AHL- Apolyton Hockey League 08/09: Preseason

[Flubber]

I did not see a thread on this. Last year it seemed the first thread was on Aug 28 and while the draft was done well in time, there was some worry we would be rushed. So I thought I might get things started now. The opening post from NYE last tyear seems a good place to start

It's on again.

http://fantasysports.yahoo.com/

They have some new features. Among them, you can register a URL and keep track of successive seasons for the league.

I suggest we take the AHL, or Apolyton Hockey League.

Other new things can be seen here.

http://hockey.fantasysports.yahoo.com/hockey/features

I'll send out invites to everyone from last year and the 3 inactive managers from the previous season. Give them a few days to speak up and then we can send out other invites.

Topics for discussion include...

Commissioner

Rules

This year's stats categories and roster sizes. We used 2C, 2L, 2R, 2D, 2G, 4 bench, 2 IR last year with G, A, +/-, PPG, PPA, W, SV%, SHO.

Draft

Thoughts?

[Asher]

You want to be commish? You're active enough in the league.

I think I was happy with the stats last year in this league...

[Flubber]

I would be fine with playing under exactly the same rules as as last year if thats what people wanted but two issues arise for discussion in my mind

1. Some people wanted a limit on the number of transactions probably largely because I was averaging about 4 a week (usually shuttling 2-3 marginal players in and out of my lineup). I would have no problem accepting a limit as long as a reasonable number of transactions were permitted (whether the limit were per week or for the year)-- I would like to suggest however that if there is a restriction we think about adding one extra player to the bench-- actually thats not a bad idea anyway if people want tyo reward the people that draft well

2. The categories to be used-- Four are points and I always thought this was overkill. There seemed to be some support for this sentiment last year as well. I would once again like to suggest dropping PPG and PPA and simply having PPP-- To keep the 5-3 category balance between players and goalies, I would suggest we pick up another category. I continue to like penalty minutes-- I think it adds another dimension to the mix and lets people make really strategic decisions such as whether to draft a complete goon type. It also ups the value of some tougher players that score a little less.


Thats my two cents. I'll accept the general feeling and play regardless of what is decided.

[Asher]

I'm fine in dropping PPG/PPA and adding PPP, but we absolutely would need another category to ensure that goalies aren't overly valued.

PIM might work...would need to look at the other available stats as well. Typically I'm not the biggest fans of goons/PIM-whores but they do make for interesting fantasy hockey matches

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Asher
You want to be commish?

I thought that NYE had 2 more years left on his term -- I was actually quite happy with the way things went last year and would think that the default position would be that NYE could do it again if he wished.

[SIZE=1] You're active enough in the league.

It was my only one and I was

1. making up for the horrendous decision to draft Emery and
2. making up for my failure to draft a decent RW-- Knowing the rules I took flyers on two RW in my last two picks

I doubt I would be as active but then again, I was playing completely within the rules. A lot of the interest in this draft for me came from sitting down to look at the week and seeing what tweaks I could potentially make

Originally posted by Asher


I think I was happy with the stats last year in this league...

Dang -- I ws hoping you might like penalty minutes

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Asher
I'm fine in dropping PPG/PPA and adding PPP, but we absolutely would need another category to ensure that goalies aren't overly valued.

PIM might work...would need to look at the other available stats as well. Typically I'm not the biggest fans of goons/PIM-whores but they do make for interesting fantasy hockey matches

Ahh -- I now see that you are a bit undecided


I actually don't LOVE penalty minutes as a stat BUT it seemed to be better than the other options and I can see it making for interesting decisions-- In a tight match, do you dress a scorer or a tough guy??

[Kontiki]

Dunno if I'll participate this year.

[Asher]

[snoopy369]

I'd be happier with PPA/PPG, myself, as frankly what are you doing in hockey if not scoring... PIM I think is idiotic, as it's not actually a good thing much of the time, and it's basically an attempt to describe people who 'play hard'. I'd rather run the goons out of the sport...

PPA/PPG separate gives some defenders significantly more value (not just lidstrom, but others who have a lot of PPA). There's a significant disparity between people who have PPA and have PPG, and I think that's a good reason to keep them separate.

If you want PPP, then what about Checks? I'm fairly sure they keep track of that stat ... or 'hard checks' or whatever the stat officially is. That would reward 'tough' players, without rewarding penalty minutes which are sometimes good sometimes bad.

[mrboo123]

I'm pretty sure I'll join again. If there are an odd number of teams, I could drop out if wanted though...

[Flubber]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I'd be happier with PPA/PPG, myself, as frankly what are you doing in hockey if not scoring... PIM I think is idiotic, as it's not actually a good thing much of the time, and it's basically an attempt to describe people who 'play hard'. I'd rather run the goons out of the sport...

PPA/PPG separate gives some defenders significantly more value (not just lidstrom, but others who have a lot of PPA). There's a significant disparity between people who have PPA and have PPG, and I think that's a good reason to keep them separate.

If you want PPP, then what about Checks? I'm fairly sure they keep track of that stat ... or 'hard checks' or whatever the stat officially is. That would reward 'tough' players, without rewarding penalty minutes which are sometimes good sometimes bad.

The stat is "Hits" and I agree that I would like that one more than PIM but I thought the problem was that yahoo did not track hits. If that has changed I would wholeheartedly go for hits. Blocked shots is another that I would like

I agree that PIM are not really a good thing for players to get but they are measurable and different from "points"-- I just think it would be interesting to have a different category-- As it stands now, many of the best players are excellent in all 5 player categories-- so you rarely have a big player decision to make-- you always play your best scorer


I would like the league a little better if there was a little added complexity-- Imagine blocked shots were available-- we would all have the decision of whether or not to draft a defensive specialist and we would all have an added very different factor in assessing players-- It could also be interesting late in the week deciding who to play as certain categories are close or pretty much clinched.

Now if "blocked shots" is not possible, there must be something else out there that is different enough. PIM WOULD fill the bill except for the fact that it is a negative.

Anyway thats my take -- I just would like some other category-- anything that is not more points -- not that I mind points but I just see a lot more possible twists, valuable players and interesting decisions if we had another non-points category

[snoopy369]

I'll be the first to admit I don't know hockey all that well, but I don't think I like blocked shots as a stat either. It's far too specialized of a thing, I think - how many people have blocked shots in a significant number (more than one a week)? Of those people, how many of them have any value beyond blocked shots?

In general, stats where the person getting that one stat gets no other stat is a bad thing - you'll never want even one of those players on your team. They might also get +/-, but I doubt they'd necessarily get all that much +/- if they're not a goal scorer or assists man (ie, they're on the 3rd or 4th line, or more likely they're PKers, which is where most of the blocked shots occur from what I've seen). It's like holds in baseball, but worse - holds are at least related to ERA, WHIP, and to some extent strikeouts (3 of the 5 usual categories in baseball) plus some of the other rate statistics if they're included.

But, that said, if blocks are relatively common and make for an interesting stat - either on defensemen, which I suppose is one ameliorating factor in that defensemen don't have much to select them by normally; or on forwards who either have some redeeming value, or on enough of them that you don't have to select a specific blocks guy - then I'd be okay with it. If it's just a matter of deciding "Either get some blocks, but have an otherwise useless guy in, or don't" then I don't like it at all.

Remember, PPA/PPG are two different categories, and do have two different groups of people in them - there are stars which do both of course, but you have a lot of defensemen who score PPAs primarily and wingers who score PPGs primarily (and the opposite, to a lesser extent). Merging them together weakens those significantly, particularly the defensemen portion...

[Flubber]

I guess I fundamentally do not undestand why a stat that is different and comes from a different sort of player is such a bad thing-- I am not saying blocked shots is the best (heck its probably not available of yahoo anyway) but its not a 3rd or 4th liner stat. Actually neither hits nor blocked shots are led by marginal players-- Instead its defencemen that lead these mostly.



On the Calgary Flames-- defencemen were the top 6 ranked in blocked shots but Craig Conroy, Matthew Lombardi and damond langkow were the next three. ON hits it was d-men in the top 4 spots then Conroy-Iginla tied for 5th. Lankow was in 10th with 75 hits


Move to Montreal and BLocked shots are even more dominated by D-men (8 of the top 9 as MOntreal had folks that shifted up from time to time). Hits ? The top 3 are d men but then the next 6 spots are filled with the likes of Latendress, Kostoupolous, Begin, Ryder.


So from that cursory look, it appears that Blocked shots is not somewhat a defenceman stat like PPA but completely dominated by defencemen.

Hits? Again somewhat defenceman dominated but not as much as blocked shots and many of the top forward as show up


So if the goal is to give some more importance to defencemen, these stats will do it way more than PPA ever would, maybe even too much. League wide, D men make up 15 of the top 30 in Hits last year-- but were 30 out of 30 on blocked shots

These stats probably are not available on yahoo but snoopy's question made me curious about these stats

[snoopy369]

The thing is that you don't necessarily want to give 'more' importance to defensemen; you have to have defensemen, and a set number, so you don't just give them more import overall. That won't change their draft position at all, at least for intelligent drafters, because many factors go into when you draft someone, but average point total of a position is not high on the list (it's only a factor if that point total is extremely low, such as for TE's in the NFL prior to 2005). That said, if block is basically a D-only stat, it may not be that useful - but it could be, also. I'm not saying I know it's a bad stat; I'm saying my gut feeling says it is a bad stat, but those of you more knowledgeable about hockey should definitely correct me if I'm wrong.

When strategizing what stats to use, you should look at:
1. Does this stat increase the number of viable players at a position *AND* is increasing the number of viable players a good thing? (For defensemen, probably is good)
2. Does this stat have a positive, negative, or neutral correlation to other stats? For blocks, my guess is negative... which is generally good if it's slightly negative, bad if it's very negative. You don't want Lidstrom and whatnot to suddenly become mediocre players, after all; the stars should still be the top choices by a significant amount.
3. Does the stat increase the separation inside the position, *AND* is that a good thing? Again, for defensemen this may be a good thing. If it increases separation (ie, increases the benefit of drafting a player earlier), that means D-men will be drafted earlier instead of being drafted in the last rounds.
4. Is the stat relatively predictable from year to year? If it is, then it is a good thing. Kickers in the NFL, for example, are relatively unpredictable from year to year, so they are drafted at the end by an intelligent drafter (in addition to having a small separation). If it is not predictable (you cannot reasonably predict at least 5 of the top 10 finishers in that category, and have 75% or above confidence of predicting all top 10 finishers ending in the top 20 or so) then it is not a good stat, because it reduces the ability of the drafter to intelligently draft.

If it passes these four tests reasonably well, then it's a good stat I think hits is significantly better than blocks, personally, because not only is it a stat plenty of non-defenders get, but it's also relatively predictable I think, more common than blocks, probably slightly negatively correlated with the other offensive point stats (positively with +/-, negatively with the others, I'd guess), and might tend to increase separation within D-men (particularly as it correlates with strong defensemen such as your friend in Calgary). But, blocked shots could well be better, or at least good enough ... you'd really have to run the stats to find out.

[Flubber]

Looking at the stats I came to dislike blocked shots as it was something totally dominated by defencemen at the top end and a stat that most top scorer are pretty bad in. Many scorers hit but far fewer block shots in big numbers


I found these 4 tests interesting-- I had never thought about it that deeply --