|
Post by Oxford United on Aug 5, 2023 21:00:37 GMT -7
Eliminate the rule that allows skaters to be declared inactive, returning the roster limit to 35 players.
|
|
|
Post by nash on Aug 6, 2023 23:02:41 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by amack17 on Aug 9, 2023 5:50:38 GMT -7
The more I think about this, the more I think that removing these slots is probably the right call. Lorne shared the numbers earlier and it does not seem that these "developmental" slots are being used as often as we may have expected.
|
|
|
Post by QC Mike on Aug 9, 2023 11:52:42 GMT -7
The more I think about this, the more I think that removing these slots is probably the right call. Lorne shared the numbers earlier and it does not seem that these "developmental" slots are being used as often as we may have expected. Not sure what Lorne has been doing but I've had these three slots filled since they opened. Over the last three seasons there has been a lot of chaff but "players" who have occupied a farm team slot and have graduated to my starting roster are Michael Rasmussen, Shane Pinto and William Borgen. Hoping that Nikolai Knyzhov (assuming he can stay healthy for once) and Fabian Zetterlund will make the jump from this year's farm team.
|
|
|
Post by Oxford United on Aug 9, 2023 15:23:57 GMT -7
The more I think about this, the more I think that removing these slots is probably the right call. Lorne shared the numbers earlier and it does not seem that these "developmental" slots are being used as often as we may have expected. Not sure what Lorne has been doing but I've had these three slots filled since they opened. Over the last three seasons there has been a lot of chaff but "players" who have occupied a farm team slot and have graduated to my starting roster are Michael Rasmussen, Shane Pinto and William Borgen. Hoping that Nikolai Knyzhov (assuming he can stay healthy for once) and Fabian Zetterlund will make the jump from this year's farm team. Not every team has the volume of players found in QCQ's system, that's for sure. But the real question is would you have protected them if there was no Inactive Skater list? Would you have let Pinto go in favor of Jake Gardiner (inactive in NHL)? Or Rasmussen go to save Julien Gauthier? You'd have had to make some pretty easy decisions, I think.
|
|
|
Post by nash on Aug 9, 2023 16:24:19 GMT -7
I am still protecting Andrei Markov. And a variety of trash.
|
|
|
Post by nash on Aug 9, 2023 16:36:57 GMT -7
For some context, you may look at the CHL file and any player on the Rosters tab who is bolded has previously been pulled off the Inactive list and protected normally.
|
|
|
Post by QC Mike on Aug 9, 2023 23:22:15 GMT -7
Not sure what Lorne has been doing but I've had these three slots filled since they opened. Over the last three seasons there has been a lot of chaff but "players" who have occupied a farm team slot and have graduated to my starting roster are Michael Rasmussen, Shane Pinto and William Borgen. Hoping that Nikolai Knyzhov (assuming he can stay healthy for once) and Fabian Zetterlund will make the jump from this year's farm team. Not every team has the volume of players found in QCQ's system, that's for sure. But the real question is would you have protected them if there was no Inactive Skater list? Would you have let Pinto go in favor of Jake Gardiner (inactive in NHL)? Or Rasmussen go to save Julien Gauthier? You'd have had to make some pretty easy decisions, I think. The Rasmussen - Gauthier call might have been a little tougher. Gauthier still outscores Rasmussen on a goal per (proprietary stat here) basis but it's the rest of the card that would make him a sacrifice. Given at the time they were both part time 4th liners it could have been a coin toss. Just like Brandon Sutter (Edmonton PTO - don't expect him to make it after two years off but you never know with a Sutter).
|
|
Adam (Moose Jaw)
Power User
Da competition is gonna sleep wit da fishes
Posts: 145
|
Post by Adam (Moose Jaw) on Aug 10, 2023 9:15:47 GMT -7
you never know with a Sutter Team slogan right there
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Aug 12, 2023 14:59:38 GMT -7
I guess the counter to all of this is with teams that draft well, and have players that take 3-4 years to develop. In some instances you may not have the slots to allocate due to injury, players you need this year, but have already retired, etc and you're just short games. Dropping your future doesnt seem like a wise decision, but you still have to be able to fulfill your duties to the league and field as good a team as you can in your position.
Tage Thompson took 4 years before he had his outburst. In none of those 4 years did he give any indication that he was going to be a star player. Forcing guys who draft well, do their research and acknowledge that draftees may require a long runway, to just dump these players seems unfair.
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Aug 15, 2023 12:00:04 GMT -7
An addition here in reference to Arrons mention of not having enough people speak out about reasoning to not implement these changes. This goes to my last post on the Draft Round reduction thread as well.
I read an article on the weekend that I'm trying to find again, will link it if I can, but basically it went through player developments from draft year to when they either bust or become NHL regulars. The average time it takes is 4 years from a draft year for them to become an NHL regular.
If we have 5 (4) rounds of drafting, over 4 years thats going to be 20 (16) rookies. These guys will all have played at least 10 games to be draft eligible, but many of them wont reach their every day status for those 3-4 years.
If you draft even reasonably well, and if say, only 1/2 of those guys become regulars, that's still going to be 10 (8) rookies you're trying to protect over those 4 years. 3 slots wont cover it, so I think we are already selling rebuilding/drafting models short.
There's no harm in having the 3 slots. If you don't draft, dont use them. If you don't need extra players because you have no idea who may turn out or not, dont use the slots. How does it negatively affect anyone if you keep some extra rookies in these slots?
If they don't pan out, they will get cut eventually, they wont be played against you while they're protected.
But if you get a Macelli or a Thompson, why should we force you to cut them before they're NHL regulars?
|
|
|
Post by Oxford United on Aug 15, 2023 13:43:20 GMT -7
Some reasonable points there, Daniel. Food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by QC Mike on Aug 16, 2023 12:24:03 GMT -7
Also want people to look at these rule proposals as part of a whole package. If we go from 5 draft rounds to 4 to reduce the amount of "talent" on each team to bring more 3rd and 4th liners in to play, how is that going to effect player turnover if there is a smaller roster to back things up? I'm not sure what's going to happen with NHL rosters with the salary cap expected to grow next year. Are we going to see everyone get paid or is all the money going to go to the stars, a little bit to some above average players and then a rotating cast of role players on league minimum so that 3rd liners may play every game for a few seasons only to disappear for the newest flavour and hope for lighting in a bottle? If we end up with smaller rosters and the NHL flushes through bottom of the order players faster to keep costs down in a cap world, our GMs could potentially find themselves squeezed for players as those 3rd and 4th liners we are using to fill our rosters drop out of the NHL after three seasons.
|
|
|
Post by brandonmoose on Aug 16, 2023 21:22:30 GMT -7
55 in 55 out ser numbers every year. Let's look at the 3 names thrown around as reasons to keep the skaters and current players on list Micheal rassmusen picked 22nd in his draft QC had 4 more picks in the draft chose to put those 4 on roster over rassmusen. Would he really keep 2 5th round darts lammikko and saunter over his second round pick? No of course not we just enabled him with a loop hole. If dropped back in draft as a free agent this year does he get drafted? No.
Shane Pinto 21 pick in draft. 20 goal second line center. Will be demoted to 3rd or 4rh lime on nhl team with return of Norris. Team made 3 additional picks that year only 1 on roster the 43 overall pick in same draft. Other 2 are on current rookie inactive list. Team values 4th rounded over this second round pick or enabled to hold as rule created loop hole? If droped a free agent with age and 3rd to 4th line role may warrant a 4th round pick in this year's draft.
Tage Thompson drafted 16th in his rookie draft the 16 pick was the next season, which was traded in a package for 1st overall pick and has never been close being dropped. Was allowed to hide for 1 season as inactive skaters rule created loop hole.
There are currently 23 players from on the list year this means before this year we are 78 players over our roster limits instead of 55. The rule is unfair as it only allows certain players availability and creates more problems each season as they're players we keep the more players we have to drop, restarting the same cycle every year. We want the as a whole to lower to nhl standards torpedo 23 dart board players from current rosters and force some decisions.
|
|
|
Post by Shamrockville on Aug 17, 2023 14:58:39 GMT -7
I think some of this may be personal bias as well though Lorne. Pinto, as an example, would warrant at least a 3rd round pick for sure, based on the draft list I see, and possibly a 2nd. Lot's of guys get shuffled around to accommodate talent, which he has.
Thompson didn't have the option to be hidden his first season because we didnt have the 3 slots at that time. He most certainly would have had 2, possibly 3 seasons there had it been implemented earlier.
The point is not these individual players we've outlined, there are surely more if I wanted to do an in depth study to see who's been available and protected, but rather in a GM's ability to plan, draft and build his team the way he wants. Rassmusen may not have value to you, but Mike certainly had been on top of his progress and could tell you his year over year improvements. The point here is that Mike enjoys it and it doesnt hurt you in the slightest so why would you seek to simply abolish it out of hand?
There is no problem created by having some players with these rookies because everyone is allowed to so if they wish. You may not value the opportunity to draft 4th and 5th round prospects to take a chance on them, but some players do. If these draftees are so terrible, as you claim then what's the issue with them being on a roster for a couple years? It's not like they hurt you in any way. They aren't available for play, can't influence your season, and have no direct impact on anyone elses team.
You want to "force" some decisions, but that's not working in the league. Guys don't or wont trade. Like you can't force guys to trade, why should we force guys to drop a development aspect they enjoy and doesnt impact you?
|
|