|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Jan 21, 2013 13:31:37 GMT -5
I have no problem with this other than that it devalues the later round picks. I know we have discussed this and you didn't want us to realize an extreme value if one of our minor league contracted players exploded to having a usable card. My example was not an explosion by any means but a usable card to be sure on a lot of clubs. Was trying to clear this up not only for all owners but myself as well as I was under the impression that if we were intending to use a player in our line up that he had to be on a pro contract as that is the premise I have been following. That was the original plan but I was unable to include logic that precluded these players from being called up. Instead i arrived at a solution where these players must be given a pro contract next year or they would be Free agents. I am amenable to discuss whether using them this year would burn one year of their eligibility. My referring to the cracks versus void was illustrating the point that the code to keep this (bringing up guys either by the GM or the simulation itself when needed) was not in place. |
|
|
|
Post by Ian-Halifax on Feb 8, 2013 1:33:31 GMT -5
Joe Vitale, 30-21, 225k, has played 30 games this season, how did this slip through cracks? Especially with a card that high. No one slipped through the cracks. There is nothing in place to track this during the season so by it;s very nature, you can't have cracks in a gaping void. Once the season is done I will be able to write a query to identify any player on a minor league contract that played with the big club. These guys will then have to be given a pro contract. I have a question about this. If I have a minor leaguer I don't want to lose (isn't playing in the nhl or ahl), can I play him in a game so he gets a contract next year even if he doesn't have a card? |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Feb 8, 2013 7:37:49 GMT -5
I was in this position last season, the minor leaguers that do not have a card can not be retained. Chalk up another advantage to the draft picks Dane.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Feb 8, 2013 9:08:20 GMT -5
I was in this position last season, the minor leaguers that do not have a card can not be retained. Chalk up another advantage to the draft picks Dane. Scott is correct. That is one of the big differences between the drafted prospects and minor league signees. If you would have signed him to a pro contract at the start of this year, you would have had the option of retaining him as any other pro contracted player could be retained. Which player are you referring to? If he played in the NHL/AHL last year, why wouldn't he get some games this year, I am guessing it is a junior kid who came up for a cup of coffee last year. If so, what makes you feel he won't get the same cup this year? |
|
|
|
Post by Ian-Halifax on Feb 8, 2013 9:20:52 GMT -5
I don't really have anyone specific in mind. I only have two guys in juniors right now I think, but I also have some guys that are playing in the khl and I am doubting they will be signing a new contract during the regular season. I was more or less just curious.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Mar 19, 2013 7:51:28 GMT -5
This issue was addressed last season. You can not skate minor league salaried players ( below the 500k threshold ) if you have healthy players ( not on IR ) on your roster. I was questioned last season for skating Urbom for a game when I had an injury and was made aware that I was playing against the rule...These type players have to be sent down or given Pro contracts. Otherwise, whats to say anyone wont just skate a bunch of rookies and tank on purpose. It is circumventing the rules to skate a roster of rookies. I can field a roster full of rookies and tank the season. When the season is over, I can drop these players instead of signing them. Then what do we do? Does the new owner have to sign them to Pro Contracts or are they Available at discounts again? In any case, this issue was discussed and debated. A solid rule has not been delivered, but an understanding was...that understanding was this: Players on Minor League contracts were not allowed on Big Rosters unless an injury were sustained and a roster spot needed to be filled. If this was the case, the next season that player was to be given a Pro Contract. See "Riding the Pine" subtitle "Minor League Contracted Players" for more info... gtgfhl.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=minors&action=display&thread=1010&page=1View Page 4 first ( the initial right up ) |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Mar 19, 2013 10:11:18 GMT -5
This is definitely an area that needs to be addressed. Chris is absolutely right, players making under 500k are only eligible to play on emergency basis but I believe Glenn said there was a technical issue preventing him from stopping these players from getting called up so we want with the following this season. .. any player on a minor league contract who plays in at least one game must be signed to a pro level contract the following year. That's the way it is for now.
On a sidebar here, we need to add rule changes and amendments such as the one discussed above to the rulebook as they occur or are discovered, it does us no good to have a rulebook which is incomplete or out of date
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Mar 19, 2013 12:03:41 GMT -5
Actually, it's 500k and they can be signed or released, not sure how this is tracked, not my department.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Mar 19, 2013 12:49:46 GMT -5
I will be providing a list of players who were on minor league contracts and played in the "Bigs" this year. It will be pretty easy to create this systematically.
Scott is correct, if you want to keep them you need to sign them to a pro deal or you can release them out right at which point they become free agents.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Mar 20, 2013 7:33:31 GMT -5
Personally, and I believe it is the NHL rule as well...
As soon as a player meets the criteria ( whatever we decide it will be or follow the NHL rule for ELC either 3,7 or 10 games played ) that player has to be signed to a pro contract. "During" the season of play. If he is not offered a contract he must pass thru Waivers.
I think we should also follow that lead. If you want to skate a team of 100k players, thats fine, but the moment they play in their 3rd, 7th or 10th FHL game, they need to re-upped to a pro contract.
This will hold managers responsible to the level we have talked about all along. They will have to make sure they have the cap room for such contracts and if not, they will need to trade or release players immediately. All the while, adhering to the minimum players required ( 45 Roster total and 25 pro roster requirement.
Initially, we allowed for a lot of minor league movement without penalty because we still hadnt solidified a Minor's Team. Now that we are 3 season's in, 98% of our league has had the op to build a team. There is no need to allow these 100k players on our rosters unless:
1- you made moves on your own and mismanaged your team
2- your are being pulverized with injuries.
3- your circumventing the rules
Allowing a guy to play 100k players during the season ( essentially non capable players ) is essentially allowing a team to tank and then drop those non significant guys and replace them with new ones after the season ends without penalty.
Make them pay "in season" and manage the team properly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Mar 20, 2013 9:14:49 GMT -5
Personally, and I believe it is the NHL rule as well... As soon as a player meets the criteria ( whatever we decide it will be or follow the NHL rule for ELC either 3,7 or 10 games played ) that player has to be signed to a pro contract. "During" the season of play. If he is not offered a contract he must pass thru Waivers. I think we should also follow that lead. If you want to skate a team of 100k players, thats fine, but the moment they play in their 3rd, 7th or 10th FHL game, they need to re-upped to a pro contract. This will hold managers responsible to the level we have talked about all along. They will have to make sure they have the cap room for such contracts and if not, they will need to trade or release players immediately. All the while, adhering to the minimum players required ( 45 Roster total and 25 pro roster requirement. Initially, we allowed for a lot of minor league movement without penalty because we still hadnt solidified a Minor's Team. Now that we are 3 season's in, 98% of our league has had the op to build a team. There is no need to allow these 100k players on our rosters unless: 1- you made moves on your own and mismanaged your team 2- your are being pulverized with injuries. 3- your circumventing the rules Allowing a guy to play 100k players during the season ( essentially non capable players ) is essentially allowing a team to tank and then drop those non significant guys and replace them with new ones after the season ends without penalty. Make them pay "in season" and manage the team properly. Chris. This has been discussed repeatedly. The problem is modifying the engine/web site to trap for these occurences. I do not have the time to do so right now (or in the near future). Also, in regards to worries about teams tanking, I was pretty much left with the impression that as we discussed the changes to the way the lottery positioning was going to take place there was almost universal agreement that worries about a team tanking was not a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Mar 20, 2013 10:07:41 GMT -5
I think the whole discussion ties in with the importance of Draft Picks and Rules. It's easy to see how many games any of our FHL guys play. It is listed on a teams page, so we should be able to track it individually. No worries there at all.
I am more concerned with a GM signing BIG contracts for the season just to suit up a team, with only enough monies to spend on 3 lines of a FHL team, then using his limited monies to sign a 45 man roster to 100k contracts, and dumping all of the 100k guys and the big contracts come seasons end and repeating that process over and over, season after season.
This is a keeper league...right? my above description is currently allowed in this leagues format without penalty by circumventing. There is nothing "keeper" about that approach.
Scott-NY and I have had this discussion prior...we are both of the same mind about it. It isn't just about a philosophy, it's about the integrity of the FHL.
I have to use an example of what I mean....and I am not calling out Moncton...but that is the closest example.
Currently above Roster limit of 25, Only 1 player on IR
Rostering 100k players in starting Bigs Roster
I am very much a rules oriented person. Not that I dont cross over a solid yellow line from time to time or dodge in and out of the HOV lanes, but...we have some rules here that have just not been adhered to, and as pet peaves of my own....are just bugging the heck outta me.
25 Man roster, period....assign your rosters...move your guys back and forth from Pro's to Minor's is fine....it's easy and takes a few minutes. If ya have time to post on the forum and and make your lineup changes daily...you surely have time to adhere to this little rule.
How can we move forward with Bigger Rules when guys aren't adhering to the smaller simpler rules?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Mar 20, 2013 10:10:57 GMT -5
I agree with Chris, there should be some sort of payment in season as it is too easy to circumvent the rules. I love the idea of waivers(I would have poached half Owen's bench by now) but it can't happen as we have a minimum number of players each team has to maintain. I think the best way would to bump the guys salary up manually. I'm sure the fun police will alert Glenn and then it's just one guy. Change 100K to 500K so switching a 1 to a 5, done. I'm guessing it can't be too hard. This then make teams like ADR for example who are up against the cap to think twice before using all those 100K players. It will force them to better manage their team and make them have to move a high salary guy for a smaller one in a hurry and with almost no leverage. When teams see that they will think twice spending to the ceiling. EXALTED!  My feelings exactly! It makes GMs think twice! It makes GM's responsible! I will be the first to apply for the Brenden Shanahan Fun Police Position. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Mar 20, 2013 11:28:17 GMT -5
Change 100K to 500K so switching a 1 to a 5, done. I'm guessing it can't be too hard. That's what the marketing guys tell clients before consulting with the tech team. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Mar 20, 2013 13:04:08 GMT -5
more enforcement....like this
Starting with ALL those minor league rs used .Moncton played a shit-ton. They ALL need to be signed to big contracts next year.
Sal played a NHL free agent Goalie in the FHL this year....does he need to sign him?
Draft picks should be more accurate with salaries...we need to price them all lower, so the FHL draft, to include the 3-5th round becomes relevant again.
|
|
