FCHL Temp Home

Zach6668 · Guru

Gameday 25 - November 27, 2016

Zach6668 · Guru

6-gamer Sunday.

Zach6668 · Guru

no goalies vs no goalies between Jay and I.

rinswun · Guru

Double header with four forwards, zero d and no goalies!

Zach6668 · Guru

Ollie, that's not good!

Zach6668 · Guru

Ooh ya. Beefing up for that big match vs Jay... Micheal Ferland will be the difference maker.

Zach6668 · Guru

lol, my other pickup option today was Dom Moore, and he scored already. Grrr.

jeff · Guru

streaming players just creates more work for the commish. stop that zach.

Adam · Guru

I figured I would be getting crushed by now, but if Karlsson and the Sens have a big game against Jeff's Rangers I could actually pull this mess out.

Zach6668 · Guru

Skinner + Rask = <3

Zach6668 · Guru

Jay and I are currently tied. OT is tied, though his player is still alive (Simmonds).

So it's Simmonds vs Streit, Hamilton, Ferland.

We tie if it stays the same. I win if those 3 outscore Simmonds in the last 10 mins. I lose if more points happen and we stay tied.

SBriand · Guru

Fcking Calgary...

Zach6668 · Guru

Top 4 offensive scores tonight are from teams with no goalies. Forwards and D-men stepping up when required.

Zach6668 · Guru

Hamilton!

throwaway assist, shorthanded, Flames game basically over. tyvm

Just need to fade Simmonds with what will probably be an empty net now...

Zach6668 · Guru

Gameday 25 - November 27, 2016

Blindsides (-2.5) vs. Lethbridge Golden Seals 0.0
BlackDevilHawks (-0.5) vs. Broadway 1.5
The Ales (-1.0) vs. Royal Oak Fearsome Beavers 0.0
Injured Reserve (-0.5) vs. asdfjkl; (-1.0)
KC Reserves (-0.5) vs. Lost Cause (-1.5)
Whalers 2.5 vs. Tulane Flyers 0.0
Newmarket Hurricanes 1.0 vs. Toronto Rocket 1.5
Iowa Crop Dusters 0.5 vs. Blindsides (-2.5)

Zach6668 · Guru

GG Jay. That was an interesting one to sweat. Lots going on all day. You had the 1:00 Boston/Tampa game with all your players, then I had the 6:00 Florida/Carolina game with all mine, then we both had some guns left right to the end.

SBriand · Guru

Whew

Adam · Guru

Didn't need much to win tonight and couldn't even get that.

Zach6668 · Guru

Round up.

Whalers avoid the unthinkable, a streak of 3-straight, with a win. All is right in the world.
ROFB continue to be hot. 5-1-1 in their last 7.
Hottest team is the IR, though - 6 straight wins.
Both the BDH and the Ales are on losing streaks going back to Gameday 20. That's 6 in a row for the Ales, however, BDH had a doubleheader in there, so they have the longest losing streak at 7 games.
asdfjkl; run their losing streak to 3 games, coming off a 5-game win streak.
7 negative scores tonight (8 if you count Ollie's doubleheader as two scores)
3 scores of 0.0
Total combined score from all 15 teams: (-0.5)
4 of the 5 positive scores were by teams with no goalies.

jeff · Guru

God what a brutal night

Zach6668 · Guru

What is going wrong in BlackDevilHawk land? I don't see their team being nearly this bad on paper. I had them in the playoffs pre-season. Decent number of injuries, I suppose.

rich · Overselling players since 1993

Steve you're welcome.

SBriand · Guru

Thanks buddy!

MLP · Guru

That's how you beat the crap out of a no goalie night

DaveyG · Guru

Zach6668 wrote:
What is going wrong in BlackDevilHawk land? I don't see their team being nearly this bad on paper. I had them in the playoffs pre-season. Decent number of injuries, I suppose.

Injuries, bad goalies, and guys like Boedker who just suck this year.

rinswun · Guru

Can we look at removing 6 game nights from the schedule for next season, now that we have double headers?

Zach6668 · Guru

rinswun wrote:
Can we look at removing 6 game nights from the schedule for next season, now that we have double headers?

A 6-game night doesn't give any one team a worse chance at winning, all else being equal, than a 7- or even a 15-game night.

Fenxis · Guru

Zach6668 wrote:
Round up.
Hottest team is the IR, though - 6 straight wins.

ya but when you win games by -0.5 ... it's a very shaky win streak.

...

CFL next year? :P

rinswun · Guru

True but it's less about the winning chance than the fun of having 3 guys going and no goalies than 10 guys and a goalie set.

Fenxis · Guru

Zach6668 wrote:
rinswun wrote:
Can we look at removing 6 game nights from the schedule for next season, now that we have double headers?
A 6-game night doesn't give any one team a worse chance at winning, all else being equal, than a 7- or even a 15-game night.

Perhaps; but there could be higher variance on those nights (ie: lots of LL and WWs).

Would need to run the numbers at the end of the season when we have all of the results and see if the variance is an issue or not.

MLP · Guru

I love 6 game nights!

SBriand · Guru

We should allow the use of farm players on 6 game nights.

Zach6668 · Guru

rinswun wrote:
True but it's less about the winning chance than the fun of having 3 guys going and no goalies than 10 guys and a goalie set.

So having double headers has nothing to do with it? youre just anti-6-game nights? The alternative is fewer games. You'd rather have no game at all than have 6 skaters going (often against just 6 skaters)?

Zach6668 · Guru

Fenxis wrote:
Zach6668 wrote:
rinswun wrote:
Can we look at removing 6 game nights from the schedule for next season, now that we have double headers?
A 6-game night doesn't give any one team a worse chance at winning, all else being equal, than a 7- or even a 15-game night.
Perhaps; but there could be higher variance on those nights (ie: lots of LL and WWs).
Would need to run the numbers at the end of the season when we have all of the results and see if the variance is an issue or not.

Sure, one season won't provide anywhere near enough of a sample size to support remotely meaningful conclusions.

Zach6668 · Guru

SBriand wrote:
We should allow the use of farm players on 6 game nights.

I've thought about this before.

Like, maybe we allow a total of 9 single-game callups or something per season? Or fewer maybe, whatever.

I thought about using the NHL's 9-game rule for farmies before the contract kicks in, but I think that's too much. I don't want to go full AHL on this.

Oh, and if it's the above, is it limited to 6-game nights? Limited to nights when you have zero other options? (ie you can replace empty slots or injured players only, but can't replace crappy guy who have locked in to a contract you can't get rid of)

Something to think about, anyways.

rich · Overselling players since 1993

Or just no goalies ;)

MLP · Guru

I love 6 game nights!

Zach6668 · Guru

Arp, do you like 6-game nights always? Or just because you won this particular 6-game night?

SBriand · Guru

You could just say that each farm player could be brought up for 2 games a season and returned to farm. You can use them a 3rd time but if you do you cant call up that player up again that season, not even as a roster player.

No callups during playoffs. Can be used for any 2 games. Doesn't have to be 6 game nights.

Just spitballing.

Zach6668 · Guru

I really think it's an idea we should explore. I'd like to be able to fill out lineups, while still leaving GMs the flexibility to keep players on farms as long as they want based on current rules.

MLP · Guru

Zach6668 wrote:
Arp, do you like 6-game nights always? Or just because you won this particular 6-game night?

Always.

I think it tests the depth of your team, which I'm always all about. I hate best on best Saturday+Tuesday+Thursday nights, where we keep playing our same 6-4-1 (pretty much) over and over again.

And Im all for more game nights instead of less.

rich · Overselling players since 1993

I think I'm with Arp in spirit, but not to sound like a broken record but the goalie part of the equation takes it too far.

Zach6668 · Guru

rich wrote:
I think I'm with Arp in spirit, but not to sound like a broken record but the goalie part of the equation takes it too far.

You think the penalty for not having goalies is too great if we were to have too many 6-game nights, for example? (Or 7-, or 8-, etc)

Zach6668 · Guru

MLP wrote:
Zach6668 wrote:
Arp, do you like 6-game nights always? Or just because you won this particular 6-game night?
Always.
I think it tests the depth of your team, which I'm always all about. I hate best on best Saturday+Tuesday+Thursday nights, where we keep playing our same 6-4-1 (pretty much) over and over again.
And Im all for more game nights instead of less.

Agree.

MLP · Guru

rich wrote:
I think I'm with Arp in spirit, but not to sound like a broken record but the goalie part of the equation takes it too far.

I was actually going to add something about the gtd as well, good point. That is the one part I find thats pretty imbalanced.

Fenxis · Guru

Zach6668 wrote:
rinswun wrote:
True but it's less about the winning chance than the fun of having 3 guys going and no goalies than 10 guys and a goalie set.
So having double headers has nothing to do with it? youre just anti-6-game nights? The alternative is fewer games. You'd rather have no game at all than have 6 skaters going (often against just 6 skaters)?

On paper having 6-game nights rewards teams that have rosters that are properly spread out over every conference and NHL team.

edit: ok a bit repetitive as I had this sitting in the editor for a while.

-- Edited by Fenxis on Monday 28th of November 2016 02:44:18 PM

Fenxis · Guru

MLP wrote:
rich wrote:
I think I'm with Arp in spirit, but not to sound like a broken record but the goalie part of the equation takes it too far.
I was actually going to add something about the gtd as well, good point. That is the one part I find thats pretty imbalanced.

With scoring down again across the NHL maybe we should look at putting no-goalies at -2 instead of -2.5?

Zach6668 · Guru

MLP wrote:
rich wrote:
I think I'm with Arp in spirit, but not to sound like a broken record but the goalie part of the equation takes it too far.
I was actually going to add something about the gtd as well, good point. That is the one part I find thats pretty imbalanced.

Well that would be a simple fix. - though we could complicated it if we wanted to, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Penalty for missing goalies doesn't have to be -2.5 forever, it could be pegged to a number of different things.

The average goals against so far in 2016-17, including the "GA" for a shootout loss, is 2.6758, which translates into 1.338 in FCHL terms. So the penalty for not having goalies is only 1.17 right now. What should it be? There SHOULD be some incentive to do your homework and try to find the best combination of goalies you can. I don't see a reason to eliminate the penalty altogether. But can you convince me why the penalty should be less?

Fenxis · Guru

Zach6668 wrote:
But can you convince me why the penalty should be less?

Iirc The AHL used to have it at 4GA but boosted it after the last lockout because of the increased scoring but now we are back to pre-lockout levels I think. (and the AHL have 3 tandems)?

Zach6668 · Guru

For reference, goals against in 05-06, the highest scoring season in decades... was 1.542 in FCHL terms, only .204 more than current season.