I'm creating this thread to share some of these ideas, but really I'm hoping to create a jumping off point for some discussion around these issues. A lot of these subheadings have already had extensive discussions, but often no final resolution was reached. I'm hoping in this thread we can start to make some of these resolutions. I see now as the best time to go about this while the board is still active, the ideas and problems experienced are still fresh, and before BBKL enters summer hibernation. So without further introduction here are some of the major talking points Matthew presented to me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. The Prevention of Tanking by sitting talented players. Find a way to make it so concise that any ruling the CC makes is obvious.
2. The punishments for missing GP.
3. Switching from 23 match schedule to 82 match schedule.
4. Waiver eligibility modifications
5. In week Player swap due to injury
6. The Different possible scoring systems
7. Penalties for being over or under cap.
8. Whether in-season rule modification should be allowed or whether it must be off-season.
9. When a GM takes over an overly terrible team, what should we do about it?
10. Official yearly Cut-off date in-season for signing free agents that would be eligible for the waiver draft
11. Trading during the playoffs/when is the trade deadline/how to figure out the goalie injury problem in the playoffs.
12. Official dates for centerman position change, with the rules surround positional change added to the CBA.
13. The Maximum goalie starts in a single week situation. Is this just playoffs or also during season? etc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a couple initial suggestions to bring to the table around these problems, which I'm interested in feedback on. Others are going to definitely require discussion.
For this I think its pretty simple. You are the manager of your team, and ultimately in any sort of grey area decision making in terms of roster management you give a lot of leniency to the Manager. But I think there should be laid out official appeal process to a CC member, if someone feels that there is a league member who is intentionally worsening their lineup. Main considerations to give to this appeal in order.1. The Prevention of Tanking by sitting talented players. Find a way to make it so concise that any ruling the CC makes is obvious.
1) Is this person currently out of the playoff race?
2) Has this person been taking a dramatic fall in the standings?
3) Does this person hold their 1st and/or 2nd round draft pick?
4) Are there any other CC determined indicators that foul play could be present?
Only if the answer is yes to 2 out of 4 of these questions does the appeal process continue.
At this point it becomes difficult to regulate. But if someone is for example well out of the playoff race, and hold their first round pick. And they have a proven scorer or proven goaltender sitting on the bench I think at the CC's discretion they can determine if lineup adjustments are necessary.
I feel that this would be enough of an official layout to address the rare instances where someone may be accused of intentionally worsening their lineup.
2. The punishments for missing GP.
This is a new CC implemented rule by Mik. Which I personally really like. So I think little needs to be done here. Which is as follows.
kyuss wroteCOLONThe following will be used from this season onward as guidelines to determine draft positions and sanctions for teams failing to reach the minimal requirements for games played.
1- the team's 1st rounder will be moved back at least one spot if GP minimums are not reached
Formula to assess the amount of the pick/s' penalization:
Adjustment = POINTSperGP x UnderLimit
Points + Adjustment = points to be used in the standings to determine the draft order
UnderLimit = number of games missing to reach the minimum
POINTSperGP = Points/GP
Points = total points at the end of the season
Essentially, the team position is just being adjusted for the missed games; the ensuing new position in the standing affects all the team's picks still owned and the team's 1st round pick no matter if still owned or not.
2- Seriousness of the offence
- within 246GP = 1 warning for removal
- equal to or greater then 246GP = 2 warnings for removal
- 2nd time offender = eligible for removal* (like any GM that gets 3 official warnings)
*obviously, eligible for removal only means a vote on the GM removal wil occur inside the CC. It doesn't mean per se the GM will be indeed removed.
GMs will be allowed to produce all sorts of evidences suggesting missing GPs was not caused by their conduct. Removal will depend on the voting outcome.
3- Compensation owed by the offending GM to the owner of the diminished first rounder*
- If the pick is moved 2 or less spots:
and the pick is #1, a first round selection in this same draft
and the pick is #2-5, a 2nd and a 3rd round selection (this draft year or next)
and the pick is 6+, a 2nd round selection
if the offending GM doesn't own the compensatory picks he will have to acquire them on the market
- If the pick is moved more then 2 spots:
and the pick is #1-5, the league will also compensate the GM with a pick between the 1st and 2nd round (30b)
and the pick is 6+, the league will also compensate the GM with a pick between the 2nd and 3rd round (60b)
*Obviously point #3 depends on when the owner of the pick acquired it. If the pick is acquired at the end of the season, or when its team is already on par of missing gp, #3 will not apply, as the owner acquired an asset (the pick) that already had diminished value at the time of the deal.
Points #3 also work as sanctions for the GM responsible of missing gp. If the pick is traded at a time that voids #3, instead of sanctions you would have decreased value of the pick already affecting the offending GM in the deal.
I think this is really solid, but based on what we saw unfold at this past draft lottery I think there are some additional amendments necessary. I absolutely think GP adjustments should be made pre-lottery. And official warnings should be issued at the 2/3 mark, (Game 55 under the 82 game format) if someone does not exceed 700 GP at that point. And make the penalties very clear if measures aren't taken to address this. An official warning must be issued for draft pick compensation to be paid for a moved pick, but whether a warning occurs or not, the point adjustment in the standings will take place at the end of the season.
While it is the CC's responsibility to monitor this. If you hold a draft pick of a potential GP offending member and do not report this to the CC by the 55 game mark. You can't hold the CC accountable for missing this warning, and for not receiving compensation at the end of the season. Essentially if you want your compensation, make for damn sure that person knows penalties are coming if they don't make some changes.
But picks need to be moved pre-lottery is a big thing here. Our point adjustment does not work if picks win the lottery. It just moves it back to the "bump one spot" norm that existed before Mik introduced the adjustment formula. We fucked up this year for sure.
Personally Injuries have been and always will be a part of fantasy hockey for me. If you want to reduce this risk target non-injury prone players. Thats my opinion on this matter at least, but I know it is a potential point of controversy.5. In week Player swap due to injury
Believe this has been discussed at length. Should look at the conclusions made and look for group finalization in a decision. This would be a good place to finalize that.6. The Different possible scoring systems
I would say absolutely not. Rule finalization should coincide with the NHL draft in my opinion. This is our real offseason right now. Best time to talk about rules while people are still here during the playoffs, season is over. Finalize any rule problems over this couple month break. Draft signifies the start of a new BBKL year. NHL draft not BBKL draft. Should make that clear. Could potential extend this, but the boards arent that active though the July/August months so for me it seems to make sense to lock down the rules for the upcoming season before then.8. Whether in-season rule modification should be allowed or whether it must be off-season.
I can understand the extra draft pick argument. And when you take over a team that has been stripped of all its picks for a couple seasons it makes it really hard. I think its a talking point worth discussing, could serve as a way to instill hope in new members.9. When a GM takes over an overly terrible team, what should we do about it?
To keep league interest. I would err on the side of non-playoff teams remaining trade active during BBKl playoffs. Only trade break is from deadline until the end of the BBKL regular season.11. Trading during the playoffs/when is the trade deadline/how to figure out the goalie injury problem in the playoffs.
41 minimum- 95 maximum (or similar higher than 82 number) I feel is fair. Max exceeding 82 because of trades and some leniency if manager owns a starter and backup from different teams . I think you create lenient maximums, but strict penalties for exceeding them. I believe this deters goalie hoarding sufficiently allowing spread of goaltenders around the league. While still allowing someone to not necessarily have a system without getting penalized harshly if they do not completely monitor their starts.13. The Maximum goalie starts in a single week situation. Is this just playoffs or also during season? etc
I believe during the season at least the maximums are there to discourage goalie hoarding, rather than week to week competition, I don't think someone should be punished by backups getting unexpected starts for whatever reason. With playoffs it is more complicated as the competition is so fierce. I think you do need the weekly cap in the playoffs, but those who have goaltenders from multiple teams have to be aware of the risks they are taking, and may have to decide to err on sitting a goalie because of that. This does push people towards acquiring goalie systems if they are a risk adverse competitive manager, but doesn't make it an absolute requirement to ice a competitive roster.
----------------------------------------
So these are my main thoughts on some of these issues on controversy. I'm interested in hearing what some of you think on these issues yourself. Or if you have other issues of controversy that I can add to the OP here.
Matthew also brought up discussing amendments to scoring categories as a potential talking point, personally I think we have a lot to work out before crossing that bridge, but if anyone had opinions surround that. Before firing out this CBA would be the time to do it.
But yea Matthew and I are willing to work on the draft of this thing with board and CC approval, to ultimately pass along to the CC to finalize. But there are a lot of major talking points here already that will need a lot of board input, so I figure we better get started sooner rather than later.
Additional Points for Discussion:
Lee wroteCOLONI'd ask for a consequential trade deadline, not a week or 2 before the season ends.
Lee wroteCOLONGP being met only restriction on compliant rosters. Intentional worsening of lineups permitted as long as GP is met. Single active goalies can be played, even if one is benched. Make GP adjustments rather than worsening lineup restrictions [Paraphrased]
