Offseason Annual General Managers Meeting

Baby Mama Drama
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Offseason Annual General Managers Meeting

Post #1 by MP » Mon Apr 21, 2014 12:27 pm

Welcome to the offseason thread to discuss any rule tweeks for the upcoming season. Over the season the following were brought up:

First, was changing the min GP penalties to a percentage of the games available.

A simple proposed change to next season rule book would be to replace the GP numbers below to 5+%, 4%, 3%, 2%, and <2% of min GP required.

+21GP - 1st Round draft pick
16-20GP - 2nd Round draft pick
11-15GP - 3rd Round draft pick
6-10GP - 4th Round draft pick
1-5GP - 5th Round draft pick

Second, was chickpeas idea to reduce goalie SO's to 3pts and award 2 points for goalie assists. (How much would a goalie goal be worth?)

Third, is 2 IR slots enough?

Fourth, what are the tiebreakers and in what order are they applied? I.e., the first tiebreaker being FPts per game. Then most goals as the second, followed by A's, then W's.

Fifth, number of draft round to be 6 or 7?

Sixth, the lack of rep given to this years champ is disrespectful.
User avatar
cawbber
Registered Broad
Posts: 14911
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:58 pm
Has given rep: 216 times
Received rep: 155 times

Post #2 by cawbber » Mon Apr 21, 2014 12:43 pm

MP wrote:Welcome to the offseason thread to discuss any rule tweeks for the upcoming season. Over the season the following were brought up:

First, was changing the min GP penalties to a percentage of the games available.

A simple proposed change to next season rule book would be to replace the GP numbers below to 5+%, 4%, 3%, 2%, and <2% of min GP required.

+21GP - 1st Round draft pick
16-20GP - 2nd Round draft pick
11-15GP - 3rd Round draft pick
6-10GP - 4th Round draft pick
1-5GP - 5th Round draft pick

Second, was chickpeas idea to reduce goalie SO's to 3pts and award 2 points for goalie assists. (How much would a goalie goal be worth?)

Third, is 2 IR slots enough?

Fourth, what are the tiebreakers and in what order are they applied? I.e., the first tiebreaker being FPts per game. Then most goals as the second, followed by A's, then W's.

Fifth, number of draft round to be 6 or 7?

Sixth, the lack of rep given to this years champ is disrespectful.


1) fine with that.

2) I am okay with the way things are goalie-wise. I don't want to lessen shutouts to introduce more obscure stat categories for that position.

3) I am in favour of a 3rd IR slot.

4) fine with what you have proposed

5) I would say 7 for this year, and then lower to 6 the following year.

6) Repped
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #3 by MP » Mon Apr 21, 2014 12:55 pm

Oh yeah, seventh, I know we've stated a $5M bonus, but really shouldn't the bonus be a percentage if the cap? That way when the cap eventually rises to $150M we'd get a $10m bonus?
User avatar
AD
Posts: 68914
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 665 times
Received rep: 734 times

Post #4 by AD » Mon Apr 21, 2014 7:42 pm

Too many issues in a single thread. Separate them or else.
User avatar
IcE ColD
Registered Broad
Posts: 36037
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Out of Purgatory
Has given rep: 40 times
Received rep: 81 times

Post #5 by IcE ColD » Mon Apr 21, 2014 9:05 pm

Not answering to all question, but here are some answers:

Goalie SO's points reduction and addition of points for goalie assists and maybe goal:
Totally for it. We'd have to discuss the amount of point worth for each offensive category, and I think right now shutout are having a too big impact for what they are.

IR slots:
I'm totally disgusted by myself for agreeing with a Leafs fan, but I'd second cob's idea of a 3rd IR slot.

Draft to 6 or 7 round:
I'd be up for 6. By the end of the 5th round, people get disinterested and most the players we get could be gotten by waivers anyways. I say end the misery sooner rather than later. This said, I wouldn't get down to 5 round.

Lack of rep given to this years champ being disrespectful:
[YOUTUBE]aeAQ_TCWglw[/YOUTUBE]
This whole idea that we are even important is a fucking illusion. We’re just an accident left to our own devices.

Trent Reznor - 24/07/2018
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #6 by mayoradamwest » Mon Apr 21, 2014 9:40 pm

MP wrote:Welcome to the offseason thread to discuss any rule tweeks for the upcoming season. Over the season the following were brought up:

First, was changing the min GP penalties to a percentage of the games available.

A simple proposed change to next season rule book would be to replace the GP numbers below to 5+%, 4%, 3%, 2%, and <2% of min GP required.

+21GP - 1st Round draft pick
16-20GP - 2nd Round draft pick
11-15GP - 3rd Round draft pick
6-10GP - 4th Round draft pick
1-5GP - 5th Round draft pick

Second, was chickpeas idea to reduce goalie SO's to 3pts and award 2 points for goalie assists. (How much would a goalie goal be worth?)

Third, is 2 IR slots enough?

Fourth, what are the tiebreakers and in what order are they applied? I.e., the first tiebreaker being FPts per game. Then most goals as the second, followed by A's, then W's.

Fifth, number of draft round to be 6 or 7?

Sixth, the lack of rep given to this years champ is disrespectful.


1. Sure.

2. I could do with dropping shutouts by a point, but am not a big fan of goalie offensive points.

3. Our teams are so big that a third IR slot might be worth it.

4. Ok.

5. 6.

6. Hugs.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #7 by MP » Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:55 am

AD wrote:Too many issues in a single thread. Separate them or else.


I thought you lawyer types liked to muddy the waters with unnecessary complexity?
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #8 by MP » Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:04 am

MP wrote:Oh yeah, seventh, I know we've stated a $5M bonus, but really shouldn't the bonus be a percentage if the cap? That way when the cap eventually rises to $150M we'd get a $10m bonus?


Anyone have opines on 7?
User avatar
Indrew
Registered Broad
Posts: 4617
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:10 pm
Has given rep: 1 time
Received rep: 5 times

Post #9 by Indrew » Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:41 am

1. Sure
2. No points for goalie assists please. I don't care about 2/3 points for a SO.
3. I don't care
4. Fantasy points/games
5. 6 rounds
6. Fair enough
7. Whatever helps boost trading near the deadline
mcphee wrote:FUCK YOU INDREW.

Lord Chezz wrote:FUCK YOU INDREW
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #10 by mayoradamwest » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:15 am

round numbers are inherently better
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #11 by MP » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:17 am

mayoradamwest wrote:round numbers are inherently better


Good point. The percentage could be rounded to the nearest million. But making it an automatic percentage takes away future votes to change the bonus amount as it becomes function of the actual cap.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #12 by MP » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:26 am

For reference:
2010/11 bonus was 7.692%
2011/12 bonus was 7.215%
2012/13 bonus was 6.649%
2013/14 bonus was 7.215%

So IMO pegging the bonus cap at 7.25% of the cap rounded to the nearest million will ensure the bonus is relative to players salaries for the years to come.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #13 by mayoradamwest » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:44 am

that just seems too troublesome to bother with imo. I don't have an issue with the bonus space as is.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #14 by MP » Tue Apr 22, 2014 10:50 am

mayoradamwest wrote:that just seems too troublesome to bother with imo. I don't have an issue with the bonus space as is.


So when the cap hit $100m, you'll see a $5m cap as reasonable?

And since when is basic arithmetic troublesome?
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #15 by mayoradamwest » Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:00 am

MP wrote:So when the cap hit $100m, you'll see a $5m cap as reasonable?

And since when is basic arithmetic troublesome?


it'll be reasonable as long as it's equal.

June 12 1477

don't see this as being an issue at all.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #16 by MP » Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:01 pm

What happened on June 12, 1477? Google didn't know.

June 12, 1477 is the 163rd day of the year 1477 in the Gregorian calendar. There are 202 days remaining until the end of this year. The day of the week is Tuesday.
If you are trying to learn French then this day of the week in French is mardi.
A person born on this day will be 536 years old today. If that same person saved a Nickel every day starting at age 5, then by now that person has accumulated $9,712.90 today. (Assuming this person is still alive and kicking)
User avatar
VLoo
Posts: 9459
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:33 am
Has given rep: 81 times
Received rep: 101 times

Post #17 by VLoo » Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:14 pm

I think he was trying to say that basic arithmetic was troublesome in 1477, but that shit was around in the BCs, so he's obviously the dumbest person alive for implying such a thing.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #18 by mayoradamwest » Tue Apr 22, 2014 2:04 pm

VLoo wrote:I think he was trying to say that basic arithmetic was troublesome in 1477, but that shit was around in the BCs, so he's obviously the dumbest person alive for implying such a thing.


It wasn't a problem before then you uncultured swine.
User avatar
VLoo
Posts: 9459
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:33 am
Has given rep: 81 times
Received rep: 101 times

Post #19 by VLoo » Tue Apr 22, 2014 2:29 pm

I live in rural Ontario. Of course I'm uncultured.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #20 by mayoradamwest » Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:05 pm

At least you've got strong family values.
User avatar
AD
Posts: 68914
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 665 times
Received rep: 734 times

Post #21 by AD » Tue Apr 22, 2014 5:43 pm

I'm with Maw. 5 million.
User avatar
HS
Registered Broad
Posts: 13053
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:27 pm
Received rep: 2 times

Post #22 by HS » Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:15 pm

I'm against whatever AD stands for.
User avatar
AD
Posts: 68914
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 665 times
Received rep: 734 times

Post #23 by AD » Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:17 pm

HS wrote:I'm against whatever AD stands for.


Excellent.

HS wants this. Now you know everything you need to kmow to make this decision.
User avatar
IcE ColD
Registered Broad
Posts: 36037
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Out of Purgatory
Has given rep: 40 times
Received rep: 81 times

Post #24 by IcE ColD » Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:19 pm

Percentage, I go with percentage. Give 'em hell, MP.

:colbert:
This whole idea that we are even important is a fucking illusion. We’re just an accident left to our own devices.

Trent Reznor - 24/07/2018
User avatar
chicpea
Registered Broad
Posts: 17808
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: lagoons or ditches
Has given rep: 682 times
Received rep: 356 times

Post #25 by chicpea » Tue Apr 22, 2014 6:37 pm

22 million! ¥
User avatar
cawbber
Registered Broad
Posts: 14911
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:58 pm
Has given rep: 216 times
Received rep: 155 times

Post #26 by cawbber » Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:20 am

% works
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #27 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:54 am

The thing is if we keep the bonus stagnant, the year over year difficulty gets tougher every year the cap goes up. Is that what we want or do we want the effect of bonus to remain same each year?

I know some of you lawyer and librarian types don't excel at math, but I'll offer to do the 'cumbersome' calculations...
User avatar
AD
Posts: 68914
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 665 times
Received rep: 734 times

Post #28 by AD » Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:35 am

MP wrote:The thing is if we keep the bonus stagnant, the year over year difficulty gets tougher every year the cap goes up. Is that what we want or do we want the effect of bonus to remain same each year?

I know some of you lawyer and librarian types don't excel at math, but I'll offer to do the 'cumbersome' calculations...


Difficulty is good you pansies.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #29 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:46 am

AD wrote:Difficulty is good you pansies.


I'd tell you to have a look at the standing over the past five years, but that would be juvenile...
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #30 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:05 am

the bonus seems more to allow for that whack of minimum salaries we all carry at the beginning of the year to be on the roster until they get sent down to the AHL. The lower end salaries aren't going up at the same rate as the higher end salaries, so what the change will result in is people being able to carry an extra star at that point and it will eliminate the problem of having too many good prospects (which can force people into a trade - I like that.)

If we increase the turnover at a rate pegged to the high end of the cap increases we'll be decreasing turnover in the league and allow for the bonus period to be a time for carrying a star and the young guys. As is, the cap bonus room provides an incentive to make trades at the beginning of the year. The incentive at the trade deadline will always exist anyways.
User avatar
VLoo
Posts: 9459
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:33 am
Has given rep: 81 times
Received rep: 101 times

Post #31 by VLoo » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:15 am

Not to be juvenile maw, but did you look at the standings the past 5 years?
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #32 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:21 am

VLoo wrote:Not to be juvenile maw, but did you look at the standings the past 5 years?


what shocked me was how consistently the tenth place team finished ahead of the person in 11th.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #33 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:31 am

mayoradamwest wrote:the bonus seems more to allow for that whack of minimum salaries we all carry at the beginning of the year to be on the roster until they get sent down to the AHL. The lower end salaries aren't going up at the same rate as the higher end salaries, so what the change will result in is people being able to carry an extra star at that point and it will eliminate the problem of having too many good prospects (which can force people into a trade - I like that.)

If we increase the turnover at a rate pegged to the high end of the cap increases we'll be decreasing turnover in the league and allow for the bonus period to be a time for carrying a star and the young guys. As is, the cap bonus room provides an incentive to make trades at the beginning of the year. The incentive at the trade deadline will always exist anyways.


An extra $1M when the cap hits $83M isn't going to allow that. :bert:
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #34 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:00 pm

Why don't we wait until we have firm numbers to look at and decide on. Year to year basis?
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #35 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:04 pm

mayoradamwest wrote:Why don't we wait until we have firm numbers to look at and decide on. Year to year basis?


Why don't we just settle it now and never speak of it again instead of revisiting it every few years?

What if the proposal was 7.25% round down to the nearest million? Would that make you more comfortable with it not going up to fast?
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #36 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:26 pm

MP wrote:Why don't we just settle it now and never speak of it again instead of revisiting it every few years?

What if the proposal was 7.25% round down to the nearest million? Would that make you more comfortable with it not going up to fast?


what's the rush? if we're really trying to change it now, I'd prefer 5 million but allow for 1 salary to be waived if injured during that time.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #37 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:47 pm

mayoradamwest wrote:what's the rush? if we're really trying to change it now, I'd prefer 5 million but allow for 1 salary to be waived if injured during that time.


The idea isn't a rush, the idea is to change the rule while there is zero effect on the current playing field. That way when the cap does go up by some significant amount, there is no debate on bias or the new system benefiting one GM over another. Right now if we changed it the bonus would likely remain at $5M for the next few years.
User avatar
chicpea
Registered Broad
Posts: 17808
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: lagoons or ditches
Has given rep: 682 times
Received rep: 356 times

Post #38 by chicpea » Wed Apr 23, 2014 1:01 pm

Percentage makes sense to me in all naked honesty.
According to local lore, Christ didn't commit any miracles while residing in Japan, but instead was just an extremely pleasant fellow to be around.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #39 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:06 pm

MP wrote:The idea isn't a rush, the idea is to change the rule while there is zero effect on the current playing field. That way when the cap does go up by some significant amount, there is no debate on bias or the new system benefiting one GM over another. Right now if we changed it the bonus would likely remain at $5M for the next few years.


There's no rush but we need I make his change right now? Poppycock.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #40 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:07 pm

Pardon my strong language.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #41 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:09 pm

mayoradamwest wrote:There's no rush but we need I make his change right now? Poppycock.


The thing is the change I suggest isn't really a change, unless something happens which would require a debate and subsequent change. I'm merely suggesting we be proactive so we don't come at the issue with perceived biases at the moment the change is required.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #42 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:12 pm

If we make proactive change, I'll become a reactionary. :gary:
User avatar
Bow Tie
Registered Broad
Posts: 10791
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:21 am
Has given rep: 6 times
Received rep: 10 times

Post #43 by Bow Tie » Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:37 pm

MP wrote:Welcome to the offseason thread to discuss any rule tweeks for the upcoming season. Over the season the following were brought up:

First, was changing the min GP penalties to a percentage of the games available.

A simple proposed change to next season rule book would be to replace the GP numbers below to 5+%, 4%, 3%, 2%, and <2% of min GP required.

+21GP - 1st Round draft pick
16-20GP - 2nd Round draft pick
11-15GP - 3rd Round draft pick
6-10GP - 4th Round draft pick
1-5GP - 5th Round draft pick

Second, was chickpeas idea to reduce goalie SO's to 3pts and award 2 points for goalie assists. (How much would a goalie goal be worth?)

Third, is 2 IR slots enough?

Fourth, what are the tiebreakers and in what order are they applied? I.e., the first tiebreaker being FPts per game. Then most goals as the second, followed by A's, then W's.

Fifth, number of draft round to be 6 or 7?

Sixth, the lack of rep given to this years champ is disrespectful.


1. okay/indifferent
2. I'd be okay with reducing shutout worth, but feel like adding goalie offensive points is trivial and unnecessary
3. I think our rosters are big enough to warrant additional IR room
4. I'm okay with that
5. 6 rounds
6. :fart_noise:
VLoo wrote:The Canadian version, as like many other Canadian versions, is decidedly subpar.
User avatar
MP
Registered Broad
Posts: 28727
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: :uoıʇɐɔoן
Has given rep: 163 times
Received rep: 388 times

Post #44 by MP » Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:19 pm

dempsey_k wrote:I'd prefer to discuss the elephant in the room: expansion.

I think everyone against expansion is a Tea Party jerkoff racist who don't want no Mixicins takin our jerbs.


So I guess that's number 8. I'd be okay with one more team, provided the expansion draft rules don't hurt my team and we can find a good GM.
User avatar
Bow Tie
Registered Broad
Posts: 10791
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:21 am
Has given rep: 6 times
Received rep: 10 times

Post #45 by Bow Tie » Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:25 pm

I've already given my thoughts on expansion. If we do it, we have to do some reformatting to rosters or scoring. It's hard enough as it is to find 6 defensemen who are worth a damn and can work under the cap. Same goes for depth in general.
VLoo wrote:The Canadian version, as like many other Canadian versions, is decidedly subpar.
User avatar
Bow Tie
Registered Broad
Posts: 10791
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:21 am
Has given rep: 6 times
Received rep: 10 times

Post #46 by Bow Tie » Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:35 pm

Some downsize to roster or some category to make non- or low-scorers relevant
VLoo wrote:The Canadian version, as like many other Canadian versions, is decidedly subpar.
User avatar
Sailor Man
Posts: 7154
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: Humiliation Street
Has given rep: 5 times
Received rep: 22 times

Post #47 by Sailor Man » Wed Apr 23, 2014 5:36 pm

I'm with cap increase by percentage.

Not really down with Chicpeas idea.

fairly indifferent to everything else.
[quote="StanGetz":31yfpnhk]What are you guys fucking talking about[/quote:31yfpnhk]
User avatar
HS
Registered Broad
Posts: 13053
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:27 pm
Received rep: 2 times

Post #48 by HS » Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:30 pm

Open to expanding to one team. Beyond that, I say nay.
User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29848
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 349 times
Received rep: 166 times

Post #49 by mayoradamwest » Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:04 pm

Is murph really coming back?

Return to “Broads Keeper League”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest