Buds Board Keepers League

LOL I was PM-ed about Giroux's new contract and last chance to sell him, yet he has a better impact than Crosby and no one is telling me Crosby has a bad contract.

'The leagues' value perception is definitley influenced by the NHL media's evaluations. We're told Campbell has a bad contract in the NHL, and now he does here as well, we're told Getzlaf/Perry/Staal/Giroux/Weber/7MLetang are hard sells at 8M, and that for some reason is reflected here - one glance at their impact shows they easily have the impact worthy of their cap, no you cannot build a team of them, but god damn they determine weeks.

Guys - please argue about this in the Ryan Suter thread. This thread is meant to let every GM have their vote count.

Nick wroteCOLON

Big Fun wroteCOLONI think the new stat (if implemented) actually brings a 'truer' value to these players. Goalies are badly over-valued and these highly priced, offensive forwards aren't as valued as they should be "becuase they dont play the PK"

i think it brings a more realistic aspect to the BBKL

We value goalies lower than almost any league in existance. Tough to make that statement.

Im not in a lot of leagues, but when backup goalies go for a 1st rounder +, to me that seems redic

i find it hard to think other leagues value goalies more than that

KapG wroteCOLON

Big Fun wroteCOLONI think the new stat (if implemented) actually brings a 'truer' value to these players. Goalies are badly over-valued and these highly priced, offensive forwards aren't as valued as they should be "becuase they dont play the PK"

i think it brings a more realistic aspect to the BBKL

see I disagree that these offensive forwards hold little value.

I've traded my fair share of these offensive guys with big cap hits and every single time i have done it I've gotten what I have considered to be a great return.

It's become harder lately because guys knew about the upcoming cap changes. That has more to do with the cap than it does the player themselves though.

This very well could be true as well, i think both aspects hold some truth this summer.

Basically i'm saying:
-Scorers dont hold true value because most dont PK
-The cap dropping doesn't help (it will go back up and thus players value with it)

Big Fun wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLON

Big Fun wroteCOLONI think the new stat (if implemented) actually brings a 'truer' value to these players. Goalies are badly over-valued and these highly priced, offensive forwards aren't as valued as they should be "becuase they dont play the PK"

i think it brings a more realistic aspect to the BBKL

We value goalies lower than almost any league in existance. Tough to make that statement.

Im not in a lot of leagues, but when backup goalies go for a 1st rounder +, to me that seems redic

i find it hard to think other leagues value goalies more than that

The only reason that is the case is because one or two GM's set the precedent a few years back. Now that's what they go for. Most of the firsts that are traded aren't really the reallllllllllllllllllllly valuable ones either. Usually just late firsts.

SuperMario wroteCOLONGuys - please argue about this in the Ryan Suter thread. This thread is meant to let every GM have their vote count.

Why didn't you include an actual poll?

Nick wroteCOLONLOL I was PM-ed about Giroux's new contract and last chance to sell him, yet he has a better impact than Crosby and no one is telling me Crosby has a bad contract.

'The leagues' value perception is definitley influenced by the NHL media's evaluations. We're told Campbell has a bad contract in the NHL, and now he does here as well, we're told Getzlaf/Perry/Staal/Giroux/Weber/7MLetang are hard sells at 8M, and that for some reason is reflected here - one glance at their impact shows they easily have the impact worthy of their cap, no you cannot build a team of them, but god damn they determine weeks.

Which is great! Difference of opinion on values is the only way trades happen other than direct need-for-need swaps.

I can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

Shoalzie wroteCOLONI can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

valid argument. where were you during this discussion in the suter thread? we could have used some level minded thinkers in there. I would be opposed to losing that stat either but think if you make the argument to keep SO, you have also made it for GWG. It's funny that we have never even discussed adding a stat, only swapping one out.

Shoalzie wroteCOLON

SuperMario wroteCOLONGuys - please argue about this in the Ryan Suter thread. This thread is meant to let every GM have their vote count.

Why didn't you include an actual poll?

You need forum powers to do that.

Shoalzie wroteCOLONI can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

best post yet

i agree 100%

i know we've talked about losing GWG's anyways, it's a pretty useless stat and doesn't give much credit to a good team, GWG's are pure fluke.

I would not be opposed to replacing GWG with PPTOI, actually would rather do that than lose SO

shooker wroteCOLON

Shoalzie wroteCOLONI can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

valid argument. where were you during this discussion in the suter thread? we could have used some level minded thinkers in there. I would be opposed to losing that stat either but think if you make the argument to keep SO, you have also made it for GWG. It's funny that we have never even discussed adding a stat, only swapping one out.

I mentioned it a while ago..

What Billy said. I could live with losing GWG. SO I think are necessary to keep...

Lee wroteCOLON

shooker wroteCOLON

Shoalzie wroteCOLONI can live with new categories being added but why remove another stat as a result? If the option was to just add this stat, I'd be open to it but why do we need to remove a category?

One could argue shutouts is somewhat redundant considering we have GAA and SV% that reflects the results of a shutout. So why have GWG? Goals and assists are basic stats but then we have parsed out of that the point stat, which is redundant...plus, we have ST points, which is redundant in the same way shutouts could be redundant for goalies. If the argument of using PPTOI as a way to counter SHTOI, I can understand...but don't eliminate shutouts. If you eliminate a stat to make room, I'd say lose GWG.

valid argument. where were you during this discussion in the suter thread? we could have used some level minded thinkers in there. I would be opposed to losing that stat either but think if you make the argument to keep SO, you have also made it for GWG. It's funny that we have never even discussed adding a stat, only swapping one out.

I mentioned it a while ago..

yea but when shoalzie says it, it sounds smart.

OP edited. This is now only for adding PPTOI. What needs to be removed IF at all can be discussed afterwards.

Great point Shoalzie

KapG wroteCOLONWhat Billy said. I could live with losing GWG. SO I think are necessary to keep...

so would you be a yes dependent on the stat we would be taking out? IE ok with PPTOI in general but just don't want to lose SO?

As of now im fine with what we have, so im keeping my vote as a No.

but if there is change, I dont think we should take out SO to be replaced by something else. Would rather see either just a new stat added or as some have mentioned perhaps think about losing GWG.