One left the team for personal reasons, and the other messed up his hand in a fight.

The mark of a true champion, turns it on when he needs it

Congrats, DMC!

I expect the same tomorrow when *I* celebrate my untainted win at Fast Break! :p

No need, I'll post it now:

The mark of a true champion, keeps doing the same thing and catapults to first when the leader drops out

It's the stupidest rule I've ever seen, and I don't care who it happened to. Do real teams play shorthanded when they start the playoffs? Why have a rule against "roster manipulation" during the playoffs and not the regular season? Is someone really going to drop their good players one day, to fill a few roster spots with shitty players the next?

You had the opportunity to object to it when it was originally posted.

As a matter of fact, here is how the conversation went :

So please,

:p




Don Cardi

I was probably worn out from debating PL over the RP scoring in Yahoo Baseball.

Ok, now LET'S GO RANGERS!!!!!


Don Cardi

The guy that left the team for "personal reasons" is one thing, but I don't understand why the guy with the injured hand wasn't put on IR.

Correct me if I'm wrong, JL, 'cuz I really don't know shit about hockey, but if these guys weren't on IR or the DL or whatever, then weren't their real-life teams in fact playing short-handed?

I'm not JL, but I can answer your question Plaw.

In real life a team carries 25 players on it's roster during the regular season and dresses 18 + 2 goalies a game for a total of 20, with the remaining 5 being "scratched" from the lineup for that game.

So in reality the team did have 3 remaining players that they could insert in the lineup.


Just Lou, like the rest of us, had 4 spots left of bench players. And each manager could carry whatever extra players at whatever postions he chose to.

JustLou chose to carry a third Goalie and 3 forwards. He chose not to carry any extra defenseman and unfortunately in the playoffs when he lost those two guys, they were not placed officially on IR and he did not have any Defenseman sitting on his bench to replace them with. He just had the 4 defensman in the 4 starting postitions.


Don Cardi

No. They can bring up people from the AHL, or play their "healthy scratches".

No. They can bring up people from the AHL, or play their "healthy scratches". [/b][/quote]They cannot exceed their 25 man roster size. If they opt to bring up someone from the AHL withOUT creatinga roster spot using the IR, then they must create a roster spot for that player that they wish to bring up from the AHL by opting ANOTHER player on the roster down to the AHL.

The roster size of 25 cannot be exceeded unless a) another player is placed on IR / or b) another player is opted down to the minors.


Don Cardi

Yes, DC is right. My answer was too simplistic.

Next season, for those who are still interested in playing again, we can expand the roster size to 25, and hold a live draft.

We can entertain the idea of going with a roster that looks something like this:

3 starting lines LW,LW,LW, C,C,C, RW,RW,RW

5 starting defenseman D,D,D,D,D

2 starting goalies G,G

9 bench players BN,BN,BN,BN,BN,BN,BN,BN,BN

I also will be going to a points only scoring system rather than the head to head scoring system, which BTW, eliminates head to head playoffs and just accumulates points based on stats until the very last day of the regular season.

Then the final standing would look something like this :

Don Cardi

As you may know I much prefer points only, sice it eliminates the luck factor involved with the scheduling.

But along with that, I would strongly suggest that we incorporate a "maximum games played at each position" feature as well.

That way, as with a real life team, if we have, say, three centers and each has a miximum of 82 games, your total at the position would be 246.

Explain this to me Plaw. If an NHL schedule has the teams playing 82 games, then what is the benefit of setting the maximum at 82 games for a player?

He cannot play more than 82 games if the NHL schedule only has 82 regular season games.

As I said before I am pretty new to INTERNET fantasy sports and that Maximum games thing confuses me as I don't understand the motive behind having a setting like that.


Don Cardi

Let me give you an example using the Yahoo Baseball game which just started, since I'm not really familiar enough with the hockey players names, and we both know the baseball guys.

The roster for baseball was set up to theoretically resemble a real MLB team; you can have 14 offensive players and 11 pitchers, or 11 offensive players and 14 pitchers - whatever configuaration you want.

You can have flexibility about who to play on offense and take advantage of certain pitcher-hitter matchups by carrying more hitters and fewer pitchers, or you can have more flexibility with your pitching ty carrying more pitchers and fewer hitters.

But you can only carry 25 players.

On offense, just as in real baseball, there are 9 starting positions (including the DH).

But there is a maximum number of games played at each offensive position of 162.

Now, Just Lou's starting third baseman is Alex Rodriguez.

Since the season is 162 games long but spans approximately 180 days, there will be days when he will not have a starting centerfielder - those days that the Yankees don't play.

JL can fill in the centerfield position with one of his bench players on those days (asuming he's carring a substitute third baseman), but since the maximum number of games he can have at third base during the season is 162, then every game he uses someone else at third base, that's one less game of A Rod that he can have..

If his back-up third baseman is, say, Gerald Atkins of Colorado, and Colorado happens to be playing the first 18 days that the Yankees aren't, and JL uses Atkins at 3B instead of A Rod so he can have a full team on the field every day. then when the season is 162 days old he will have used up his entire alotment of games at 3B, by having 144 games of A Rod and 18 games of Atkins.

Obviously, theoretically at least, he would be better off not having a third baseman on the dys the Yankees are off and using as many of those 162 games as he can with A Rod.

In other words, every day of Atkins is one less day he can have of Rodriguez.

If there were no limit on the number of games at each position, then every day the Yankees were off he would want to fill in with another third baseman (Assuming he had one. However with the multiple position eligibility that som many players have, it's easy to construct a 4 or 5 man bench and cover every position).

The problem with that is, is that it brings the luck of scheduling into play.

For example, let's say that Colorado is also off on the same day that the Yankees are on 13 of the 18 days that the Yankees don't play.

In that case, JL has no chance to substitute for A Rod with Atkins on the days the Yankees are off on 13 days.

So the most gaems he can get for the whole year at 3B would be 167.

A Rod's 162, plus the 5 that he could use Atkins on the 5 days that Colorado plays and the Yankees don't.

But suppose that in the same league my third baseman is David Wright, and my substiute at 3B is Joe Crede of the White Sox.

If, by simple luck of the schedule, the White Sox just happen to be playing on 13 of the 18 dyas that the Mets aren't, then I could wind up with 175 games for the seaon at 3B.

Wringht's 162, plus the 13 that I could use Crede on the 13 days that the White Sox plays and the Mets don't.

This problem would be especially magnified in hockey, where the teams only play 3, 3, or 4 tims each week.

there sould be a week when my 3 best centers play a total of 9 times, and my substitutes are all off on the same day that my regulars are, while your 3 best centers also play 9 times during the week, while your subsitutes happen to be off on different days, which, purely by luck of the schdule, will give you extra games.

In other words, a limit on the number of games at each position puts everyone on equal footing and does not give one player the chance to have more games at a position than someone else simply because of the way the schedule happens to fall.


In baseball, if A rod gets injured and misses a game, then JL will use his back-up third baseman on a day when the Yankees are off, to make up that game.

Or if A Rod happens to be facing a pitcher that he's 0-20 against lifetime and JL's back-up guy, Atkins, happens to be playing at home at Coors where he has a lifetime record of 10-16 with 3 homers against the pitcher that he's facing that day, the JL may make the intentional decision to bench A Rod and play Atkins, but those to examples are what the bench is supposed to be for.

It's not supposed to be there to give me an advantage over JL because of the way the schedule happens to work out with respect to which days which teams happen to have their off-days.

A little wordy, no? :p

At least that's my opinion on how it should work.

Also, having no maximum makes it a "daily" game.

You have to look at your roster every day to make sure that you can have as a fulla roster as possible every day.

With a maximum, you only have to worry about filling in players when your "starters" have missed games, unless you want to take it to the next strategy level by looking at matchups every day.

For example, in baseball my starting team is pretty much set.

But as you know from playing the salary cap game, catcher is a weak position, and sometimes it's hard to tell which days a catcher will play and which days he won't.

So I have two catchers, and I always have one of them in my lineup when possible. If they are both scheduled to play, then I look at the matchup and their records against the pitcher that day and pick one of them.

Since they both basically stink equally, ansd since when they play and when they don't is somewhat unpredictable, I'm more concerned with reaching my 162 games max at cathcer than I am with trying to juggle how many games I get out of one vs. the other as I would be if one was significantly much better than the other, like David Wright and Joe Crede.

Same thing in right field. My nominal starter, Geoff Jenkins, and my potential subs, Craing Monroe and Jay Gibbons, are roughly equal, so every day I look at the pitching matchups before I decide who to play.

There could theoretically be days when I don't like the matchups for any of the three of them, and decide to have no rightfielder, but I sill have enough days left in the season to reach my 162 game max without having to worry.

But if there were no "maximum # of games played at each position" I'd have someone in the lineup every day that I could, and that's where the "luck of the schedule" facor comes in.

there could be a day when all 3 teams that my possible rightfielders play for are off, while all season long someone else NEVER has a day when all of his players ata particuklar position are off, so thru sheer luck, he winds up getting more games - and potentially more points - than I do.

Whaddaya talking about?

My original answer was incomplete, so I wrote even more.

Is there another way? You wanna take a shot at it maybe?

Not for nothing am I called "Windbag"

Thank you Plaw, I appreciate the detailed explaination, despite what JG says.

Now, I understand what you have explained.

You talk about Scheduling and the way that it falls, but the bottom line is that when the MLB season ends, EVERY TEAM plays the same 162 games Schedule.

So my thinking here is that if you are using the POINTS SCORING SYSTEM, then it doesn't really matter if you limit games played for the players in the fantasy league. The MLB schedule works out to an even amount of games when the season ends.

Now, if we were doing head to head play, then I could understand limiting games for a player because as we saw in Fantasy Hockey this past season, the Schedules are unbalanced every week and therefore My Goalie's real NHL team may have 2 games a particular week and your Goalie may play 3 or 4. And if we are playing head to head that week you obviously have an advantage. So that is where I can see having a limit on the games played for a player.

But in total points scoring, the real life Schedule does NOT cause anyone a disadvantage because when all is said and done, every team winds up playing the same amount of games and it all works out at the end of the season.

So for a points only league, I don't really see the need to limit games played because of the reason that I pointed out.

In a HEAD to HEAD league I would agree totally about setting a limit because the unbalanced Scheduling on a week to week basis can work to the advantage of one team and the disadvantage of another.

And why shouldn't I fill in a position with one player on my bench who's team is palying that day over anothr one who's team isn't playing? I should manage MY team as if I were a real life Manager. I shouldn't have to leave a postion unfilled on a given day just because I have reached or am afraid of reaching my max at that postion.

Again, in a points only league, it won't matter. Why shouldn't a fantasy manager have the same options as a real life Manager and try to play his hot players on the day that he has a game. In points only leagues, why shouldn't I have the option as a manager of playing David Wright over AROD if I feel that Wright is the hotter player at the time? If I play Wright the first 20 games, and hypothetically I decide to put AROD at SS ( we'll assume that he is listed as a two position player right now) on the same day as I put Wright at 3B, then at the end of the season if AROD is hot and I want to start him at 3rd base for the last 3 games? Putting a limit on the number of games played ( again in a points only league ) doesn't make sense to me.

It's like MLB telling a Manager " Well, you used AROD at SS for the first 10 games of the season, so now you only can use him at 3b for a limited amount oif games. MLB players ( barring injuries of course) can play 162 games in a season, so why limit the number of games they can play in a points only fantasy league?

Head to Head, yes, I can see the reasoning, but I cannot see the reasoning for Points Only scoring because everyone winds up with the same amount of games at the end of the season and their points are based on the stats and not a weekly head to head schedule.

If I have 3 guys on my roster elidgable to play SS and #B, then as a real life manager, I should have the option of playing those three guys in every game of the season if I want, or spot play them based on how hot they are at the time, and not be penalized for it. Real life managers are mot penalized for it.

My point exactly. And that is how I think that a fantasy team manager/coach should run his team and how the league should be played, like managing or coaching a real life team.


And Geoff thought your post was long winded?


DOn Cardi

I guess we have a differnet theory on how the game should work.

I like to make an attempt at realism, which in baseball means that you can't get more than 162 starts at any position.

But by not having a limit on games played at each position, not only do you sacrifice the realism, but more importantly you give some players an advantage over others based on the way the schedule falls.

Here's my example from before:

Keep in mind that the season runs for 183 days, from April 2nd through October 1st, with each team playing 162 games and having 21 days off during that period.

Suppose, as in the example I offered earlier, JL has A Rod and Atkins as his third baseman.

Here's a chart with all the off days for the Yankees and Colorado:

As the chart shows, the Yankees and Colorado share an off-day 10 times.

That means there are 11 days that the Yankees are off on which Colorado plays.

So, if there is no limit on the number of games at each position, JL can start A Rod at 3B the 162 days that the Yankees play, and an additional 11 days that Colorado plays that the Yankees don't play.

That gives him 173 possible games at 3B.

Now, suppose I have the Mets' David Wright as my starting third baseman, with Joe Crede of the White Sox as my back-up.

Here's a chart of the Mets and White Sox days off:
As this chart shows, the Mets and White Sox share an off-day 11 times.

That means that there are 10 days on which the Mets are off that the White Sox play.

So, if there is no limit on the number of games at each position, I can start Wright at 3B the 162 days that the Mets play, but only an additional 10 days that the White Sox play that the Mets don't play.

That gives him only 172 possible games at 3B.

(BTW, I just picked these two examples (A Rod-Atkins and Wright-Crede) out of thin air, and the difference was only one game.....I'm sure if I looked I could find combinations in which the difference is maybe 3 or 4 games.)

So what we have here is a situation where strictly because of the way the off-days of the schedule fall, JL would have the opportunity to have one more game at third base than I would.

Multiply that by 9 positions, and you could have a situation in, say a ten member league, where the difference between the player with the most opportunities and the least could be maybe 20 or 30 games or more.

And in hockey, since the teams have maybe 90-100 days off each, I'd guess that the differences are potentally much greater.

Hello the quiet one checking in here

Yeah DC you can already check me in for fantasy hockey next season.

Plaw man you take fantasy sports to damned serious.

Now on to DMC I'm going to be a good loser and say congratulations.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


On second thought fuck being a good loser, I DEMAND A RECOUNT!.

Fantasy Sports have become my hobby, man.

You're into guns and hunting and all of that. Don't you take it damned seriously?

Fantasy Sports have become my hobby, man.

You're into guns and hunting and all of that. Don't you take it damned seriously? [/b][/quote]Yeah I do take guns, & hunting seriously but when I made the remark that you take fantasy sports to seriously it was as a joke I meant no disrespect by it.

Hell we all have our hobbies.

I know you were joking, IM. I was just breaking balls.

I think see what you are saying now. It can potentially fall uneven because of the number of days it takes to play a complete season schedule (162 games in 183 days in the case of MLB) and not because of the actual number of games played by a MLB team.

So then what I will need to do is set the number of games played at each positon, for the fantasy hockey, at 84, correct?

Don Cardi

Is that what the teams play? An 84 game regular season?

If that's the case, and we want a "reality based" game, then I would have a roster with the same number of players that an NHL team has; What is it, 20?

Then, I would make the starting lineup every day consist of 3 centers, 3 left wings, 3 right wings, 6 defensemen, and one goalie, just like teams do in real life.

Everyone could cover whatever positions they wanted to on the bench.

The "maximum number of games at each position" limits would be 252 for the center and wings, 504 for the defensemen, and 84 for the goalie.

Just like real life; if a team dresses 6 defenseman for every game, at the end of the season the total number of games playd by their defenseman will be 504, right?

So it wouldn't matter which teams had off days on which of the 180 days of the season during which each team plays 84 games with 100 days off.

Everyone is allowed the same number of games.