|
|
Post by Coal - Kraken on Mar 11, 2019 20:12:18 GMT -5
It should specify that the first puck drop is the start of playoffs (assuming its not already there and I'm just I'm not seeing)
|
|
|
|
Post by Robyn - Flames on Mar 11, 2019 20:16:30 GMT -5
How about players that are listed as "OUT"? I know this is a fairly recent addition to Yahoo as well. I would think players with the 'O' should be considered the same as IR and DTD. Commish? |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Mar 11, 2019 20:26:21 GMT -5
How about players that are listed as "OUT"? I know this is a fairly recent addition to Yahoo as well. I would think players with the 'O' should be considered the same as IR and DTD. Commish? I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 12, 2019 8:41:34 GMT -5
How about players that are listed as "OUT"? I know this is a fairly recent addition to Yahoo as well. I would think players with the 'O' should be considered the same as IR and DTD. Commish? I agree for the most part. I am hesitant to fully endorse this though because sometimes Yahoo designates a player as ‘O’ when a player misses a single period due to being struck in the face by a puck, for instance, but does not miss the next game. The spirit of the rule is to be able to replace an injured player who will miss time, not to seize an opportunity to drop dead weight. I want to limit any possible manipulation if I can. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 12, 2019 12:53:58 GMT -5
It should specify that the first puck drop is the start of playoffs (assuming its not already there and I'm just I'm not seeing) I agree. But what is your argument? Some people who miss the update at 3 AM wont even try to add people up until the puck drop because they think it is too late? I assume managers would want to make all roster moves before the league updates for the first day of the playoffs to maximize the potential numbers of games played should they have a player or players playing on Monday. The first puck drop is the "extended" deadline because up until that point no NHL games have been played and can not influence a transaction one way or the other. |
|
|
|
Post by Coal - Kraken on Mar 12, 2019 16:15:10 GMT -5
Just for consistency and semantics sake.
If it’s stated that bye-week teams have until the first puck drop to finalize their playoff rosters it should use the exact same language for when non-bye-week teams.
As for the argument, I think the teams should have the same deadline regardless of its truly beneficial for the team. Either all rosters are locked at 3 am on Monday of the respective weeks, or on the puck drop of the first game. It just needs to be consistent.
Personally, I am also VERY MUCH not a fan of bye-week teams getting an extra week to finalize their rosters as I do not think that is even REMOTELY fair. I think it all rosters should be locked as of 3 am on the Monday of the first round of playoffs regardless of if you have a bye-week or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 12, 2019 20:16:46 GMT -5
Personally, I am also VERY MUCH not a fan of bye-week teams getting an extra week to finalize their rosters as I do not think that is even REMOTELY fair. I think it all rosters should be locked as of 3 am on the Monday of the first round of playoffs regardless of if you have a bye-week or not. Why do you feel it is unfair? |
|
|
|
Post by Kyle - Devils on Mar 12, 2019 23:14:37 GMT -5
I would think players with the 'O' should be considered the same as IR and DTD. Commish? I agree for the most part. I am hesitant to fully endorse this though because sometimes Yahoo designates a player as ‘O’ when a player misses a single period due to being struck in the face by a puck, for instance, but does not miss the next game. The spirit of the rule is to be able to replace an injured player who will miss time, not to seize an opportunity to drop dead weight. I want to limit any possible manipulation if I can. But what about the guys that are legitimately out that get that silly O designation. Maybe something to talk over but i think the majority of O's is legit. I could be wrong but thats what I've seen. |
|
|
|
Post by Coal - Kraken on Mar 13, 2019 16:03:02 GMT -5
A bye week is already advantage enough, other teams scrambling to keep ahead of the team they are facing while the bye-teams lie in wait.
These bye-teams are also able to react in real time to any suspensions/injuries/line changes while the other contenders have to watch their players drop like flies without a hope of changing their fate. This is ridiculously unfair.
In the case of injuries, if a non-bye-week team drops DTD/O player in the first week in desperation to win their week, the bye-week team can pick up that player if they get healthy again before the end of that week.
The bye-week is advantage enough, we don’t need to give them an extra week to finalize their rosters. It’s just a win-more rule for the top-seeded teams.
And if their rosters aren’t locked for the first week, does that mean bye-week teams get an extra week to send down minor leaguers with them only having to test waivers against the other bye-week teams? Or can they only sign players to their main club and not send people between the farms and to the main club?
Just leave the rule at rosters are all locked at the beginning of the fantasy playoffs for simplicities sake, rather than having some extra special clause for the top seeded team in each bracket to get even further ahead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Mar 13, 2019 16:21:12 GMT -5
A bye week is already advantage enough, other teams scrambling to keep ahead of the team they are facing while the bye-teams lie in wait. These bye-teams are also able to react in real time to any suspensions/injuries/line changes while the other contenders have to watch their players drop like flies without a hope of changing their fate. This is ridiculously unfair. In the case of injuries, if a non-bye-week team drops DTD/O player in the first week in desperation to win their week, the bye-week team can pick up that player if they get healthy again before the end of that week. The bye-week is advantage enough, we don’t need to give them an extra week to finalize their rosters. It’s just a win-more rule for the top-seeded teams. And if their rosters aren’t locked for the first week, does that mean bye-week teams get an extra week to send down minor leaguers with them only having to test waivers against the other bye-week teams? Or can they only sign players to their main club and not send people between the farms and to the main club? Just leave the rule at rosters are all locked at the beginning of the fantasy playoffs for simplicities sake, rather than having some extra special clause for the top seeded team in each bracket to get even further ahead.  Couldn't agree more. Not having to fight for your life for an entire week is enough of a "reward" for finishing in the top seeds. |
|
|
|
Post by Robyn - Flames on Mar 13, 2019 19:15:20 GMT -5
In the case of injuries, if a non-bye-week team drops DTD/O player in the first week in desperation to win their week, the bye-week team can pick up that player if they get healthy again before the end of that week. I was kinda leaning in the other direction, but this is an extremely good point and provides a far too significant advantage to 'bye' week teams. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 13, 2019 22:36:43 GMT -5
A bye week is already advantage enough, other teams scrambling to keep ahead of the team they are facing while the bye-teams lie in wait. These bye-teams are also able to react in real time to any suspensions/injuries/line changes while the other contenders have to watch their players drop like flies without a hope of changing their fate. This is ridiculously unfair. The teams who have a 'bye' do not have a signifcant advantage. If anything, there is more risk involved of a player getting injured while not accruing stats for one week. All the bye teams are able to do is send down prospects and call up prospects/minor leaguers from the farm one week longer than the teams who did not earn the bye without the caveat of being injured. Fun fact, more teams without the bye have won the NAFHL championship than those who have had the bye. Food for thought. |
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Mar 14, 2019 14:49:20 GMT -5
The teams who have a 'bye' do not have a signifcant advantage. The teams that are rewarded with a "Bye" week have the most significant advantage in fantasy sports, it is literally what the entire league is fighting for all regular season long. If anything, there is more risk involved of a player getting injured while not accruing stats for one week. All the bye teams are able to do is send down prospects and call up prospects/minor leaguers from the farm one week longer than the teams who did not earn the bye without the caveat of being injured. Fun fact, more teams without the bye have won the NAFHL championship than those who have had the bye. Food for thought. More risk involved of players getting injured facing off against no opponent, you are correct. You have time to assess how bad the injury is and time to make moves to recall a player from your farm to replace the injured player. |
|
|
|
Post by Coal - Kraken on Mar 14, 2019 14:52:55 GMT -5
Teams that have a “bye” objectively have a significant advantage. That’s the free walk to the second round of playoffs.
I’d take my players being at risk of getting injured while not accumulating points for me for a free win any day. And even then, if your argument is that the players might get injured, why does there need to be any stipulation anyway? As every team can drop/call up a player in the case of that happening.
That fun fact is nothing but arbitrary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 14, 2019 17:55:10 GMT -5
The teams who have a 'bye' do not have a signifcant advantage. The teams that are rewarded with a "Bye" week have the most significant advantage in fantasy sports, it is literally what the entire league is fighting for all regular season long. You are taking this quote out of context. Coal - Golden Knights argument was pertaining to adding/dropping players, which is what my statement was in reference to, nothing else. Obviously a free win is an advantage. If anything, there is more risk involved of a player getting injured while not accruing stats for one week. All the bye teams are able to do is send down prospects and call up prospects/minor leaguers from the farm one week longer than the teams who did not earn the bye without the caveat of being injured. Fun fact, more teams without the bye have won the NAFHL championship than those who have had the bye. Food for thought. More risk involved of players getting injured facing off against no opponent, you are correct. You have time to assess how bad the injury is and time to make moves to recall a player from your farm to replace the injured player.[/quote] The time spent "assessing" a player is usually negligible. If a player gets injured, he typically won't be playing another game for at least 48 hours after the injury. By this time, the NHL team he plays for, or some other source of information will almost certainly provide a status update that will allow a manager to respond accordingly. Furthermore, over half of any NAFHL team (10/19) is compromised of keepers who wouldn't be dropped even if an injury occurred. The odds of all of these things aligning to create a perfect storm is very small. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 14, 2019 17:57:14 GMT -5
Teams that have a “bye” objectively have a significant advantage. That’s the free walk to the second round of playoffs. I’d take my players being at risk of getting injured while not accumulating points for me for a free win any day. And even then, if your argument is that the players might get injured, why does there need to be any stipulation anyway? As every team can drop/call up a player in the case of that happening. That fun fact is nothing but arbitrary. We were not discussing "free wins," we were discussing the adding/dropping of players. My fun fact might be arbitrary, but it is observable. Players getting injured is completely arbitrary AND hypothetical. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Mar 14, 2019 19:09:01 GMT -5
Let's not kid ourselves here, it's an advantage. You're in the Quarter Finals and you have no opponent. You fail to acknowledge the possibility of signing FA players or claiming dropped Waiver eligible players or signing Prospects to your Farm teams. Are you saying only moves that pertain to Farm rosters are legal with Bye Week teams? It really isn't clear or stated in the rulebook for reference. I think you can take your foot off the brakes there son, let the top down, feel the wind in your hair a bit, alright? The fact that rosters are locked in this fashion is dumb to begin with. There are better ways to ensure nobody illegally streams players, like adding a weekly moves limit. The average number of moves made by a manager this season was 0.82 moves per week, so implement a max 2 moves per week limit on managers. It's pure stupidity to force managers to sit on their hands when the season is on the line. Semi streaming has always been a skillful part of fantasy hockey as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Mar 14, 2019 19:32:59 GMT -5
I agree for the most part. I am hesitant to fully endorse this though because sometimes Yahoo designates a player as ‘O’ when a player misses a single period due to being struck in the face by a puck, for instance, but does not miss the next game. The spirit of the rule is to be able to replace an injured player who will miss time, not to seize an opportunity to drop dead weight. I want to limit any possible manipulation if I can. But what about the guys that are legitimately out that get that silly O designation. Maybe something to talk over but i think the majority of O's is legit. I could be wrong but thats what I've seen. I agree with Kyle that the majority of "OUT" players are rightfully injured players. In the scenario you addressed I feel that would be a very rare and obscure case. The "OUT" designation gets applied simply because teams in real life don't want to put certain players on their IR. In fact, more often than not, players listed as "OUT" are usually longer term injuries or else Yahoo would apply them as "DTD". |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 15, 2019 4:18:38 GMT -5
Let's not kid ourselves here, it's an advantage. You're in the Quarter Finals and you have no opponent. You fail to acknowledge the possibility of signing FA players or claiming dropped Waiver eligible players or signing Prospects to your Farm teams. Are you saying only moves that pertain to Farm rosters are legal with Bye Week teams? It really isn't clear or stated in the rulebook for reference. I think you can take your foot off the brakes there son, let the top down, feel the wind in your hair a bit, alright? The fact that rosters are locked in this fashion is dumb to begin with. There are better ways to ensure nobody illegally streams players, like adding a weekly moves limit. The average number of moves made by a manager this season was 0.82 moves per week, so implement a max 2 moves per week limit on managers. It's pure stupidity to force managers to sit on their hands when the season is on the line. Semi streaming has always been a skillful part of fantasy hockey as well. Bye week teams are still bound by the same rules as non-bye week teams, except for the fact that they can interact with their farm without the caveat of an injured player. No signing free agents, no claiming off waivers. It should have been added in the rulebook, but it was not. I am simply just implementing what was in place last season, and I did in fact address it. The teams who have a 'bye' do not have a signifcant advantage. If anything, there is more risk involved of a player getting injured while not accruing stats for one week. All the bye teams are able to do is send down prospects and call up prospects/minor leaguers from the farm one week longer than the teams who did not earn the bye without the caveat of being injured. Fun fact, more teams without the bye have won the NAFHL championship than those who have had the bye. Food for thought. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Mar 15, 2019 4:20:06 GMT -5
But what about the guys that are legitimately out that get that silly O designation. Maybe something to talk over but i think the majority of O's is legit. I could be wrong but thats what I've seen. I agree with Kyle that the majority of "OUT" players are rightfully injured players. In the scenario you addressed I feel that would be a very rare and obscure case. The "OUT" designation gets applied simply because teams in real life don't want to put certain players on their IR. In fact, more often than not, players listed as "OUT" are usually longer term injuries or else Yahoo would apply them as "DTD". I am not arguing that point. I do not anticipate any issues, I just wanted that exception on record should it randomly come up. |
|
So exciting.
Aug 28, 2024 22:53:08 GMT -5
So exciting.
Aug 28, 2024 22:53:08 GMT -5
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.
Sept 13, 2024 17:17:04 GMT -5
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.
Sept 13, 2024 17:17:04 GMT -5