SDS Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 I thought the scores that were shown was the total of categories you were currently winning to the categories your opponent was winning? But now that I see a 12-10 score that can't be the case... I'm confused. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePebble19 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Thank you. It's closer in my game than in the 12-10 game...It shows I am winning 10-4, but I think it should be 11-3. I think a bunch of them are jacked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 I did a quick scan and didn't see it. My apologies. I want 7 Hail Darcys and 5 Our Lindys and you will be absolved my son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 I want 7 Hail Darcys and 5 Our Lindys and you will be absolved my son. Can I whip myself with a shredded Tim Connolly jersey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Just read the latest comments. Last year, your total was based on your starters and not your team total. It was real time and you could always tell exactly where you stood. Team total numbers makes no sense at all. That has to be a glitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted October 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Yahoo is a little slow on getting everything working. But I'd guess they'll get it all fixed up soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted October 12, 2009 Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 Isn't there a two game minimum for goalies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted October 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 Isn't there a two game minimum for goalies? Yes. OTL wasn't a category we included. So while it looks like Scott only had 1 game; his goalies played 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted October 12, 2009 Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 Isn't there a two game minimum for goalies? Two game or three? I thought it was three. It should be three... Two is too easy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Two game or three? I thought it was three. It should be three... Two is too easy.. Should I bump it to 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Should I bump it to 3? I strongly believe it should be three. Risk vs reward.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 I strongly believe it should be three. Risk vs reward.. I'm seeing your point; especially since we dom't have OTL. I've sent out a email to the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Ugh I dunno, I think two is fine. But that's because my goalies blow and riding the stats is the only thing even keeping my matchups close. Bumping it to three will just make me lose even worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Ugh I dunno, I think two is fine. But that's because my goalies blow and riding the stats is the only thing even keeping my matchups close. Bumping it to three will just make me lose even worse. Tell me about it.. I have Quick and Mason.. But what is killing me week-in, week-out is faceoffs.. I lose the goalie category pretty regularly.. Computer picked my team.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Should I bump it to 3? no, because some of us are screwed on the goalies with no hope for relief. You can't just change the rules. There aren't 32 starting goalies in the league, then take into account those that carry 3 goalies and it is a nightmare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 I say change it to 3 but don't tell anyone. Then when someone loses their playoff because of it, just say you sent out a memo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 I'm seeing your point; especially since we dom't have OTL. I've sent out a email to the league. I sent you a response, but after giving it more thought, rules should not be changed mid-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 The numbers are leaning towards no change right now. You guys sure take the fun out of being commisioner; now I know how Bettman feels. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 The numbers are leaning towards no change right now. You guys sure take the fun out of being commisioner; now I know how Bettman feels. :) If you knew how Bettman feels you wouldn't have asked us. You would have heavy handed us and told us to deal with it. I'm up for either way. I can lose by any rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 no, because some of us are screwed on the goalies with no hope for relief. You can't just change the rules. There aren't 32 starting goalies in the league, then take into account those that carry 3 goalies and it is a nightmare. You don't need 32 goalies. You just need to start your goalies three times in a week. Clearly two goalies can cover three starts... I won't push it since we didn't start with these rules, but two starts takes ALL the challenge out of it. There is no late week decisions on whether you want to risk a loss to win the GAA. Two starts just doesn't give enough play. You might as well not play the goalies with just two starts. Where is the challenge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 You don't need 32 goalies. You just need to start your goalies three times in a week. Clearly two goalies can cover three starts... I won't push it since we didn't start with these rules, but two starts takes ALL the challenge out of it. There is no late week decisions on whether you want to risk a loss to win the GAA. Two starts just doesn't give enough play. You might as well not play the goalies with just two starts. Where is the challenge? the problem is that the hands are dealt. I have 1 starter and 2 backups. I can't get 3 starts per week, so by changing the rules mid-season, I am forced to either take an 0-4, or make a heavy trade for a starting goalie. That isn't right to do in November. There are 16 teams in our league. We have two goalie slots. 16 x 2 = 32. But there are only 30 NHL teams. There are not enough goalies to go around for 3 starts for a few of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 no, because some of us are screwed on the goalies with no hope for relief. You can't just change the rules. There aren't 32 starting goalies in the league, then take into account those that carry 3 goalies and it is a nightmare. The more I read this the more confused I get. What does someone carrying three goalies have to do with creating a nightmare? We are talking about requiring you to have three starts by any combination of your goalies. So you can ride, say Miller, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday and meet the requirement. Or you can start Miller on Thursday and Friday and Biron on Saturday. Now if you are tied come Sunday, you might start Biron again to win the wins but you risk a loss or GAA, etc.. But the rule is you must have at least two starts now and I was advocating three starts like we played last year. There is no managerial skill in just selecting one of your goalies to play just two games. Say Broduer throws back to back shut outs. Under the current rules, you can just bench your goalies for the rest of the week and sweep. I say, force a third start and make the rest optional. Does this make sense? Does this sway anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 the problem is that the hands are dealt. I have 1 starter and 2 backups. I can't get 3 starts per week, so by changing the rules mid-season, I am forced to either take an 0-4, or make a heavy trade for a starting goalie. That isn't right to do in November. There are 16 teams in our league. We have two goalie slots. 16 x 2 = 32. But there are only 30 NHL teams. There are not enough goalies to go around for 3 starts for a few of us. I see your point. Should have drafted better says the man with two terrible goalies.. What are you going to do if your starter gets injured? Hopefully your backup is your starter's backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 The more I read this the more confused I get. What does someone carrying three goalies have to do with creating a nightmare? We are talking about requiring you to have three starts by any combination of your goalies. So you can ride, say Miller, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday and meet the requirement. Or you can start Miller on Thursday and Friday and Biron on Saturday. Now if you are tied come Sunday, you might start Biron again to win the wins but you risk a loss or GAA, etc.. But the rule is you must have at least two starts now and I was advocating three starts like we played last year. There is no managerial skill in just selecting one of your goalies to play just two games. Say Broduer throws back to back shut outs. Under the current rules, you can just bench your goalies for the rest of the week and sweep. I say, force a third start and make the rest optional. Does this make sense? Does this sway anyone? If a player sits a goalie to avoid messing with their goalie stats their should be a penalty. Say, none of their skater stats for that day should count as well. I doubt the system is designed like that. That said, you can't change horses midstream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 If a player sits a goalie to avoid messing with their goalie stats their should be a penalty. Say, none of their skater stats for that day should count as well. I doubt the system is designed like that. That said, you can't change horses midstream. That's exactly how you should be playing. That is the "managerial" game within a game. Again, it's risk vs reward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.