|
Post by Montreal Canadiens (Tyler) on Apr 4, 2019 0:06:07 GMT -5
The Proposal: Add a minimum skater games played per matchup (similar to minimum goalie starts). Proposed starting value will be 30.
|
|
|
Post by Philadelphia Flyers (John) on Apr 4, 2019 20:30:42 GMT -5
I’m holding off on my vote on this one until I hear some reasons thisnwould work. I really like the idea of having something like this, but I don’t know what it will accomplish. If a team can’t get 30 starts in a week for players, they really have to be trying to lose the matchup (trying to tank?) what’s the penalty going to be for not reaching the 30 mark? Zeros down the board? Mission accomplished for the guy trying to lose the matchup.
If the penalty is more in line of losing draft picks if it happens twice or something like that, then I can get on board.
I just need more clarification before I cast a vote.
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks (Russell) on Apr 5, 2019 8:47:46 GMT -5
^ Yeah I was thinking more, if the number of gps is not met, there is a draft pick penalty. We can work in a warning/strike system for leniency. We'd also need to work out the draft pick penalty (I'd say, the team forfeits a draft pick of their choosing).
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks (Russell) on Apr 5, 2019 8:54:04 GMT -5
I'd propose the following rule:
If a team does not meet "X" games-played by skaters during a week multiple times in a year, they must forfeit "n" draft picks of their choosing (can be any year) where "n" is the number of times they did not meet the skaters games-played threshold minus one.
Some good values for X would be: - 18 (there are 18 skater slots so one start per slot) - 36 (there are 18 skater slots so two starts per slot) - 30 (close to two starts per slot but easier to remember)
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks (Russell) on Apr 5, 2019 8:55:26 GMT -5
If you guys think that is a good rule proposal, we should change the poll to be a choice of: -18 -36 -30 -This shouldn't be a rule
|
|
|
Post by Philadelphia Flyers (John) on Apr 7, 2019 10:56:22 GMT -5
I think 30 is still a good number to start with. I like the idea because everyone has to be active otherwise they could lose draft picks. Maybe as a first strike, move them to the bottom of the waiver wire priority list. I would like to see more movement in the waiver wire priority list as those rankings move pretty slow throughout the season, so it’s just another way of creating more movement in the waiver wire list without much impact. Then after that strike is where a draft pick would come into play if that team misses the player game limit? I would like every strike to mean something to further prevent teams from tanking and keep teams to stay active every matchup, so that would be my proposal.
|
|