|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 12, 2023 23:34:09 GMT -7
"Roll" = roll on a "d82" (i.e. d100 from 1-82, rerolling all rolls 83-100) "Roll in" = where you successfully 'roll in' if the roll <= # of games played "Roll out" = to miss a roll in. Principle: A player who plays X% of NHL games plays as close as possible to X% of regular season games; we should do the same with playoff games. This is complicated by the fact that the # of games in each series is variable; the proposed system will account for it. Game 1: "Roll" each player, one roll. League players will be available in the VERY unlikely event that a GM can't roll in a full roster from a 35 man list. Subsequent games, apply the following rules: 1> If the player has played a below average # of games so far, AND they would still have played a below average # of games if they rolled in next game, they automatically roll in for the next game. 2> If the player has played an above average # of games so far, AND they would still have played an above average # of games if they rolled out next game, they automatically roll out for the next game. 3> Otherwise, roll for the player as in Game 1 Example player: Player X has played 38/82 GP this year; this works out to an average of 38/82 of all games in the playoffs, specifically: After 1: 0.4634 After 2: 0.9268 After 3: 1.3902 After 4: 1.8536 After 5: 2.3171 After 6: 2.7805 After 7: 3.2439 Example #1 Game 1: Player X rolls in Rule 2 says that X has played above average (1 > 0.4634) and if he missed game 2, he'd still be above average (1 > 0.9268), therefore X automatically rolls out for game 2 Example #2 Game 1: player X rolls out If he rolls in for game 2, he'll be above average (1 > 0.9268); if he rolls out, he'll be below average (0 < 0.9268). Therefore, he rolls for game 2. Let's say he then "rolls out" and misses game 2: He is below average with 0 games. If he rolls in for game 3, he will still be below average (1 < 1.3902). Therefore, X automatically rolls in for game 3 It's honestly not that hard, and frankly, it's easy to print up a little table come playoff time. It's literally less effort AND more accurate than rolling in each player every game, and it avoids ALL of the "mutants do better in playoffs" effect that have plagued both leagues for decades. ALTERNATIVE: before each playoff series starts, the league can perform these rolls for 7 games for each player on each team, giving up a little realism in the way of 'future sight' in exchange for a far simpler method. But this method is plenty simple
|
|
|
Post by revelstoke on Jul 13, 2023 6:11:56 GMT -7
Charles, can you simplify it for us dummies who don't want to have more rules? I already get to remember and know far too much for work, the last thing I want is more stuff. Just looking at all those decimal points makes me go... huh? Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by nash on Jul 13, 2023 8:40:46 GMT -7
I was thinking the same thing Steve, but I wasn't to the point of having it as clear as you have. Good work.
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 11:26:23 GMT -7
Charles, can you simplify it for us dummies who don't want to have more rules? I'd like to give this a try. In this example I'll use fewer decimals to make it less scary. We would like to know if Alexander Edler can play a playoff game. Edler played 64/82 games. Edler has a 78% chance of playing game 1. - After 2 games, Edler would be eligible to play 0.78 + 0.78 = 1.56 games.
- After 3 games, Edler would be eligible to play 0.78 + 0.78 + 0.78 = 2.34 games.
- Etc.
It looks like this: Game # | Eligible GP | 1 | 0.78 | 2 | 1.56 | 3 | 2.34 | 4 | 3.12 | 5 | 3.90 | 6 | 4.68 | 7 | 5.46 |
To determine if Edler may play in a game, take the Eligible Value for the game and subtract his Games Played so far in the series. - So Eligible - Games Played = Result
- If the result is >= 1, Edler can play the game and does not need to roll.
- If the result is <= 0, Edler can not play.
- If the result is between 0 and 1, Elder must roll to play.
It's game 1. Edler has played 0 games. Can he play in Game 1? - Edler is eligible to play 0.78 games of 1.
- Edler has played 0 games.
- 0.78 - 0 = 0.78
- The Result is between 0 and 1. Edler must roll.
Let's assume Edler played game 1. Can he play in Game 2?- Edler is eligible to play 1.56 games of 2.
- Edler has played 1 game.
- 1.56 - 1 = .56
- The Result is between 0 and 1. Edler must roll.
Let's assume Edler has played the first 4 games. Can he play in Game 5? - Edler is eligible to play 3.90 games of 5.
- Edler has played 4 games.
- 3.90 - 4 = -0.10
- The Result is <= 0. Edler may not play.
Let's assume Edler has played 4 games. Can he play Game 7? - Edler is eligible to play 5.46 games of 7.
- Edler has played 4 games.
- 5.46 - 4 = -1.46
- The Result is >= 1. Edler may play without rolling.
I hope these examples help. And Chuck, I hope this interpretation is faithful. Steve This is absolutely on-the-spot correct. I did make that mistake with in/out in the OP, so feel free and edit it, or heck, even substitute your formulas and explanations. Glad to see it get a positive shine here at first
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 12:59:50 GMT -7
I am 100% for this rule. It works equally well for skaters and goalies. It would make rolling easier if we used 1-80 (d8 and d10) letting skaters who played 80 or more games play every playoff game and reducing to zero the number of unused rolls from 83-100 (on the d100). If passed I commit to having the Eligible GP values printed on the cards. While that is an acceptably-small amount of 'bucketing' in the name of a quicker experience, a problem exists in that d8 & d10 give you numbers between 10 and 89, so we'd have to subtract 10.. nine, actually, to get numbers between 1 and 80.
|
|
|
Post by nash on Jul 13, 2023 13:38:25 GMT -7
Guys with less than 10 games aren't carded correct?
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 13:40:18 GMT -7
8s are zeroes. If the result is 8-0, that’s 80. I'll have to get a black felt and block out one of the two loops in the "8" so it looks just like a small "0"
|
|
|
Post by bonavista on Jul 13, 2023 13:49:34 GMT -7
I also like the idea behind this. It also takes out the gut wrenching bad luck that was sometimes found with the roll method in SBHL where it was possible to have a 73 game player miss an entire series. I dont remember exactly who this happened to but I remember being across the table from it.
Will need to make up a full chart for games played and how it pro rates though to make it so we dont have to do it manually every series though. that is not a big issue though.
Also for those thinking about how much extra time would be added. roll-ins were usually done within 5 minutes of setting up rosters. the only real delay would be you couldn't pre set your game sheet as you dont know who is playing that game.
|
|
|
Post by nash on Jul 13, 2023 13:53:09 GMT -7
I'll have to get a black felt and block out one of the two loops in the "8" so it looks just like a small "0" God, I hope you don’t roll ♾️ on the d8. You two are such D&D noobs. You don't need to adjust any dice to generate 10 to 82 on d8/d10.
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 14:07:54 GMT -7
God, I hope you don’t roll ♾️ on the d8. You two are such D&D noobs. You don't need to adjust any dice to generate 10 to 82 on d8/d10. Yes, but that only has a space of 73 possible outcomes. So if someone plays 10 games, instead of having a 10/82 chance of making the playoffs, they have a 1/73 chance, which is significantly lower.
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 14:10:02 GMT -7
I also like the idea behind this. It also takes out the gut wrenching bad luck that was sometimes found with the roll method in SBHL where it was possible to have a 73 game player miss an entire series. I dont remember exactly who this happened to but I remember being across the table from it. Will need to make up a full chart for games played and how it pro rates though to make it so we dont have to do it manually every series though. that is not a big issue though. Also for those thinking about how much extra time would be added. roll-ins were usually done within 5 minutes of setting up rosters. the only real delay would be you couldn't pre set your game sheet as you dont know who is playing that game. I lost a playoff series to John Burns when he rolled in his 21GP .931 David Aebischer for all five games, and even at that it took him until the third period of the 5th and final game to break the tie to win. German fuckin' Titov.
|
|
|
Post by bonavista on Jul 13, 2023 14:11:31 GMT -7
wait Burns actually made playoffs? I cant say I ever remember that
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 14:20:04 GMT -7
wait Burns actually made playoffs? I cant say I ever remember that He did at least once. I had loaded up for a deep cup run too. Between that and losing my last playoff series when my goalie let in literally every single hard shot for three games solid.. yeah.
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Jul 13, 2023 14:25:34 GMT -7
I am absolutely opposed to this rule. This takes out a coaches ability to choose when a player plays, and to change his lineup accordingly so it isn't completely hamstrung by a random rolling of who can play or not. This is over complicating things for no reason.
Guys play games banged up in the playoffs, they miss entire seasons and come back and play every game in the playoffs, they miss time early and play in the playoffs.
There is no reasoning behind changing this because the regular season and the playoffs are 2 entirely different sets of games.
|
|
|
Post by alphalackey on Jul 13, 2023 14:29:24 GMT -7
I am absolutely opposed to this rule. This takes out a coaches ability to choose when a player plays, and to change his lineup accordingly so it isn't completely hamstrung by a random rolling of who can play or not. This is over complicating things for no reason. Guys play games banged up in the playoffs, they miss entire seasons and come back and play every game in the playoffs, they miss time early and play in the playoffs. There is no reasoning behind changing this because the regular season and the playoffs are 2 entirely different sets of games. We currently limit the number of playoff games allowed based on the number of real life GP, right? My proposal will limit the number of playoff games allowed based on the number of real life GP, but do it far more accurately. There's no coaching decisions whatsoever to be made in playing players for playoff games -- play each player every game they're allowed as soon as you can, because the value you get from exploiting "always has 4 / have to allow for it potentially going to 7" is so massive that nothing else matters. Just like you always play your best shootout players, in order, top to bottom.
|
|