League Settings

Teams: 16
Divisions: 4
Player Pool: All NHL Players
Roster: 3 C, 2 LW, 2 RW, 2 W, 4 D, 2 G, 3 BN, & 3 IR
Max Moves and Trades: None
Trade Deadline: TBD
Set Lineups: Daily
Type of Scoring: H2H
Scoring Categories: Gs, As, +/-, PPP, Shoot Out Goals, Majors (Penalties), Ws, GAA, SV%, & Shutouts
Scoring Periods: Weekly
Minimum Goalie Starts: None

A couple comments but Im not sure if these are up for debate.... I think it would be cool if we had a couple more forward spots, and less specific. Like say you get to start 3 centremen and 6 wingers (3 lines) and then 5 D spots to balance it out, with 2 or 3 bench spots. I like the 3 IR spots. I also like the major penalties stat instead of the PIM. but shoot out goals im not completely sold on, but it is better than GWG, which is all luck.

The reason why I don't like being specific with roster spots is because in the NHL, they mix and mash lines so much that LW's play on the right and vice versa at the coach's whim. Also becuase this is a dynasty league, I feel that it should be a little deeper so that those late round picks matter more. And I'm sure we all know that what separates the winners and the losers are the picks after round 5. Also to make this more like you are managing an actual team, I think that the bench should be lowered so you have some "healthy scratches."

Lastly, Luis did you mention that there is a rookie draft too? how does that work?

Yea we still have to iron out a lot of stuff that you can't see. Matt or I will give you answer when we are closer to the "finished" work.

I will probably work on a lot of this in the up coming week.

Although do answer question yes there will be some sort of minor league draft and system.

sounds cool to me! good luck scouting everyone... I'll be around!

I'm open to having more forward spots, but it really depends on how many teams we get in the league.

Although reeeeeeeeeeallly deep leagues are fun too!

i was worried for about a nanosecond, cause i thought it meant no trades or pickups at all (the no move/trade limit).

all better.

I wonder if i should make another rebuilding team

Na....

I think that we should include all PIM's not just major's. Also i think that we should have three centers two left wingers two right wingers and two winger spots. Another thing is that i think that we need to have a max games started for goalies or something like that so we don't have guys drafting a bunch of goalies.

Dr Mcsexy wrote:

I think that we should include all PIM's not just major's. Also i think that we should have three centers two left wingers two right wingers and two winger spots. Another thing is that i think that we need to have a max games started for goalies or something like that so we don't have guys drafting a bunch of goalies.

Thats quite the wishlist

1) I hate all PIMs; one of the main reasons I opted to use CBS was because they offer majors. The point of PIMs in fantasy hockey is so people draft the fighters. I mean rewarding someone for tripping, slashing, diving, and etc is weak.

2) Falls under expanding rosters as tay said

3) I have never heard of that in my entire life. Why would someone draft all goalies? They are basically tanking GAA/SV% and getting wins..shutouts is a tossup. Who would want to go 1-2-1 and make their offense weak?

Lgonzo wrote:

Dr Mcsexy wrote:

I think that we should include all PIM's not just major's. Also i think that we should have three centers two left wingers two right wingers and two winger spots. Another thing is that i think that we need to have a max games started for goalies or something like that so we don't have guys drafting a bunch of goalies.

Thats quite the wishlist

1) I hate all PIMs; one of the main reasons I opted to use CBS was because they offer majors. The point of PIMs in fantasy hockey is so people draft the fighters. I mean rewarding someone for tripping, slashing, diving, and etc is weak.

2) Falls under expanding rosters as tay said

3) I have never heard of that in my entire life. Why would someone draft all goalies? They are basically tanking GAA/SV% and getting wins..shutouts is a tossup. Who would want to go 1-2-1 and make their offense weak?

1) thats understandable i hear you on that one

3) this guy in my league last year and did good, but i forgot that my league last year included saves as a stat so he did pretty good.

I'm excited for this league thought can't wait for hockey season to start.

While I've traditionally only counted PIM's in my league I do admit that it does generally reward guys for bad behaviour other than fighting (tripping, high-sticking, etc.). I kind of like the idea of just counting fighting majors.

I wouldn't mind seeing a minimum of 2 or 3 goalie starts a week as well.

I think a minimum games played for goalies on a weekly basis is kind of harsh. Because this is going to be a really deep league (16 teams??? I don't remember what gonzo told me) what if one your number one goalie is out for a week and your number 2 (who probably isn't very good) goalie faces Pittsburgh twice, and Ottawa once or something like that. I might want to sit my number 2 for those games. I could see a season minimum of 100 GP or something like that. If the owner doesn't meet that then they forfeit the GAA and SPCT categories.

So season floor yes.
Weakly floor no!

Season minimum is fine with me.

Id prefer it to be 5-5 categories between offensive and goalies. I think goalies would be underappreciated and need to be just as valuable as offensive players. Take away Shoot Out Goals or PIM/PIM majors as a whole and add a goalie category.

also think need to take away 2 LW and 2 RW and just make it 4 Wings. Therefore saves you 2 positions and you can add these to bench players. making 5 bench players.

I think 2-3 goalie appearances a week is a priority. Set minumum at 3. then dont have to worry about it.

Theeplaymaker wrote:

Id prefer it to be 5-5 categories between offensive and goalies. I think goalies would be underappreciated and need to be just as valuable as offensive players. Take away Shoot Out Goals or PIM/PIM majors as a whole and add a goalie category

.

What goalie stat would that be? All the rest are repetative. Saves, Goals Allowed, Shootout Wins, and games played. None of those are serious categories. I do not think goalies are underappreciated. I mean a good goalie controls all 4 goalie categories. While a good player can control PPP, +/-, goals or assists, and maybe shootout goals. I mean there is no player who racks up fights along with great stats. Only a select few who are balanced in scoring and assisting. 30 goalies and 16 teams; I believe most people will goalie first.

Theeplaymaker wrote:

also think need to take away 2 LW and 2 RW and just make it 4 Wings. Therefore saves you 2 positions and you can add these to bench players. making 5 bench players

.

I think it becomes too easy then. I don't know without researching, but it is the same as 3 OF or LF/CF/RF. Even so there are a lot of wingers who play both. Most people seemed to like 2 LW, 2 RW, 2 W. Unless there is an overwhelming amount who disagree it will probably stay like that.

Theeplaymaker wrote:

I think 2-3 goalie appearances a week is a priority. Set minumum at 3. then dont have to worry about it.

I dont even know if CBS allows minimum; I will have to check, but I know for baseball you could have min/max IP for roto and not H2H.

Hey Kids!

I am the newest member of the league and I am glad to be joining you all for some serious hockey in the years ahead. It looks like Luis and the crew have really put some thought into getting this league up and running - so cheers to you all!

Before we get down to our live drafting I just wanted to retouch one issue that I have seen appearing in a number of places in this forum... the ShootOut goals category. It is the only stat that cannot be a guaranteed opportunity for a team. If none of the games that a manager's players are involved in during a weekly period go to a shoot-out, it is impossible for a managers team to score points in this category (all other categories are possible to score points in except this one). I would hate to loose a week because none of my teams played in overtime games and therefore were not able to even attempt a shot in a shoot-out. Maybe we could eliminate it as a category and add straght Points as a finalcategory for the offense. This would keep the 6-4 balance between offence and goalies and we put more emphasis on offensive players to create some balance with the need for top-notch goaltending.

I know I am new to the league and maybe shold just keep my mouth shut and play the game, but i think the league would be more sound if it didn't include "chance" categories. Anyways, thats just m 2cents...

I can't wait to start drafting and look forward to th season ahead - no matter the categories!

tG

Welcome aboard TG! Glad to have you here, and we're always happy to hear everybody's 2 cents worth.

teamGruFFalo wrote:

Hey Kids!

I am the newest member of the league and I am glad to be joining you all for some serious hockey in the years ahead. It looks like Luis and the crew have really put some thought into getting this league up and running - so cheers to you all!

Before we get down to our live drafting I just wanted to retouch one issue that I have seen appearing in a number of places in this forum... the ShootOut goals category. It is the only stat that cannot be a guaranteed opportunity for a team. If none of the games that a manager's players are involved in during a weekly period go to a shoot-out, it is impossible for a managers team to score points in this category (all other categories are possible to score points in except this one). I would hate to loose a week because none of my teams played in overtime games and therefore were not able to even attempt a shot in a shoot-out. Maybe we could eliminate it as a category and add straght Points as a finalcategory for the offense. This would keep the 6-4 balance between offence and goalies and we put more emphasis on offensive players to create some balance with the need for top-notch goaltending.

I know I am new to the league and maybe shold just keep my mouth shut and play the game, but i think the league would be more sound if it didn't include "chance" categories. Anyways, thats just m 2cents...

I can't wait to start drafting and look forward to th season ahead - no matter the categories!

tG

welcome to the league, and i agree with this guy.. after thinkign about it haha.

Hey Guys,

One thing that I was wondering about is possitional eligibility for players.... What are we going to use as a source when we are drafting? The reason I ask is because a player like Christopher Higgins (MON) played centre and LW last year (and had eligibility at both positions in Yahoo leagues) but I know that we are using CBS for this league. I was looking on the CBS site and couldn't find any anything that listed a players position... Not too sure if they have a list on their site that I couldn't find... Are players only going to have 1 position all year or will they gain other eligibilities if their position changes during the year? Just wondering.

tG

They can have multiple eligiblity; I believe 5 games gives them eligibility in a position, I will have to double check.

I'm commish on a CBS site and they suck at multi-eligibility. They list everyone as C basically. Stillman is a C on CBS and I don't think he's taken a faceoff in 5 years. Gruffalo raises a good point, especially when it comes to LW and RW. In my league we just have W or C. And I was tired of guys saying so and so is a W. So I institituted this rule....

6c Players are drafted at the position they are listed under in the CBS sportsline database, regardless of whether that player plays multiple positions. If an owner feels a player has eligibility at another position, the onus is on that owner to provide proof. In order for a forward to have dual eligibility, the player must have played 5 games in the previous year or 5 games in the current year at another position. To be considered a C a player must have taken at least 5 faceoffs in one game for him to be considered a C for that game. If he played and did not take 5 faceoffs, he is considered a winger for that one game. The owner must provide the league with dates to confirm the 5 game eligibility. Finding a player’s name on a depth chart on some guy’s blog is not going to cut it.
Faceoff stats for each game can be found on nhl.com/scores. Click on official superstats or faceoff chart.

It puts the onus on the owner to find the evidence. I'm not recommending this for this league because it doesn't take into account Left or Right Wing. Hopefully this year CBS will be better and this will be a non-factor but it is something to watch out for. If Yahoo does a better job maybe someone can check that site and the commish can make the final call.

KFH

I agree with taking away the shootout goales

teamGruFFalo wrote:

Hey Kids!

I am the newest member of the league and I am glad to be joining you all for some serious hockey in the years ahead. It looks like Luis and the crew have really put some thought into getting this league up and running - so cheers to you all!

Before we get down to our live drafting I just wanted to retouch one issue that I have seen appearing in a number of places in this forum... the ShootOut goals category. It is the only stat that cannot be a guaranteed opportunity for a team. If none of the games that a manager's players are involved in during a weekly period go to a shoot-out, it is impossible for a managers team to score points in this category (all other categories are possible to score points in except this one). I would hate to loose a week because none of my teams played in overtime games and therefore were not able to even attempt a shot in a shoot-out. Maybe we could eliminate it as a category and add straght Points as a finalcategory for the offense. This would keep the 6-4 balance between offence and goalies and we put more emphasis on offensive players to create some balance with the need for top-notch goaltending.

I know I am new to the league and maybe shold just keep my mouth shut and play the game, but i think the league would be more sound if it didn't include "chance" categories. Anyways, thats just m 2cents...

I can't wait to start drafting and look forward to th season ahead - no matter the categories!

tG

gdon wrote:

I'm commish on a CBS site and they suck at multi-eligibility. They list everyone as C basically. Stillman is a C on CBS and I don't think he's taken a faceoff in 5 years. Gruffalo raises a good point, especially when it comes to LW and RW. In my league we just have W or C. And I was tired of guys saying so and so is a W. So I institituted this rule....

6c Players are drafted at the position they are listed under in the CBS sportsline database, regardless of whether that player plays multiple positions. If an owner feels a player has eligibility at another position, the onus is on that owner to provide proof. In order for a forward to have dual eligibility, the player must have played 5 games in the previous year or 5 games in the current year at another position. To be considered a C a player must have taken at least 5 faceoffs in one game for him to be considered a C for that game. If he played and did not take 5 faceoffs, he is considered a winger for that one game. The owner must provide the league with dates to confirm the 5 game eligibility. Finding a player’s name on a depth chart on some guy’s blog is not going to cut it.
Faceoff stats for each game can be found on nhl.com/scores. Click on official superstats or faceoff chart.

It puts the onus on the owner to find the evidence. I'm not recommending this for this league because it doesn't take into account Left or Right Wing. Hopefully this year CBS will be better and this will be a non-factor but it is something to watch out for. If Yahoo does a better job maybe someone can check that site and the commish can make the final call.

KFH

Interesting idea, I haven't played CBS yet either. We could look at just making all C and W spots generic forward spots I guess. That way it doesn't matter how many C or W's you have. It's a bit of a radical idea, but not insane.

Also, I guess we're gonna have to come to some decision on what to do about the Shootout goals. Just seemed like a fun way to incorporate this new aspect of the NHL game, but I understand the arguments against it too.

Alright, I've gotta go scour the websites for a final member.

Glad we our getting thins hashed out before draft; I will poll shootoutgoals to see what the non posintg masses think as Im fine with getting rid of it.

thanks for in the info gdon aswell

Whatever we decide with position eleigibility, I think we should set up the league on CBS before the draft so that all managers can access the player database to see what position each player is listed for. On CBS, each player is only listed for one position and managers will need to know this information before they draft. For example, if a manger drafts E. Malkin to fill a LW position he will be out of luck when rosters are entered on to the CBS website because Malkin only carries C eleigibility (even though he played more than 5 games at LW last year). There are others players that this will affect also. I don't think it matters what we decide as long as everyone has the information on players and their positions before the draft starts.

On another note, thumbs up to the commish for working to get the little details (ie. shootout goals) worked out ASAP!!! Hopefully we can get a final manager soon and begin the draft. I know from slow-drafts that I have done in baseball that we are already cutting things close if we want to getting all players picked before the start of the regular season...