Week 17 - WARNING 1:00PM EST START

[Lee]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying I'm not an asshole for doing it. I'm doing what's best for my team.

[shooker]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying I'm not an asshole for doing it. I'm doing what's best for my team.

you are an asshole that is following the rules and deserve zero repercussions for it.

[The BBKL Insider]

Ya, lee isn't breaking rules, he's smart, he found a loophole.

[bma]

Going W-L-T definitely helps with the issue. Instead of Shep winning 14-1-1, he'd get the 1-0. Lets say Minny plays Lee the week before with his goalies and wins but only by a 8-6-1 margin. Thats a 13 point difference in the league standings..thats HUGE for beating the same team 1 week apart.

So yes, W-L-T, definitely helps with the issue. And i don't understand how its boring? Whats the difference in excitement level when you compare it to category wins?

[KapG]

it doesn't matter much.pretty sure the discussions been had and idont think itwill ever happen.

[KapG]

How so? Tanking creates an unfair situation in our scoring system. Aside from the win, we stupidly measure magnitude of the win. Now compare that against teams that don't face him, or faced him before the tank began. It magnifies the problem with our scoring system.

Our gp, goalie and anti-tanking rules clearly need a compete overhaul.

if we go to a W-L-T system instead of getting 16 points for a sweep of a tanker would make it more even for the top teams.

For example, shep is going to pick up 30-32 points this week with a clear win over Lee, that adds a lot of points for 1 weeks worth of a win.

Or you could just properly fine people who do what lee is doing.

W l t is soooooooooooo boring. Also doesnt fix the issue here, as has been mentioned.

there are multiple issues with goaltending and gp imo. There is a rule against having more then 4 goalie starts in the playoffs (obviously would have been an exception if it were something like TBL having 5 in one week) because it is deemed unfair but yet it is allowed to occur in the regular season? seems like an easy clarification that needs to be taken place.

also gp in general. guys don't have to dress multiple positions in the regular season and can make up gp in the postseason. needs to be addressed, simply making the gp requirements based off the 21 week regular season seems like an easy option but thankfully, I don't have to make those decisions.

this league will clearly be ever evolving as we keep finding loopholes and abuse them. Everyone does it, so clearly not an attack on a person, just the rules.

goodpost . i do agree with it.

[bma]

Im literally just fishing for somebody to give me some good arguments against W-L-T. Maybe I'm not searching hard enough but I can't seem to find any.

[Nick]

Not my opinion, but most repeated is " you lose interest in winning that one category, even when you know you've lost the week".

[Mike]

Not my opinion, but most repeated is " you lose interest in winning that one category, even when you know you've lost the week".

I'm in favour of individual cat wins being the first tie breaker. If two teams are tied the one with more cat wins is ranked ahead. Bam, single cat victories still significant.

[Robin Hood]

Im literally just fishing for somebody to give me some good arguments against W-L-T. Maybe I'm not searching hard enough but I can't seem to find any.

It's pretty self-explanatory. But I'll explain it. Two reasons:

1. It lowers variance. A Top 3 team in the league could have its stats dispersed week by week in such a way that its weekly record shows 10-6-5 while it would actually be a a Top 3 team when you count each category as a win. You want there to be more "events" so as to lower variance. E.g. flipping a coin 21 times versus could have high variance and Tails may come up 16 times. But flipping it 21 (game weeks) x 16 (categories) would likely result in a 50-50 split between heads and tails based on the sample size.
2. Magnitude matters. It matters how much you beat each team by. In terms of difficulty, each team has a fairly equal schedule compared to other team's in its conference. So if one team accumulates more category wins over the course of a season, it implies that said team is better than other teams who did not accumulate as many wins. This also matters for teams at the bottom. Think about it for a second. Right now DET and DAL are 2-14-0 on the season. CAR is next at 3-13-0. But CAR has 38 more points that DET. If we are going to do a lottery, the worst teams should get the highest odds at the top pick. Another example? DAL's 2-14-0 record still has it with more points than CAR with a 3-13-0 record. You will see these discrepancies everywhere.

Now there is a counter argument - teams that are built to win 9 of 16 categories weekly can be argued to be just as strong as a team meant to be strong in 16 of 16. Because when they face off, the 9 category team could actually win more often. But we are not trying to weigh which team would win more vs other teams 1 on 1. Standings are meant to measure who is better than other teams and worse than others. ANA may win the President's Trophy this year in the real NHL. Doesn't mean that CHI won't beat it in the playoffs.

We also have a playoff seeding based on records. A 9-6-6 team in the East vs a 9-6-6 team in the West in the final --> who gets home advantage?

This argument is so annoying because it is the definition of a "let's try to fix something when there is nothing to fix" situation. The tanking issue brought up by Lee not dressing goalies is far more important.

The last point I will make: Our scoring system makes our weekly schedule, playoffs and standings soooo entertaining. I don't think you guys appreciate how valuable that is. It keeps shit interesting for teams at the top, middle and bottom. A playoff race/division title race is far more likely with a category win system than a W-L-T system. I want to see if a team can squeeze into the playoffs in the last week. I want teams to have that chance. I don't want the 9th place team to give up because its W-L-T record isn't close even though it is close on category wins.

Let's not screw up a good thing.

[shooker]

man I couldn't say it any better than that shiv. with only 21 weeks available, we need a greater variance.

I also entirely agree that we are trying to fix something that isn't broken. Either format would work for or against teams, both aren't perfect and I don't see the point in changing unless the change is for the better. This just reverses the problems to the polar opposite direction. Neither fixes anything.

I think the most important reason to keep the 16 win weeks is for the bottom teams who seem to always be the afterthought. there will be a lot similar records at the bottom but point differentials in a 16 w week could be enormous. a team that lost every week of the year 8-7-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one week but lost on average 11-4-1.

[Robin Hood]

a team that lost every week of the year 8-7-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one week but lost on average 11-4-1.

Quoted for impact.

[Mike]

an NHL team that lost every game of the year 2-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one game but lost on average 5-1.

My POV

[shooker]

an NHL team that lost every game of the year 2-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one game but lost on average 5-1.

My POV

real life and bbkl are two very separate things. I understand the logic behind W-L-T but it wont reflect who is better or worse in bbkl accurately. If bbkl was an 82 week season then yea, for sure I agree with your stance. However it is not, and needs to be scored differently.

[Robin Hood]

an NHL team that lost every game of the year 2-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one game but lost on average 5-1.

My POV

That's because you're equating a weekly "win" to a game in the NHL. But the NHL season isn't 21 games for a reason. The sample is too small. And each game has 3 periods. And each period has X amount of SOG and Y amount of PPs etc.

A "category" is much closer to the definition of a "win" and there are more occurrences of them. Also, important to point out that in this situation fantasy finds it very difficult to emulate the real world.

A team that loses every week 11-4-1 except one is definitely worse in BBKL than a team that loses 8-7-1 every week.

[shooker]

an NHL team that lost every game of the year 2-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one game but lost on average 5-1.

My POV

oh wait, you agreed with me.

[Mike]

That's because you're equating a weekly "win" to a game in the NHL.

Yup. A week is the closest analog to an NHL game in my opinion. This opinion does not seem to be shared with the majority of the BBKL. Oh well.

[Mike]

an NHL team that lost every game of the year 2-1 should not be considered worse then a team who won one game but lost on average 5-1.

My POV

oh wait, you agreed with me.

No, I suppose it should read "should be considered worse"

[shooker]

that is how I originally read it but then reread it and was like, wtf, he agrees.

makes more sense now.

[Mike]

that is how I originally read it but then reread it and was like, wtf, he agrees.

makes more sense now.

Yes. The statement is meant to be incoherent if you equate week in bbkl to game in nhl as i do.