Call-ups/Demotions Limit

[Flames GM (Beamer)]

Submit your thoughts here.  Yes, it's a loophole that I've exploited and I agree that it should be closed.
LMs and Mods will take all suggestions and we'll come up with a fix for this.

Beamer

[Deleted]

Maybe designate keeper prospects. Players who can freely move up and down without threat of losing them. I personally built my farm team with prospects I can use and not just sit on a list. I do agree that it may be excessive on a team by team basis. So I would be for a change. Just not a drastic one. Otherwise why have prospects if you can't use them if they are NHL ready........I feel like strong regulation on farm would hurt the league. As it is a dynasty not one season. I spent a lot of time seeking out serviceable prospects. A major change would make farm useless and prospects value will drop

[Deleted]

If a player is demoted to minors, he has to clear waivers

A prospect's value does not drop if he is an NHL player, if the player is in the NHL then he either gets a roster or doesn't based on the teams discretion.

[Deleted]

The farm isn't useless just because you can't endlessly call players up though, if you have a guy you want to call up either trade or waive someone who's already on your team no? This is like real life and like any other dynasty sport...

[Deleted]

I think that any prospect who is called up to the main team at any point during the season should be given a rookie contract if one doesn't exist already and start the three-year rookie contract timer at $0.80M per year.

With that being said, I think that any player under a rookie scale contract should be free to be moved up and down as many times as the GM wants throughout the season, as long as appropriate SCD notifications are made and it's not just done using the ESPN interface (I don't know about you, but I pay almost no attention to the ESPN Western Conference league).

Real NHL teams call up real prospects periodically throughout the season, and we should be able to do the same. No limits. We already have enough rules. Too many, actually.

[Deleted]

You said teams do this periodically not every damn day

[Deleted]

Oct 30, 2015 17:05:59 GMT -6 @mattpao said:

You said teams do this periodically not every damn day

This is fantasy; players can move every damn day. It's just smart roster management.

[Deleted]

Not in well managed dynasty leagues imo but to each their own I guess

[Blues GM (Wood)]

REAL NHL is bad example, their system is based on Rookie Rule of course but they also only have 20 teams. compared to 30, im sure they would lock the rules down more tightly if the callups and demotions were as frequent as they are in here.

"LIKE A STORM, BODIES WILL CLASH, PUCKS WILL FLY, DREAMS WILL CRUMBLE UNTIL ALL THAT REMAINS IS VICTORY FOR THE FIERCEST COMPETITION IN SPORTS!!"

[Deleted]

I'm fine either way...all we need to do is limit the weekly call ups..seems like we are pretty close...just need to narrow down that number from 0 to 100, ha

All players that get called up start on the SCD contract

[Flames GM (Beamer)]

IMO - not well managed teams or bad management involves a GM not being able to have a full 25 man roster (i.e. not having enough wingers, goalies, etc...) but hey that's the team's GM strategy and they are entitled to it.
I know I'm not the only GM who has the same thoughts on having a roving/fluid roster and that some GMs built their teams to follow this strategy.
I'm open to seeing an amendment (i.e. a limit per week) and that once a player is called up, they keep their SCD $0.80M for the whole year).

[Deleted]

I think we should just do the matchup limit. There is no need to do the "once the player is called up they keep their salary the whole year thing." We already have a system in place based on the number of games played in the real life NHL to determine SCD rookie scale contract years.

[Deleted]

Also...

Hey Beams my friend and fellow LM.
Not trying to call you out or anything like that but you did make a blanket statement on what you thought bad management was so I gotta speak from my side of the fence.

IMO - Some GMs (myself included) took the opportunity to trade for generational talent (ex. Eichel) and to strengthen up their farm to build their team for long term success for years to come. And in so doing it created holes in their lineup for THIS year. Some of us GMs traded away players who were not in their future plans and concentrated on building farms that are some of the best farm systems in our league and will likely lead to consistent long term success.

It's called a rebuild and it's a perfectly viable strategy especially in a dynasty league. It's not like this is a one year league so I don't see how a rebuilding team having holes in their lineup is "bad management" or is a bad strategy in a dynasty league. Deciding to rebuild through one of the deepest drafts in years is not at all bad management. It's like me saying that a guy whose plan is to trade away all of their good farm assets just for a shot one year at a championship is bad management. Emptying my farm is not the strategy I would employ personally in a dynasty league but it's not necessarily bad management either. (especially if that team won the whole thing).

Yes I can't skate a full lineup this year and will likely not be contending for a championship THIS YEAR. But next year my team will likely already be long term competitive as multiple good players from my farm will already be making the jump into the NHL next year. Which will fill most of the holes from this year at a bargain basement price of .8M a year SCD rookie scale. Which will help as our cap drops by 9M next year.

I will say this the only thing I do consider bad management is purposely tanking to get the 1st pick. (ie pulling players/goalies out of your lineup so they don't get category points). Which is why I am glad there is a minimum NHL roster player limit in this league. And also why there will likely be a lottery system for the bottom 3 or so teams to determine 1st pick.

[Flames GM (Beamer)]

Sorry Scott - yes a generalized blanket statement that was not directed at anyone in particular; it's a crappy excuse but I didn't have enough time to type out everything clearly (only had a few minutes before my oldest's birthday party today and the Mrs. was getting snappy at me for sitting on the computer instead of cleaning).

My comment regarding "bad management" was more geared too saying that carrying a roster of minimal players isn't something that I would employ for my team; that doesn't work for me, but yes, it does work for others so long as the minimum players are on the active roster. I also confess that I typed my comment after misreading a GMs comment from above that had riled me up a little.

I know you and I chatted previously about our strategies over the summer and we both liked some of the moves that each other had made (i.e. you getting some tops picks without trading away the farm). That viewpoint hasn't changed for me; It worked for the NYI, but I don't know if the same could have been said for the "Shames" of Calgary.

We all have our strategies and even though I don't agree with some of them, they're all within the rules so there really isn't huge problem (unlike seeing the collusion that occurred before the season started with "two" GMs). How GMs choose to manage their teams whether it be doing a rebuild or going for the gusto to win it all this year is completely fine - so long as we all meet the min. roster standards and abide by the rules set forth by the league. So what I would deem as "bad management" would be deemed as "good management" by others. To each their own; that's what makes this league fun; the pitting of strategies to build a sustainable and winning club. I built my team to capitalize on the flexibility of the SCD contracts and have a decent crop of prospects for this season and then weed out the guys I didn't want. If some people want to change these rules, I'm okay with that. Just if they want change, they need to have a solution to make that fix. At the end of the day, we all want a strong, long lasting and viable Dynasty league to participate in.

[Deleted]

Hey no prob man. Again wasn't trying to call you out or anything like that was just speaking up for the few of us teams that decided to start off their SCD GM careers with a rebuild.

And yeah a prime example of bad management was "the collusion brothers." Which is why they are no longer part of the league. Yeah and totally agree with you that suggestions that lead to solutions are always more helpful then just flat out complaints with no suggestions.

Again I think a 4 callup per matchup limit is the easiest thing that fixes the problem some GMs have against endless streaming players from farm while still allowing other GMs to utilize their farm as part of their strategy as this is a dynasty league and a farm should be able to part of a GMs strategy as well. 4 just seams like good balance to make it fair for both sides of this argument. All we'd need to do is set that in ESPN. 4 callups per matchup boom done. We can see how it works the rest of this season and then discuss it more in the offseason.

Personally I don't really have a strong opinion either way on this argument. I'm just looking for that happy medium that old "meet in the middle" type solution. Pulling up/down from the farm should be allowed we just have to set the right limit for doing it that everyone can be satisfied with.

Any other teams that have ideas/suggestions please throw them into the thread.

[Flames GM (Beamer)]

Roger that Scott. I hope a win/win is found and I think we're getting close to it. Need more GMs to weigh in and then hopefully we can get this all settled up.


P.s. I betcha Clair misses SCD a liitle bit after seeing him log in on the chat forum.

[Deleted]

Yeah once we get more GMs to speak up we can have LM/mod meeting and nail down the solution.

Clair definitely misses SCD.

[Deleted]

Oct 31, 2015 15:45:57 GMT -6 @scott said:

Yeah once we get more GMs to speak up we can have LM/mod meeting and nail down the solution.

My other dynasty league allows 5 roster adds per matchup; something like that might work. Will ESPN let you make that a setting so it doesn't have to be tracked manually?

[Deleted]

Yes ESPN definitely allows you to set matchup acquistion limits (see an above post in this thread from me suggesting this). Hopefully it will still allow us to add a matchup limit even though the season has started already. My guess is it will.

[Flames GM (Beamer)]

If it doesn't, it can be noted and monitored (yes, I can monitor myself).

[Blues GM (Wood)]

Yea ESPN you can setup them

"LIKE A STORM, BODIES WILL CLASH, PUCKS WILL FLY, DREAMS WILL CRUMBLE UNTIL ALL THAT REMAINS IS VICTORY FOR THE FIERCEST COMPETITION IN SPORTS!!"