AHL- Apolyton Hockey League 08/09: Preseason

[notyoueither]

My recollection is supported by Jonny's '07 team. The final standings show him making a single move.

He drafted
1. (8) Jaromir Jagr
2. (17) Marty Turco
3. (32) Daniel Sedin
4. (41) Patrick Marleau
5. (56) Dion Phaneuf
6. (65) Keith Tkachuk
7. (80) Jay Bouwmeester
8. (89) Manny Fernandez
9. (104) Derek Roy
10. (113) Alexander Radulov
11. (128) Fredrik Norrena
12. (137) David Legwand
13. (152) Scott Hartnell
14. (161) Christian Ehrhoff


6. (65) Keith Tkachuk
is not on his final roster. Kolzig is.

Week 23
Jay Bouwmeester (Fla - D) 15 22 -5 4 10
Christian Ehrhoff (SJ - D) 1 21 9 1 4
Scott Hartnell (Phi - LW,RW) 24 19 2 10 2
Jaromir Jagr (NYR - RW) 25 46 8 7 22
Slava Kozlov (Atl - LW) 17 24 -10 5 9
David Legwand (Nsh - C) 15 29 -4 4 9
Patrick Marleau (SJ - C) 19 29 -19 7 19
Dion Phaneuf (Cgy - D) 17 43 12 10 23
Alexander Radulov (Nsh - RW) 26 32 7 4 2
Derek Roy (Buf - C) 32 49 13 6 17
Daniel Sedin (Van - LW) 29 45 6 12 20
Goaltending
Manny Fernandez (Bos - G) 2 .832 1
Olaf Kolzig (TB - G) 25 .892 1
Fredrik Norrena (Cls - G) 10 .896 2
Marty Turco (Dal - G)

Hense, dropping one and picking up another at the same time would be one move.

[Asher]

Good call. I think you're right.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Asher
Good call. I think you're right.

Perhaps

Although Kolzig for Tchuk was a trade though -- I remember because I was a party to it and traded Ollie when I was too deep in goalies

Also if I move a player to IR I didn't think that was a move since that was part of your roster-- BUt picking up the replacement would be a move would it not ?? So if someone IRed a player and picked up somone and they ended the season that way, thats another way to have a single move

Note that Jonny has 15 players on his final roster-- Slava Kozlov is also new

So with all respect, I think Jonnys team supports my view if anyone's

[notyoueither]

Yes. To IR is not a move, but adding a player is. That is my understanding.

Let me see if I can look something else up.

[notyoueither]

I am sure this has come up before. I did not find the place in a past season I looked at.

I am still positive that dropping a player for another counts as one move.

[notyoueither]

Time of draft moved to 12 noon Eastern on the 14th.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Yes. To IR is not a move, but adding a player is. That is my understanding.

Let me see if I can look something else up.

Thats my thought


Move Cleary to IR -- no move

Add Patrick Sharp to replace Cleary -- 1 move

A week later decide to drop Cleary since its a long injury and is just added stuff on your player list -- 1 move

--------------------------------


Instead of the above-- Drop Cleary and add Sharp-- 2 moves

I'm not CERTAIN but I am pretty sure that is how it goes-- I seem to recall seeing my moves go up by TWO every time I replaced a player

--------------------------------------------------------------------


Since it didn't matter last year I didn't pay that close attention. But if we are contemplating restrictions, we should know what they are. If I am right, 40 moves would mean really only twenty switches which may sound like a lot but is less than one player switch a week-- I just want to make sure we understand what the restrictions mean . . .



____________________________________



I am still trying to get at what people are trying to protect. I can understand a distaste for churning I guess but too strict a limit frankly means that what I would call more active management is curtailed. Is it that people want managers to have to pretty much stick with their drafted players?

Its the playing of hunches, or deciding to pick up a player for a week because they play LA and Tampa Bay-- or deciding to dump a player because they struggled. . . . thats the fun and interest for me. and yes that includes noticing that all my 3rd right winger's games are on nights when the two RW ahead of him play as well-- and then picking up someone new

IIRC I essentially permanently dumped 3 or 4 of my drafted players-- and I want to be free to do that again. Part of the fun of this for me was taking a wild hunch by drafting a Bobby Ryan and seeing how it goes (or making the TERRIBLE ERROR and drafting Ray Emery) but then being able to easily pick up someone else-- I have looked at "draft and live with it" type pools and frankly I would find that boring-- I like the idea that I CAN easily fix my drafting mistakes, that I can garner advantage by noticing and picking up a streaky player at the right time (and dumping him at the right time), that I can compensate for injury somewhat.

The very reason that I liked this league was that all that was possible. Did I churn? The only time I had that going on was when I had a rotation going on RW of Kovalev, Sharp and Kane IIRC but that got "corrected" pretty quick when two of those guys got snapped up and then I used Cleary a few times. But even goofing in not keeping Kovalev is part of the fun for me. It was like dang "he took Kovalev" even as I cursed him in my mind

The only other big churn element was my desperation moves on the last day of close playoff races. I think I added 4 or 5 players each time (16-20 moves? total ). If people don't like that type of move I could understand it but thats why I thought a weekly limit on moves was better (assuming a limit is needed/desired)--


Last year I was surprised how passive many of the managers were (its not a criticism ast all as our regular season leader was the most passive, mainly because he drafted so freakingly well-- but I was surprised). But knowing the setup, I had assumed from the outset that people would be pretty active. I also thought there might be more banter than there was. But I was wrong on both accounts and while no one has been completely blunt about it (that i recall anyway) , I get the sense that some people must find how I played the league last year "wrong" or at least not in the spirit of the league.

I will play with whatever restrictions people want but IMHO if you restrict things too much , you turn the league into something --at worst where the draft is everything-- BORING-- but at least something where following hockey closely to try to gain tactical advantage becomes moot-- Isn't that part of the idea of a pool like this?-- to encourage our interest and make the games even more interesting to us?


Sorry to rant and glad to get it off my chest. AS always contrary opinions accepted and even welcomed.

[snoopy369]

Hmmm, if NYE doesn't have time for the league, then we have 8 managers, so perhaps we should just go with that, and not use ESPN to manage the auction. It will make the auction take significantly longer (hopefully not TOO significantly longer, but it will definitely be a longer process) and it will be more error-prone, but such is life.

If we do it this way, what are our options as far as chat programs? Does everyone have MSN, GTalk, Yahoo IM, AIM, which? (I have all of the above, of course)

[Asher]

I have MSN and Google Talk.

I prefer Gtalk.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Flubber


Thats my thought


Move Cleary to IR -- no move

Add Patrick Sharp to replace Cleary -- 1 move

A week later decide to drop Cleary since its a long injury and is just added stuff on your player list -- 1 move

--------------------------------


Instead of the above-- Drop Cleary and add Sharp-- 2 moves

I'm not CERTAIN but I am pretty sure that is how it goes-- I seem to recall seeing my moves go up by TWO every time I replaced a player

--------------------------------------------------------------------


Since it didn't matter last year I didn't pay that close attention. But if we are contemplating restrictions, we should know what they are. If I am right, 40 moves would mean really only twenty switches which may sound like a lot but is less than one player switch a week-- I just want to make sure we understand what the restrictions mean . . .



____________________________________



I am still trying to get at what people are trying to protect. I can understand a distaste for churning I guess but too strict a limit frankly means that what I would call more active management is curtailed. Is it that people want managers to have to pretty much stick with their drafted players?

Its the playing of hunches, or deciding to pick up a player for a week because they play LA and Tampa Bay-- or deciding to dump a player because they struggled. . . . thats the fun and interest for me. and yes that includes noticing that all my 3rd right winger's games are on nights when the two RW ahead of him play as well-- and then picking up someone new

IIRC I essentially permanently dumped 3 or 4 of my drafted players-- and I want to be free to do that again. Part of the fun of this for me was taking a wild hunch by drafting a Bobby Ryan and seeing how it goes (or making the TERRIBLE ERROR and drafting Ray Emery) but then being able to easily pick up someone else-- I have looked at "draft and live with it" type pools and frankly I would find that boring-- I like the idea that I CAN easily fix my drafting mistakes, that I can garner advantage by noticing and picking up a streaky player at the right time (and dumping him at the right time), that I can compensate for injury somewhat.

The very reason that I liked this league was that all that was possible. Did I churn? The only time I had that going on was when I had a rotation going on RW of Kovalev, Sharp and Kane IIRC but that got "corrected" pretty quick when two of those guys got snapped up and then I used Cleary a few times. But even goofing in not keeping Kovalev is part of the fun for me. It was like dang "he took Kovalev" even as I cursed him in my mind

The only other big churn element was my desperation moves on the last day of close playoff races. I think I added 4 or 5 players each time (16-20 moves? total ). If people don't like that type of move I could understand it but thats why I thought a weekly limit on moves was better (assuming a limit is needed/desired)--


Last year I was surprised how passive many of the managers were (its not a criticism ast all as our regular season leader was the most passive, mainly because he drafted so freakingly well-- but I was surprised). But knowing the setup, I had assumed from the outset that people would be pretty active. I also thought there might be more banter than there was. But I was wrong on both accounts and while no one has been completely blunt about it (that i recall anyway) , I get the sense that some people must find how I played the league last year "wrong" or at least not in the spirit of the league.

I will play with whatever restrictions people want but IMHO if you restrict things too much , you turn the league into something --at worst where the draft is everything-- BORING-- but at least something where following hockey closely to try to gain tactical advantage becomes moot-- Isn't that part of the idea of a pool like this?-- to encourage our interest and make the games even more interesting to us?


Sorry to rant and glad to get it off my chest. AS always contrary opinions accepted and even welcomed.

We can certainly look at bumping the limit from 40.

I'll look more later for a good answer to our unresolved question. Also, Yahoo may get back to me about the weekly cap. The first response I got directed me to Commish Tools. Der...

[Asher]

Does anyone actually support a season-based cap on player movements?

[notyoueither]

Well, no limit would be a bump. However, I am under the impression that there are several managers wanting some form of limit.

I'll check back later.

[notyoueither]

Cavalcadeus has gotten back to me on his invite. He's been away. He would play, but does not want to inconvenience anyone (odd number of managers and bye weeks).

I would like to invite him in regardless of odd numbers. To me, more managers is better. It is a casual league, and there would be more people interested in discussions.

Besides, once he joins, maybe we get another.

Any opinions?

[snoopy369]

Flubber, I guess what I have to say is that I don't care how many MOVES you make, but aiming for maximizing games played to a ridiculous level is where it starts to become annoying. I don't actually know if you did that - and don't really have a problem with your play last year, TBH - but I could care less if you swapped out your entire team every week, as long as your team plays roughly the same amount of games as my team during the week we play each other. When a player start going for an insane number of games played per week (which for forwards is ALWAYS a better option if possible, because only +/- is not a cumulative stat) then I have a problem. Then you're effective comparing my performance over, say, 20 forward games, with your performance over 30 forward games - which is obviously not even.

Hence why i'd rather enforce a week-to-week limit on games played, not a move limit. The issue is that you consider this strategy (overloading skater-games) to be a legitimate strategy, while I consider it to be mildly questionable. (I don't really care all THAT much, and would be fine with no limit at all, but if I have to have an opinion, this is it.)

[Asher]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Cavalcadeus has gotten back to me on his invite. He's been away. He would play, but does not want to inconvenience anyone (odd number of managers and bye weeks).

I would like to invite him in regardless of odd numbers. To me, more managers is better. It is a casual league, and there would be more people interested in discussions.

Besides, once he joins, maybe we get another.

Any opinions?

More the merrier, I'm fine with a bye week if it happens.