had a guy drop and add players everyday till the finals and he won the league after just sneaking in the playoffs. So I agree with that one. Limiting the FA Transactions shouldn't be a problem with a cap on positions. Let's get busy. We wasted a lot of time already.

 

[barman]

Updating based on posts which followed my own from last night

Skaters - G, A, +/-, PIM, PPG, SOG, FOW

Goalies - SV%, GAA, W, Shutouts

-------
Limit Games By Position to 82 with no limit on FA transactions

-------

Limit defensemen to four in lineup

Thus two each for C, RW, LW, G

Four Defense

Two "Forwards"

A total of 14 players in lineup

Five Bench and Two IR slots makes

21 total players per team

============
BUSHAY suggests adding two more teams, but I humbly reject that idea since we have 12 now and that sets up a nice Head2Head schedule wherein we each play other managers twice each.

I would hate to have BUSHAY's team sneak by my team in midseason due to lucky scheduling breaks and then not have a chance to trample him in a later rematch

heh

 

[barman]

Feedback from league members of course still welcome.

I'd suggest we arrive at a consensus by late Saturday so each of us can have Sun/Mon to prepare for draft with full knowledge of agreeable League Settings.

 

[Bushay]

I would hate to have BUSHAY's team sneak by my team in midseason due to lucky scheduling breaks and then not have a chance to trample him in a later rematch

heh

Oh it's ON now damn it!

 

[Bushay]

I see another that needs attention. We have 12 teams and as of now it only takes 2 votes to veto a trade. I think that needs to be bumped up to at least 50%. At least. I somebody grabs a nice lead and swings a nice trade to help both clubs...all it would take it 2 haters to squelch it. That's not right.

 

[Bushay]

Feedback from league members of course still welcome.

I'd suggest we arrive at a consensus by late Saturday so each of us can have Sun/Mon to prepare for draft with full knowledge of agreeable League Settings.

Hell, let's tweek this till it's right. However long it takes. Monday anyway.

 

[Bushay]

Everything else looks kosher to me. Cep't the positions may need more attention.

 

[VegasVic]

I know zilch about hockey fantasy and I'm doing this for shits and giggles so I really have little to object to or support. But if I had one wish it would be...keep it simple.

 

[VegasVic]

One thing I'll never understand with hockey fantasy categories is why should someone get a positive out of a negative. Why should PIMs be a category? Wouldn't that be the same as rewarding baseball fantasy leaguers for most errors?

 

[Bushay]

You'll understand soon enough. Just like a team likes to have a tough heavyweight on their team, If PIM is a category on Fan Hockey..then you want a guy on your team that fights a lot and can really rack up the minutes. Years before it was Probert and Domi leading the league in PIM's...Today it's Daniel Carcillo of Phoenix. I believe he's led the league in PIM the last couple seasons. Winning a PIM category is just as important and is as equel in value as Ovechkin winning the scoring title. Your gonna learn the hard way maybe Vic this first season but I'm willing to bet you'll love this as as I stated earlier...it keeps you on your capping game as you follow the individual player a whole lot closer.

 

[barman]

I see another that needs attention. We have 12 teams and as of now it only takes 2 votes to veto a trade. I think that needs to be bumped up to at least 50%. At least. I somebody grabs a nice lead and swings a nice trade to help both clubs...all it would take it 2 haters to squelch it. That's not right.

Good catch.

Veto should require at least four of ten non-trade managers

 

[barman]

One thing I'll never understand with hockey fantasy categories is why should someone get a positive out of a negative. Why should PIMs be a category? Wouldn't that be the same as rewarding baseball fantasy leaguers for most errors?

It's an inverse ranking.

Manager can be rewarded for having players with lower PIM


And yes, it's akin to MLB "errors" or NBA "turnovers"

 

[barman]

Urp...just read BUSHAY's post about PIM

Am I incorrect that the highest Score goes to the team with Lowest PIM?