|
|
Post by revelstoke on Apr 18, 2023 13:10:21 GMT -7
Same proposal as last year:
The rule proposal is to remove the playoff appearance Stack for goalies and replace it with a simple number of starts formula and table so that GMs can pick the goalie they want to start and when.
The formula: =ROUNDUP(GS/10,0)+1
The Table
1-10 GS = 0 Playoff Starts
11-20 GS = 1
21-30 GS = 2
31-40 GS = 3
41-50 GS = 5
51+ GS = 7
And so it’s clear, GS = Game Starts = Roundup(Minutes Played/60,0)
*edited the game starts so that mutant low GS goalies don't get too many games, and add value to high game count goaltenders
|
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Apr 18, 2023 18:13:21 GMT -7
Something other than the stack is definitely preferred.
|
|
|
|
Post by nash on Apr 21, 2023 9:36:45 GMT -7
My goal with any adjustments to the current system is three-fold.
1. To not make it appealing to pair up two lower game goalies with high save percentages as an effective tandem in the playoffs.
As Larry has edited the number of games a goalie is available this might be suitable. We should have to think about this as being sufficient for regular season even if it solves my first point.
2. Not allow a manager to play a low game high save number guy at the beginning of every series to go ahead quickly.
This may not be as much of an issue now with the goalie save numbers not have a huge disparity, but that is really the intent of the stack.
3. Improve the value of high game guys.
It might be as simple as saying if your guy is rated for 7 games you don't use the stack at all. Otherwise you do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Apr 21, 2023 12:51:35 GMT -7
My only counter to that Nash, is that the NHL rides the hot hand all the time. If you're backup was lights out in the last month of the season, he'd most likely get the starts anyhow. The idea that in the playoffs, only one manager is going to have a good goalie is pretty much an outlier. I think that just letting guys play their teams without these needless stacks is the only really fair system. Maybe you'd even see some guys actually trading for good goalies with higher games numbers more often.
Besides, as you stated in 2b, the goalie disparity is negligible now so it doesnt really matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by nash on Apr 21, 2023 15:43:55 GMT -7
My only counter to that Nash, is that the NHL rides the hot hand all the time. If you're backup was lights out in the last month of the season, he'd most likely get the starts anyhow. The idea that in the playoffs, only one manager is going to have a good goalie is pretty much an outlier. I think that just letting guys play their teams without these needless stacks is the only really fair system. Maybe you'd even see some guys actually trading for good goalies with higher games numbers more often. Besides, as you stated in 2b, the goalie disparity is negligible now so it doesnt really matter. Can you give me a couple of examples of when the back-up has been "lights out". I can't think of it this year except for Lyon. |
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Apr 21, 2023 15:51:40 GMT -7
From a card construction perspective, this is straightforward:the stats tell us only what a player DID DO, not what he COULD DO. We should not allow teams to exceed a goalie’s ratio of games started because we do not know how that goalie would have played had he been given more starts. No one is saying that though Steve, not sure where you got that from? All anyone is saying is that we be allowed to decide when our goalies play, based on the number of games they are allowed to play. We simply don't want the stack to dictate when a goalie plays. I.E. Mike getting royally screwed last year. I have a goalie that can start 7 games and I have a goalie that can start 6 games. I should be able to dictate that my 6 game guy plays my first 6 games if I want to. Just like a GM who has a goalie that is able to play 5 games and one that can play 3 games, should be able to decide which games each goalie plays. No one should have to roll in a goalie. |
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Apr 21, 2023 15:52:16 GMT -7
My only counter to that Nash, is that the NHL rides the hot hand all the time. If you're backup was lights out in the last month of the season, he'd most likely get the starts anyhow. The idea that in the playoffs, only one manager is going to have a good goalie is pretty much an outlier. I think that just letting guys play their teams without these needless stacks is the only really fair system. Maybe you'd even see some guys actually trading for good goalies with higher games numbers more often. Besides, as you stated in 2b, the goalie disparity is negligible now so it doesnt really matter. Can you give me a couple of examples of when the back-up has been "lights out". I can't think of it this year except for Lyon. Laurent Broissot in Vegas was very good down the stretch, last 11 games and he is the Vegas starter. |
|
|
|
Post by Oxford United on Aug 5, 2023 20:33:42 GMT -7
Same proposal as last year: The rule proposal is to remove the playoff appearance Stack for goalies and replace it with a simple number of starts formula and table so that GMs can pick the goalie they want to start and when. The formula: =ROUNDUP(GS/10,0)+1 The Table 1-10 GS = 0 Playoff Starts 11-20 GS = 1 21-30 GS = 2 31-40 GS = 3 41-50 GS = 5 51+ GS = 7 And so it’s clear, GS = Game Starts = Roundup(Minutes Played/60,0) *edited the game starts so that mutant low GS goalies don't get too many games, and add value to high game count goaltenders The formula "=ROUNDUP(GS/10,0)+1" would result in the following playoff starts: | GS | PS | | 01-10 | 2 | | 11-20 | 3 | | 21-30 | 4 | | 31-40 | 5 | | 41-50 | 6 | | 51+ | 7 |
Is there a correction to the formula that would make it work as intended? |
|
|
|
Post by revelstoke on Aug 7, 2023 19:19:11 GMT -7
I didn't make a formula per se... the original was as you showed, but Nash pointed out that the low game goalies were still getting too much so I modified the numbers. Only one I left was 51+
|
|
|
|
Post by Chelsea on Aug 13, 2023 14:20:51 GMT -7
Hmm If I get to the playoffs 34 game Swayman (126 save) for the first 3 then hope to squeeze one with whoever. Might work for me
|
|
|
|
Post by nash on Aug 13, 2023 21:03:08 GMT -7
|
|
