• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

The Tanking Issue

Holy crap, what a thread.

If I'm in Soco's shoes and I couldn't move Colborne to the minors (for whatever reason), I'd definitely opt to keep another minor eligible player on the bench to not lose the asset when the difference is not significant. This is from a team that has been top 5 every year.

I specifically target players who are young and minor eligible for flexibility in our weekly lineups as injuries are a bitch and you need depth to compete.

Just my $0.02
 
For sure... and nobody had a problem with Colborne specifically that I know of. I just pointed out a way that he could have put Colborne in the minors and Schwartz in his starting lineup.
 
So I detailed a potential "top-up" plan for teams with low GP to even out the playing field a bit and asked for comments, and nobody said a word. Are we okay with the status quo, or does anybody want to actually change anything?
 
I actually thought I suggested a top up system to begin with.... so I'm very much in favour of that axl.
 
Here's the post discussing a potential top-up plan for GP.

axlsalinger said:
Okay, so we still need to figure out the best way to tackle this issue. I am sick and ****ing tired of hearing about tanking. We have a basic structure of 82 Games Played per position max. This works out to 328 GP for Center (82 x 4), 656 for Wingers (82 x 8), 492 for d-men (82 x 6), and it's 90 for goalies.

We can't expect every team to max out, I know I frequently have a player in the lineup who gets hurt on Monday or Tuesday night. Plus, we expect teams to forget to set their roster every once in a while. These things tend to even themselves out over the course of the season, plus we never know if someone is actively tanking or not.

So what's the solution? Let's say we set the minimum GP at 75 per roster spot. I went through every team's "on-pace" numbers to see how many teams will fail to meet this total.

Center 300 (75 x 4) - 4 teams
Wing 600 (75 x 8) - 7 teams
Defense 450 (75 x 6) - 10 teams
Goalie 75 - 5 teams

Now in some cases a few teams would fall just short of the number, but still, we need to decide, is this # to high? Too low? Just right? Could also make it 70 or 72 instead.

Next, once we figure out the minimum, we need to determine a point total to add. The number of .5 was floated earlier. So let's say a team has 585 total Games Played from their Wingers, and the minimum was 600. We could then add .5 fantasy points x 15 games under, resulting in an extra 7.5 points.

Is that # right? We could make it .45, .55, or .6.

Let's hear some opinions on the subject.
Click to expand...
 
I also added later that this seems like too high a number of teams to adjust for, so the GP "minimum" should probably be lower than 75.
 
72GP seems reasonable as the minimum GP. Now the question is, do we make it retroactive to this past season? Or just as a new rule moving forward? Also, what should the top-up amount per game be, 0.5, lower, higher?
 
Neither am I, and normally wouldn't institute a new rule retroactively. However, in this case, all teams have been told multiple times to keep an eye on lineups and to roster a valid group of players every week anyway. So this is basically putting a # on something that all teams have been aware of since the creation of the league.
 
axlsalinger said:
Neither am I, and normally wouldn't institute a new rule retroactively. However, in this case, all teams have been told multiple times to keep an eye on lineups and to roster a valid group of players every week anyway. So this is basically putting a # on something that all teams have been aware of since the creation of the league.
Click to expand...

I'm doubting we can get new policy finalized and a vote done in the next few hours, would likely be up to you commish if want to enforce the new set of rules or not, I guess. Is what it is - moreso I care more about getting everyone to agree on the rule itself (ie. min games played, point value etc...), is what I am more concerned about. Hate idea of a few ppl respond and that's how rule is formed.

In terms of my opinion, hasn't changed from way back when you proposed (someone actually did respond haha). Was for 70 games at 0.5 for non-goalies and 65 for goalies (as impossible to replace an injured guy if a starter goes down).

If league expands, would lower the 0.5 to something lower as the waiver wire will be much weaker with additional teams.
 
Last edited:
I'll trust whatever axl decides.

That said, in this situation I would be in favour of putting the rule in effect immediately since it's an issue that has been happening since early in the season and there have been a ton of requests for teams to "try."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top