2013-14 Pool Discussion

[Beaver Banker]

Time to start thinking about things for next year. I'll make it clear here that NONE of these changes will have any effect on the pool this year.

Specifically I want to put forth a few proposals. We can debate wording in here before I put them to a formal vote, so if you want to propose an amendment, now is the time.

Proposal one:
Increase skating scoring categories to include PPG and SHG, each worth one point each.

Proposal two:
Award an expansion Franchise to bring increase membership to twenty

Proposal three:
Implement a draft lottery to determine the selection order of the non-playoff teams

Proposal four:
Increase the roster sizes to include 3 more skaters: one F, one D and one flexible spot that can be either D or F

I'll try to summarize the discussion for each proposal and add it above. Once we seem to have stopped evolving each proposal and the details are defined, we'll put it to a formal vote.

If you have another proposal you'd like considered, list it in this thread. If you can get one other GM, to "second" your proposal, we'll add it to the conversation above and have a formal vote on it.

To ALL owners: please participate in this thread. Everyone's input is important.

[Porkchop]

I like all idea puts forward, and it gets a YES from myself. I'd like to have 2 spots, at least, to use for whatever I need them for though. I only say this for personal reasons though, as I already have too many D for next year, and might want to draft one or two, if some great ones become available. ;D

[Y Ddraig Goch]

With the additions would it still only be five players that can be protected?

[Porkchop]

Oct 22, 2012 13:41:53 GMT -4 Y Ddraig Goch said:

With the additions would it still only be five players that can be protected?

that was something I was thinking about the other day, and forgot to mention. thanks for bringing it up. there would be no point in trading for futures, or 2 for 1 deals, if we can only protect 5 of them. I would think the protection list should be expanded to include the extra spots, as well. So put it to 8 or 9, depending on how many extra spots we end up settling on.

[Penguins23®]

I'm fine with the new scoring categories.


I wouldn't want the rosters expanded too much. Especially since you're adamant on having everyone count for score keeping purposes which is understandable.

I would definitely be alright with expanding the amount of keepers though.

[L'il Boy]

Those proposals look good to me.

[Beaver Banker]

It'll still be five protected this year. We can increase the number next year, but I wouldn't want many more than we have now

[Porkchop]

if it will still be 5 protected for this year, we would be better to wait until after the draft to complete any future deals, so the other guy has to protect them. I think the majority of GM's would be for protecting a few more, if you put it to vote. however, you are the Courteau of the league.

[countryboy]

On proposal 4, the idea of adding three players to the roster.....

You say there would be an additional forward, an additional defenceman and a flex that could be either.

Let's say your flex is a defenceman. Is he scored counting two points for every goal, like other defencmen?

Or, would flex be scored as a forward and only your three "designated" defencemen would accumulate two points for every goal scored.

If it were the latter, it could get confusing if GMs decided to exchange their flex with another defenceman, based on the scoring totals for each, during the regular season.

cb

[Beaver Banker]

All dmen would score two points per goal. Otherwise those flex spots would all be forwards.

[Briwhel]

I`d like the idea of being able to hold two goalies for a specific time period. Maybe have it so that you can acquire a 2nd goalie, but have to have him off the roster by the time the roster is due or you don`t score any points. Or some other variation of this, so that people can make goalie trades that don`t automatically have to involve a goalie.

[Briwhel]

Is the official protect date going to be before the draft? In other words, if I decide I want to protect someone for another GM, can I trade the player at the draft or do I have to wait longer?

[Beaver Banker]

Oct 25, 2012 8:18:23 GMT -4 Briwhel said:

I`d like the idea of being able to hold two goalies for a specific time period. Maybe have it so that you can acquire a 2nd goalie, but have to have him off the roster by the time the roster is due or you don`t score any points. Or some other variation of this, so that people can make goalie trades that don`t automatically have to involve a goalie.

The problem with this is that there are barely enough goalies to go around as it is. The only reason to have more than one at the draft is to hoard, and drive up value in negotiating a deal.

If there's appetite to debate adding the ability to hold another goalie, we can talk about it, but I don't see how it benefits the league as a whole.

[Judas In My Mind]

What is the reasoning behind only allowing 5 players to be protected? Not that I mind, just curious. My asking is because if someone decides to go full rebuild and manages to load up on say 10 upper tier 16-18 years olds by unloading their older players, why should they have to allow five of those youngsters to go back into the draft?

As for changes in scoring I'd either like to remove the power play goal category and replace it with "game winning goals", or just add "GWGs" to it. To me those are more important than PP goals, plus anyone from lines 1-4 can get a GWG.

Game winners should be easily to tabulate as teh Q site does keep track of them.

[Penguins23®]

The thing about GWGs is if you score the third goal in a 13-2 win you get an extra point...how is your goal anymore important than the other 12?

Then again, I never understood why people got extra points for PPG in some pools. If anything it should be worth less points. 0.5 point for PP assists. 1 point for even strenght and 2 points for shorthanded goals. That's always how I would do it but for some reason pool junkies love to double the value of the easiest time to get points.