EHEC CBA Discussion

[Virtual Jarmo]

Just a thread to discuss some possible thoughts, both from me and from you guys.

Few things I had running through my head:

1. The "Four Tactics Rule": This provision would require every team to run at least four of the five tactics in their lines. Obviously, yes, this would mean that you could not use a tactic more than once. Even with additional H&G/NZT restrictions, we're going to see the majority of teams go with D&C/PP - H&G - NZT - H&G/NZT. A lot of teams will have the same framework to their tactics. At least this way, it would open up the game a little bit and add another element of gamesmanship. This provision would also have a rule that would not allow for a 4th line R&G line just to hide that tactic.

2. Minimum shift length: I've never seen anybody, even Paul Bissonette, take a 10 second shift. A minimum of 30 seconds for each line seems to be reasonable. I don't know how fast EHM cycles through the lines, or if this would create too much ice time for 4th line guys, but it seems like we should reward depth rather than reward top-heavy teams.

3. Maximum shift length: Running your top six out there for 90 seconds a piece isn't reasonable, especially with running the bottom six out there for 10 seconds each. I'd propose a maximum shift length of 70 seconds. EHM is very unrealistic when it comes to endurance.

4. The game sliders: I know we want to increase shot totals, without increasing scoring. I think opening up the tactics would do that, but does anyone have suggestions on where we should put the frequency sliders?

5. ELC slot contracts: With the past draft class having players whose attributes need more developing, burning that first year at $1M+ doesn't seem realistic. I don't necessarily have a suggestion in mind here, but, possibly a four-year ELC?

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing: Add salary cap space to the bottom six teams in the league for the next season. Give them the resources to be more active in free agency. At the end of each season, everybody would go back to the 60M cap and then we'd add to the bottom six that season. Maybe something like 2.5M-2.5M-2M-2M-1.5M-1.5M. Of course, I also realize that these teams generally aren't close to the cap, so this may be irrelevant, but I feel like we should do something to improve the competitive balance. There's very little free agency and the gap between top five picks and the other 25 first rounders isn't that big, at least not big enough to enhance the bottom-feeding teams.

7. Lower the waiver age: We've got a lot of draftees floating around. I'd recommend lowering the waiver age to 23.

8. Lower the AHL max: 1.5M is way too high. There are too many cap circumvention tactics and too many free agents with no business in the AHL being signed to 1.5M contracts just so they can be shoved into the AHL.

9. Draft adjustments: If you get auto'd in the first round, you're auto'd for the rest of the draft. I don't have time for people who don't care enough to make their own picks. Shorter time limits in effect based on time zone. I know, in a general sense, where everybody's from. We can have time limits last from 10a-10p depending on what time zone you're in. Overnights are exempt. Then, we shorten the time limits in that time period 12-hour period.

10. Injury suspensions: Any injury of 2M or more results in an automatic suspension. One game for each month, capped at six games.

Chew on those. I'll take any thoughts or alternate suggestions for ways to improve the league. There's the chance that I'll implement some of these even if they're unpopular, but I do want you guys to have a say.

[SharksGM]

1. 1 each for NZT/H&G sounds reasonable; I don't see why you'd need to restrict D&C and PP though. Maybe max 2 each for those?
2 & 3. 30-70 second limits sound good.
4. I have no clue about sliders. It doesn't seem like any would really help... maybe lowering penalty frequency would make for fewer PPs, which I would guess have much higher shooting %. Is maybe bumping the OV of every goalie in the league worth considering?
5. In the real NHL you don't burn years of an ELC keeping a player in juniors. That seems like a fair rule considering players basically don't develop in EHM juniors. Hell, one might argue for some more enticement to keep players in junior cause right now there isn't any. Maybe have an end-of-year lottery for each team to get ceiling bumps for one junior prospect? Or have it somewhat more random with a chance of increasing but potentially decreasing ceilings too, since we already have a lot of good draftees?
6. I think lowering the UFA age and making it harder to re-sign UFAs would help bad teams with cap space rebuild. Although it's not entirely realistic to have UFAs flock to bad teams either - they usually end up signing mid-level UFAs, not the best available.
7. Sounds good.
8. Lowering it to, say, 1M would help, but beyond that older players and players 72OV+ should not accept two-way contracts in the first place. In the NHL two-way clauses don't affect waiver eligibility anyways - we could just dump those and have it based on age & salary alone.
9. I'm down with auto'ing non-responses in the draft, but that's so far away.
10. EHM does seem to randomly determine if an injury is intentional or not with the intent to injure penalty, although it hands out a seemingly unrealistic number of those. So maybe just have those be an automatic suspension, and tack on more games for repeat offenders?

[Calgary.Flames]

1. I'd like restrictions by line. Something like, no trapping on the first line, no gunning on the fourth added to the current rules.

2-3. From 30-70 seems reasonable. I'd also look into something that would not allow teams to play their 3rd line more than their 1st. Let's say, a lesser line can play an equal or lesser shift length than the one above.

4. Not allowing to trap on the first line I think would improve that a lot I think. What % of teams used NZT on their top line? Too many.

5. Like Dan said.

6. Adam's idea is a good one. More than just in free agency, those teams might be more interested in trading for older veteran guys that can help their young guys if they have some more cap space to work with.

7. Would be okay with that.

8. Maybe total NHL games played should also be considered?

9. All in for auto'ing. You edit all draftees according to your list so it's not like if you'd take the first guy on top in-game which is often times not the best player available.

10. Like Dan said. More suspensions for Kurt Sauer, please.

[Virtual Jarmo]

Time to start doing more than just signing on the boards, guys. Need some thoughts on these things.

[Parker]

I'm not really in favor of any more rules, unless they address a specific competitive advantage or disadvantage.

1. The "Four Tactics Rule"

I dunno. My team could play every strategy if forced to; it wouldn't weaken me any more than anyone else. If we want to open up the game, why don't we increase the scoring or penalty sliders? A lot of teams have the same basic tactics because those are the most effective tactics given the current rules. Adding more rules would just create a new "optimum strategy" that everyone would eventually adopt.

2. Minimum shift length

I'm pretty ambivalent about this because it doesn't affect me one way or another. I have depth, and I use it.

3. Maximum shift length

Same as #2. I don't think teams are helping themselves with 90 second shifts, unless the entire line is 100 EN. Otherwise, what happens with those shifts is the players end up sitting much longer between shifts in order to recuperate.

4. The game sliders

Penalties and scoring up 20. I hate low-scoring leagues.

5. ELC slot contracts

I don't see anything wrong with the current ELC length. If you think prospects take too long to develop and are overpaid at first, either lower the slot money draft-wide or create them with higher attributes to begin with.

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing

This is my least favorite suggestion, and I don't understand how it benefits anyone. What's wrong with bottom-feeders rebuilding through the draft? A salary cap that varies inversely with your team's performance stinks of communism to me, and I don't understand how this helps competitive balance, unless by competitive balance you mean every team having a 41-41 record. I don't think we SHOULD be trying to prop up weak teams (in addition to making free agents more costly for a strong team because the weak team has an extra $2.5M to throw at a given free agent; money they didn't do anything to earn.)

7. Lower the waiver age

Interesting, but frustrating when one takes pride in his farm team as well as his pro team, and has made his decisions based on a waiver age of 25. The problem is some teams put a lot more work into building their farm team than others, and that work will be erased when their 23-24 year-olds get claimed by people who in the past didn't bother to do anything about 50OA bums on their farm teams. It props up the neglectful and punishes the diligent.

8. Lower the AHL max

Anyone could've signed those free agents. Why constrain the teams that actually go through the trouble to do it? Exactly what is WRONG with signing 69OA players for the AHL?

9. Draft adjustments

Autoing the whole draft might be a little extreme. Maybe a GM who misses deadlines gets a random ceiling penalty against one of his (3rd round or better) draftees, as a way of punishing the organization for not being properly prepared for the draft. Autopicking in the later rounds I have no problem with. Variable windows based on time of day/time zone is a good option to prevent anyone from getting screwed unfairly.

10. Injury suspensions

I like this one, but maybe it could be modified by a player's PE rating. It seems unrealistic for a high-PE player to be suspended for injuring a player on what was probably a clean hit, whereas a guy who racks up 400 PIM in a season probably stuck out an elbow or the butt of his stick.

I apologize if I come off almost universally critical of these suggestions, and it does look like I'm mostly against the rules that would hurt my team, but I've said in the past that I'm not in favor of any rules unless they either make the league more realistic or address a specific competitive unbalance, and I don't see unbalance here, I see teams at different points in their organization's development (this is a good thing) and a gulf between GM's who put a lot of effort into building all aspects of their organization, and those who don't concern themselves as much with that.

[Bruins_GM]

I'll post more later, but as far as point #9, there has to be some variation on that. Auto-drafting an entire draft might screw someone over as far as who gets picked. There has to be some incentive to putting work into it, or more of a downside to not putting work into the draft, like limiting which guys get auto'd under that scenario, based on OA. It's not like we don't know who's doing the work and who isn't and who is and just had a mistake time-wise.

[TorontoGM]

1. The "Four Tactics Rule": This provision would require every team to run at least four of the five tactics in their lines. Obviously, yes, this would mean that you could not use a tactic more than once. Even with additional H&G/NZT restrictions, we're going to see the majority of teams go with D&C/PP - H&G - NZT - H&G/NZT. A lot of teams will have the same framework to their tactics. At least this way, it would open up the game a little bit and add another element of gamesmanship. This provision would also have a rule that would not allow for a 4th line R&G line just to hide that tactic.

I don't like the idea of not being able to have two passing play lines, unrealistic IMO

2. Minimum shift length: I've never seen anybody, even Paul Bissonette, take a 10 second shift. A minimum of 30 seconds for each line seems to be reasonable. I don't know how fast EHM cycles through the lines, or if this would create too much ice time for 4th line guys, but it seems like we should reward depth rather than reward top-heavy teams.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H4Vxc4VazE Exactly 10 seconds

3. Maximum shift length: Running your top six out there for 90 seconds a piece isn't reasonable, especially with running the bottom six out there for 10 seconds each. I'd propose a maximum shift length of 70 seconds. EHM is very unrealistic when it comes to endurance.

Sure

4. The game sliders: I know we want to increase shot totals, without increasing scoring. I think opening up the tactics would do that, but does anyone have suggestions on where we should put the frequency sliders?

Cool

5. ELC slot contracts: With the past draft class having players whose attributes need more developing, burning that first year at $1M+ doesn't seem realistic. I don't necessarily have a suggestion in mind here, but, possibly a four-year ELC?

Aight

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing: Add salary cap space to the bottom six teams in the league for the next season. Give them the resources to be more active in free agency. At the end of each season, everybody would go back to the 60M cap and then we'd add to the bottom six that season. Maybe something like 2.5M-2.5M-2M-2M-1.5M-1.5M. Of course, I also realize that these teams generally aren't close to the cap, so this may be irrelevant, but I feel like we should do something to improve the competitive balance. There's very little free agency and the gap between top five picks and the other 25 first rounders isn't that big, at least not big enough to enhance the bottom-feeding teams.

I don't need you're hand outs.

7. Lower the waiver age: We've got a lot of draftees floating around. I'd recommend lowering the waiver age to 23.

Word

8. Lower the AHL max: 1.5M is way too high. There are too many cap circumvention tactics and too many free agents with no business in the AHL being signed to 1.5M contracts just so they can be shoved into the AHL.

mmhhhmmm

9. Draft adjustments: If you get auto'd in the first round, you're auto'd for the rest of the draft. I don't have time for people who don't care enough to make their own picks. Shorter time limits in effect based on time zone. I know, in a general sense, where everybody's from. We can have time limits last from 10a-10p depending on what time zone you're in. Overnights are exempt. Then, we shorten the time limits in that time period 12-hour period.

hallelujah, two years in a row and you're CUT.

10. Injury suspensions: Any injury of 2M or more results in an automatic suspension. One game for each month, capped at six games.

If only there was some formula involving the players ID #, injury #, injury length, etc to calculate the suspenion length.

[SharksGM]

7. Lower the waiver age

Interesting, but frustrating when one takes pride in his farm team as well as his pro team, and has made his decisions based on a waiver age of 25. The problem is some teams put a lot more work into building their farm team than others, and that work will be erased when their 23-24 year-olds get claimed by people who in the past didn't bother to do anything about 50OA bums on their farm teams. It props up the neglectful and punishes the diligent.

... it addresses a competitive imbalance because you can bury good draftees in the AHL until they're 25 and even longer if you never call them up. It's also plenty realistic - 25 is much older than the NHL's current waiver age, which is based on games/seasons played but usually starts around 22-23.

I apologize if I come off almost universally critical of these suggestions, and it does look like I'm mostly against the rules that would hurt my team, but I've said in the past that I'm not in favor of any rules unless they either make the league more realistic or address a specific competitive unbalance, and I don't see unbalance here, I see teams at different points in their organization's development (this is a good thing) and a gulf between GM's who put a lot of effort into building all aspects of their organization, and those who don't concern themselves as much with that.

You haven't said a word about realism.

[Parker]

... it addresses a competitive imbalance because you can bury good draftees in the AHL until they're 25 and even longer if you never call them up. It's also plenty realistic - 25 is much older than the NHL's current waiver age, which is based on games/seasons played but usually starts around 22-23.

I wasn't aware this was an actual problem in our league. I admit I haven't done much research on it; rather I assumed teams would want to develop prospects quickly since the league's pace is so slow relative to other online leagues. Why would you hold back a good prospect for four years after he's ready for the NHL? Is anyone actually doing that with legitimate prospects?

You haven't said a word about realism.

I disagree.

[Parker]

At any rate, it wasn't my intent to turn this all adversarial.

I said my piece and I'll keep my mouth shut from now on.

[Jets GM]

At any rate, it wasn't my intent to turn this all adversarial.

I said my piece and I'll keep my mouth shut from now on.

[DallasSean]

You are a complete ass.

9. Draft adjustments: If you get auto'd in the first round, you're auto'd for the rest of the draft. I don't have time for people who don't care enough to make their own picks. Shorter time limits in effect based on time zone. I know, in a general sense, where everybody's from. We can have time limits last from 10a-10p depending on what time zone you're in. Overnights are exempt. Then, we shorten the time limits in that time period 12-hour period.

I love this and, to address Boston's complaint about it, I don't think it needs any variation at all. Yes, autoing somebody's entire draft will fuck them at least a bit, but that is the nature of a punishment. If you genuinely can't be bothered to sign in and send a message to one of the draft runners saying something along the lines of "might not be around for my pick, if I'm not here when I'm up, please pick x/y/z if they're on the board or the best forward remaining if not" then you deserve everything you get.

[Virtual Jarmo]

At any rate, it wasn't my intent to turn this all adversarial.

I said my piece and I'll keep my mouth shut from now on.

Seriously, grow the fuck up.

[Bruins_GM]

You are a complete ass.

9. Draft adjustments: If you get auto'd in the first round, you're auto'd for the rest of the draft. I don't have time for people who don't care enough to make their own picks. Shorter time limits in effect based on time zone. I know, in a general sense, where everybody's from. We can have time limits last from 10a-10p depending on what time zone you're in. Overnights are exempt. Then, we shorten the time limits in that time period 12-hour period.

I love this and, to address Boston's complaint about it, I don't think it needs any variation at all. Yes, autoing somebody's entire draft will fuck them at least a bit, but that is the nature of a punishment. If you genuinely can't be bothered to sign in and send a message to one of the draft runners saying something along the lines of "might not be around for my pick, if I'm not here when I'm up, please pick x/y/z if they're on the board or the best forward remaining if not" then you deserve everything you get.

It's not that, so much as it is potentially messing up someone's draft board who's done the time to figure things out. If you're going to auto someone because they've forgot about it or don't care, then make the guys they get shit or limit them to certain groups (not over a certain OA or consistency, higher injury stats, etc.) that make it to their advantage to put the work into it.

[Commish Bub(NYR)]

1. The "Four Tactics Rule"

This is a good start. Maybe we can eliminate the use of NZT altogether. (Somewhere, Brad laughs.) This does, of course, run the risk of a league where everyone used the same tactics -- I looked at another league a few months ago, forget which one, that had line rules beyond the usual H&G limitation, and all but one of the GM-controlled teams had the exact same lines.

2. Minimum shift length

Well, there ARE the Colton Orr's of the league, who are on the ice for as long as their fights last. Doesn't really affect me, but probably not a bad idea.

3. Maximum shift length

Again, doesn't affect me much, but I could get behind this too.

4. The game sliders

Haven't seen any research behind what raising the scoring and penalty sliders would do. A little more scoring is probably a good thing; less, probably not so much.

5. ELC slot contracts

Sounds okay. Don't have strong feelings about this either way right now.

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing

How many bottom-tier teams spent near the cap last year? Or the year before that? Haven't they been pretty far from the cap? I'm not sure that giving these teams more money would make a difference. I would say no to this right now.

7. Lower the waiver age

Maybe I'm missing something; what exactly would we achieve by doing this?

8. Lower the AHL max

I guess I don't pay enough attention to other AHL teams, but how many folks are doing this? Not that I'm calling anyone out, I'm just curious. I know there are a lot of ufa signings, esp of the over-30 set, who will strictly be AHL fodder. Given that almost all of them begin vopatizing pretty quickly, it seems like a useless tactic to me. But then again, I guess it was fun for our AHL fans to watch Mats Sundin last year.

9. Draft adjustments

I agree with this, or something like it. I could see maybe not doing it for the first round, to account for someone getting sick, or caught at an airport, or beaten up, or whatever. We all make mistakes. But sitting around in the 2nd or 3rd (and so on) rounds waiting for someone to not show up gets really old really fast. I invest a lot of time in the draft, I'm constantly changing my mind on who I'm going to pick, and I like to be there when I make my pick. If you can't be bothered to at least check in, or send an email saying "fuck it, pick BPA for me the entire draft" then you deserve to load up on 5pot/8con goalies.

10. Injury suspensions

I'm down with this, or a version of it.

[CapsGM]

1. Three tactics rule + H&G + NZT restrictions sounds legit.

2,3, 4. Meh.

5. <9 games in the NHL doesn't use a year of the ELC; perhaps we can adopt something like this.

http://capgeek.com/faq/how-does-an-entr ... -slide.php

6. Not a huge fan.

7, 8. Agree.

9. Agree - if you aren't willing to make a pick or a list in the first round, then you aren't interested enough in the draft (maybe more leniency in this case, as your first pick is generally is the most important). I'm as busy as anyone and have made every single pick in each draft on time (except for my 2012 third round pick that was like 130AM-930AM my time - if someone more prudent wants to call me out on that, go ahead).

10. Depends on the case; Pavel Datsyuk hurting a guy for 2 months is a lot different than Kurt Sauer doing the same thing.

[Virtual Jarmo]

I like what Tim said about the <9 games doesn't count toward year of ELC. That said, if it were possible to stash them in the AHL for development, that would count against ELC. There's potential in there, but I'd have to find it. That and Dan's rule about not burning years of ELC while in juniors. Issue with that is, if I kept adding years back onto the boosters, they'd have a chance to boost as long as they were under contract, right?

So far, it seems like there's some traction for injury suspensions, some further line restrictions, and adding more powerplays and upping scoring. Like I said in my research last season, though, we were right on par with the NHL in terms of goals scored per game. The drastic difference was in shots on goal.

Keep the thoughts coming, guys, including some ideas of your own.

[Parker]

A Kurt Sauer Clause might be something to consider; a guy who is repeatedly involved in hurting other players, even if he's not a goon*, is obviously doing something on purpose. How about the odds and severity of suspensions increase for repeat offenders?

*Sauer's PE is 50 so I suppose that's up for debate, but Shane Doan and Ed Jovanovski have similar PE scores and are much better players; for some reason they're not repeatedly crippling people but Sauer is. Some guys just hit to hurt I guess.

[SabresGM]

Just a thread to discuss some possible thoughts, both from me and from you guys.

Few things I had running through my head:

1. The "Four Tactics Rule": This provision would require every team to run at least four of the five tactics in their lines. Obviously, yes, this would mean that you could not use a tactic more than once. Even with additional H&G/NZT restrictions, we're going to see the majority of teams go with D&C/PP - H&G - NZT - H&G/NZT. A lot of teams will have the same framework to their tactics. At least this way, it would open up the game a little bit and add another element of gamesmanship. This provision would also have a rule that would not allow for a 4th line R&G line just to hide that tactic.

I think this is interesting, but as others have noted, could lead to a lot of teams running the exact same tactics. IS the issue we want to discuss opening the game up via more tactics, or the overuse of NZT/H&G?

2. Minimum shift length: I've never seen anybody, even Paul Bissonette, take a 10 second shift. A minimum of 30 seconds for each line seems to be reasonable. I don't know how fast EHM cycles through the lines, or if this would create too much ice time for 4th line guys, but it seems like we should reward depth rather than reward top-heavy teams.

I think this if fair.

3. Maximum shift length: Running your top six out there for 90 seconds a piece isn't reasonable, especially with running the bottom six out there for 10 seconds each. I'd propose a maximum shift length of 70 seconds. EHM is very unrealistic when it comes to endurance.

Ditto.

4. The game sliders: I know we want to increase shot totals, without increasing scoring. I think opening up the tactics would do that, but does anyone have suggestions on where we should put the frequency sliders?

Will leave this to you guys that know something about the sliders, don't know shit.

5. ELC slot contracts: With the past draft class having players whose attributes need more developing, burning that first year at $1M+ doesn't seem realistic. I don't necessarily have a suggestion in mind here, but, possibly a four-year ELC?

I think we are fine the way we are in this reagrd.

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing: Add salary cap space to the bottom six teams in the league for the next season. Give them the resources to be more active in free agency. At the end of each season, everybody would go back to the 60M cap and then we'd add to the bottom six that season. Maybe something like 2.5M-2.5M-2M-2M-1.5M-1.5M. Of course, I also realize that these teams generally aren't close to the cap, so this may be irrelevant, but I feel like we should do something to improve the competitive balance. There's very little free agency and the gap between top five picks and the other 25 first rounders isn't that big, at least not big enough to enhance the bottom-feeding teams.

7. Lower the waiver age: We've got a lot of draftees floating around. I'd recommend lowering the waiver age to 23.

Agreed with whoever said it could screw the teams who have been poaching these guys. Tough question, and in regards to No. 8, 1.5 may be too high, but how much would you lower it to so that it makes a difference?

8. Lower the AHL max: 1.5M is way too high. There are too many cap circumvention tactics and too many free agents with no business in the AHL being signed to 1.5M contracts just so they can be shoved into the AHL.

9. Draft adjustments: If you get auto'd in the first round, you're auto'd for the rest of the draft. I don't have time for people who don't care enough to make their own picks. Shorter time limits in effect based on time zone. I know, in a general sense, where everybody's from. We can have time limits last from 10a-10p depending on what time zone you're in. Overnights are exempt. Then, we shorten the time limits in that time period 12-hour period.

Queston on auto'd is, how would you do it? With fantasy sports, you get the highest averaged guy left, but that really isn't applicable here. Wouldn't it be potentially better to implement some sort of penalty to your player(s) selected for your tardiness. Just don't know how much auto'd hurts teams chances, as if you aren't prepared and late to pick, whoever picks for you could probably pick a better player than you would anyways.

10. Injury suspensions: Any injury of 2M or more results in an automatic suspension. One game for each month, capped at six games.

Agreed on the idea here. Probably can be paired down some to differentiate guys with low and high PEs.

Chew on those. I'll take any thoughts or alternate suggestions for ways to improve the league. There's the chance that I'll implement some of these even if they're unpopular, but I do want you guys to have a say.

[Femur]

i always assumed that the 90 sec shifts and the 10 second shifts were an EHM short cut to get desired total ice time numbers you want at the end of the game. i assume (and i could be wrong) that the game does not account for all the skipping of the 4th line (and sometimes 3rd) if there are a lot of stoppages of play.

[Parker]

From my test sims I had the impression that the top line that isn't tired always takes the next shift. If you make all four lines the same shift length and take special teams out of the equation, first liners still get the most icetime and fourth-liners the least.

[CapsGM]

A Kurt Sauer Clause might be something to consider; a guy who is repeatedly involved in hurting other players, even if he's not a goon*, is obviously doing something on purpose. How about the odds and severity of suspensions increase for repeat offenders?

*Sauer's PE is 50 so I suppose that's up for debate, but Shane Doan and Ed Jovanovski have similar PE scores and are much better players; for some reason they're not repeatedly crippling people but Sauer is. Some guys just hit to hurt I guess.

Yeah, I was going to say something about a repeat offender clause but forgot to in my post yesterday.

[Oilers_GM]

1. The "Four Tactics Rule": I like it. I think GMs need to have some freedom in which tactics they use for the lines.

2. Minimum shift length: I think this could even be 40 seconds.

3. Maximum shift length: 70 Seconds is reasonable.

4. The game sliders: Not sure - I'd say say up the slider by 5 and see what that does this year.

5. ELC slot contracts: I agree with no burning a year of the contract even if the player plays what is it 11 games of the NHL season before going back. It would mean going in and editing the contact in the player file by adding a year to it because the system will still take a year off. Because this would be limited to just a few players a year I think this is workable.

6. Balancing the league - perhaps we allow the bottom 5 teams to have a prospect boost (2nd rounder??) But it needs to be their pick so if I'm in the bottom 5 and i traded by pick to a team in the top 10 then the receiving team would not end up with a better prospect. That said - If I traded it to another team in the bottom 5... that team could get a boost to that player.

7. Lower the waiver age: No problem there.

8. Lower the AHL max: depends on the players I think we need to look closer at the players being put there. I can understand thought behind this but the real Oil had Yann Denis and LeNeveu in OKC this past year. This was to allow for our young goalies (Roy - and this year Bunz) time. Roy played in the ECHL last year and will move up this year to back up Denis.

I think we just need to limit the number of guys over 30 that could still play in the NHL. Look at their OA perhaps?? There are always a number of older guys on AHL teams though that are there to help lead and mentor the young guys. (Mentorship in a computer sim???) Anyway guys like Yashin would never go down to the A, but guys like McAmmond, Pisani perhaps, would because of their leadership skills. Maybe thats the key... leadership.

9. Draft adjustments: No problem with this. I always try to get something in. I will say that I agree that autoing someone can also result in no punishment in the 1st or second rounds. It's still possible to get a half decent player that could be useful in the 3rd round-5 rounds. I think we need to look at player busts?? As an option as well.???

10. Injury suspensions: I think if we do the 1g/month out capped at six then we will need to boost that for repeat offenders though I'm not sure we have a lot of repeat offenders. What about 2games for each month out?

[SharksGM]

I don't think 30+ players in the AHL is the biggest issue - they mostly vopatize quickly, and if they were decent players they'd have been signed to 1.5+ deals. It's more the 22-29 year olds at the 800k-1.5M level who are stuck on deep teams who would prefer to play ~400k-800k players on their 4th lines to save cap space. I mean Kyle Wellwood is probably good enough to play on a few EHEC teams but instead he'll be stuck in the AHL putting up 100+ point seasons forever. Sorry Kyle.

It also really thins out the FA pool if you can sign basically anyone to an AHL deal and stuff them there whenever you want. Sure, you can argue every other team can do it... that doesn't mean that teams should be able to do it in the first place. In real life 23+ year old players who've done their time in juniors or the AHL usually get one-way deals or pack up to Europe, not get stuck in the AHL for another 5 years.

[MinnesotaGM]

Just a thread to discuss some possible thoughts, both from me and from you guys.

Few things I had running through my head:

1. The "Four Tactics Rule": This provision would require every team to run at least four of the five tactics in their lines. Obviously, yes, this would mean that you could not use a tactic more than once. Even with additional H&G/NZT restrictions, we're going to see the majority of teams go with D&C/PP - H&G - NZT - H&G/NZT. A lot of teams will have the same framework to their tactics. At least this way, it would open up the game a little bit and add another element of gamesmanship. This provision would also have a rule that would not allow for a 4th line R&G line just to hide that tactic.

I think HNG and NZT should be 3rd/4th line tactics

2. Minimum shift length: I've never seen anybody, even Paul Bissonette, take a 10 second shift. A minimum of 30 seconds for each line seems to be reasonable. I don't know how fast EHM cycles through the lines, or if this would create too much ice time for 4th line guys, but it seems like we should reward depth rather than reward top-heavy teams.

3. Maximum shift length: Running your top six out there for 90 seconds a piece isn't reasonable, especially with running the bottom six out there for 10 seconds each. I'd propose a maximum shift length of 70 seconds. EHM is very unrealistic when it comes to endurance.

I think lines after 1st cant be more than previous line. So if line 1 is 40 seconds then lines 2/3/4 cant be more than 40 seconds. With limits of no more than 70 and no less than 30

4. The game sliders: I know we want to increase shot totals, without increasing scoring. I think opening up the tactics would do that, but does anyone have suggestions on where we should put the frequency sliders?

any way of trying to open up offense will increase scoring, i wouldnt do more than +10 maybe decrease penalties -10. For the most part last season if i can recall the league was at or greater than nhl average of goals per game

5. ELC slot contracts: With the past draft class having players whose attributes need more developing, burning that first year at $1M+ doesn't seem realistic. I don't necessarily have a suggestion in mind here, but, possibly a four-year ELC?

I would suggest lower salary or bump attributes up just a tad when drafted

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing: Add salary cap space to the bottom six teams in the league for the next season. Give them the resources to be more active in free agency. At the end of each season, everybody would go back to the 60M cap and then we'd add to the bottom six that season. Maybe something like 2.5M-2.5M-2M-2M-1.5M-1.5M. Of course, I also realize that these teams generally aren't close to the cap, so this may be irrelevant, but I feel like we should do something to improve the competitive balance. There's very little free agency and the gap between top five picks and the other 25 first rounders isn't that big, at least not big enough to enhance the bottom-feeding teams.

to me salary cap is irrevelant on being successful. Could remove wont sign with your weak team so every team has equivalent rights to free agents.

7. Lower the waiver age: We've got a lot of draftees floating around. I'd recommend lowering the waiver age to 23.

Would it help to add more retirees to bottom dwellers?

8. Lower the AHL max: 1.5M is way too high. There are too many cap circumvention tactics and too many free agents with no business in the AHL being signed to 1.5M contracts just so they can be shoved into the AHL.

I would say 1.2 max

9. Draft adjustments: If you get auto'd in the first round, you're auto'd for the rest of the draft. I don't have time for people who don't care enough to make their own picks. Shorter time limits in effect based on time zone. I know, in a general sense, where everybody's from. We can have time limits last from 10a-10p depending on what time zone you're in. Overnights are exempt. Then, we shorten the time limits in that time period 12-hour period.

agree to a certain extent, i would suggest if 1st round auto then maybe your next pick limit is cut in half and if ur second pick is auto then ur done for the rest of the draft

10. Injury suspensions: Any injury of 2M or more results in an automatic suspension. One game for each month, capped at six games.
1 month - 3 games
2 months - 5 games
3 months - 8 games
4 months - 12 games
6 months - 25 games
indefinately or force to retire -- 1 year ban and so forth

[Virtual Jarmo]

I think the things I like the most that have been discussed are lowering the AHL salary max, injury suspensions, and draft adjustments.

Seems like we'll have to do some research regarding shift lengths and the penalty/scoring sliders and see what transpires.

I don't want to fuck with tactics too much because I don't really want to tell guys how to run their teams. No matter what I do, somebody will find a loophole. Not having NZT/H&G on the first line is already an upgrade. Not sure how much farther I want to take it.

[Commish Bub(NYR)]

Minny -- Every team does have equal rights to free agents. "Weak team" status has no bearing in EHEC.

[GoJetsGo]

Just a thread to discuss some possible thoughts, both from me and from you guys.

Few things I had running through my head:

1. The "Four Tactics Rule": This provision would require every team to run at least four of the five tactics in their lines. Obviously, yes, this would mean that you could not use a tactic more than once. Even with additional H&G/NZT restrictions, we're going to see the majority of teams go with D&C/PP - H&G - NZT - H&G/NZT. A lot of teams will have the same framework to their tactics. At least this way, it would open up the game a little bit and add another element of gamesmanship. This provision would also have a rule that would not allow for a 4th line R&G line just to hide that tactic.

I think you pointed out the main objection/weakness to this new possibility. If we have to use 4/5 tactics most will drop R+G, with the only difference being order of implementation. I understand limiting the use of hit and grind and realize dueling traps can be frustrating. *Having said that*, some leeway needs to be in place for clubs to craft an identity. Believe someone mentioned it in prior discussions, NZT certainly has a place, but probably not with first line studs.

2. Minimum shift length: I've never seen anybody, even Paul Bissonette, take a 10 second shift. A minimum of 30 seconds for each line seems to be reasonable. I don't know how fast EHM cycles through the lines, or if this would create too much ice time for 4th line guys, but it seems like we should reward depth rather than reward top-heavy teams.

3. Maximum shift length: Running your top six out there for 90 seconds a piece isn't reasonable, especially with running the bottom six out there for 10 seconds each. I'd propose a maximum shift length of 70 seconds. EHM is very unrealistic when it comes to endurance.

30-70 second shift lengths sound reasonable to me. I would recommend making an exception for 4th line to be able to drop to 20. Maybe as a playoff alteration?

5. ELC slot contracts: With the past draft class having players whose attributes need more developing, burning that first year at $1M+ doesn't seem realistic. I don't necessarily have a suggestion in mind here, but, possibly a four-year ELC?

Add a player option for young players who spend the whole season on the farm and only reach certain attributes? When the option comes up let greed and development determine acceptance?

6. Competitive balance revenue sharing: Add salary cap space to the bottom six teams in the league for the next season. Give them the resources to be more active in free agency. At the end of each season, everybody would go back to the 60M cap and then we'd add to the bottom six that season. Maybe something like 2.5M-2.5M-2M-2M-1.5M-1.5M. Of course, I also realize that these teams generally aren't close to the cap, so this may be irrelevant, but I feel like we should do something to improve the competitive balance. There's very little free agency and the gap between top five picks and the other 25 first rounders isn't that big, at least not big enough to enhance the bottom-feeding teams.

Need to encourage teams to build through the draft, although the timeline of the league makes that a tough sell. Nash and Ovechkin deals from this summer come to mind for me. Both are top talents in the file, but both ended up costing 2010 or 2011 picks plus 2012 selections. Trades seem to naturally create winners and losers.

8. Lower the AHL max: 1.5M is way too high. There are too many cap circumvention tactics and too many free agents with no business in the AHL being signed to 1.5M contracts just so they can be shoved into the AHL.

In my case, is D Greg Zanon at 1.45M stashed in the AHL that offensive? I'm not creating a juggernaut by any means, but it does help my pro squad in case of injury. Again, as others have pointed out, he was freely available. When Scuderi's albatross is gone he probably winds up with the pro squad.

9. Draft adjustments:

Can we set up a system in which blocks of picks need to be completed via a chat on the front page? For example let picks 1-5 (and those interested in trades) know their window is at time x? Naturally keep the window of picks to a small number to avoid time zone / scheduling conflicts.

[jamesredwings]

6. Take it from a last place team who had tons of cap space. There is nobody in FA! Real life had Suter and Weber and Parise and and and....

I want to be able to put out some kind of offer sheet and give the original team a chance to match. Make it exciting.

The rest is fine with me but there are just so many rules I can take

[Virtual Jarmo]

6. Take it from a last place team who had tons of cap space. There is nobody in FA! Real life had Suter and Weber and Parise and and and....

I want to be able to put out some kind of offer sheet and give the original team a chance to match. Make it exciting.

The rest is fine with me but there are just so many rules I can take

We do have offer sheets. We used it one time. Patrick Marleau back in the 2010 offseason.

Nobody qualifies guys as RFAs. Everybody gets signed long before the FA period starts.

[jamesredwings]

"Nobody qualifies guys as RFAs. Everybody gets signed long before the FA period starts."

Exactly my point

[Virtual Jarmo]

"Nobody qualifies guys as RFAs. Everybody gets signed long before the FA period starts."

Exactly my point

Well, let's find 30 other people to serve just as the player agents.

EHM financials are limited. Don't see what you want us to do differently.

[CapsGM]

"Nobody qualifies guys as RFAs. Everybody gets signed long before the FA period starts."

Exactly my point

Well, let's find 30 other people to serve just as the player agents.

EHM financials are limited. Don't see what you want us to do differently.

this

Everyone retains their RFAs in a sim league - and offer sheets rarely happen IRL anyways. Maybe lowering the UFA age might help.

[SharksGM]

I suppose you could enforce the cap + 5% over the summer and have RFAs with > 100/110 greed refuse to sign before July 1st unless paid some amount over their formula raise/arbitration award. Do we really want that though? It seems like a pain just to try to get the odd offersheet or two in.

[Montreal Canadiens]

Four tactics rule - no. Shouldn't be forced. If you want to run 4 PP (or 4 R&G) or 4 D&C then by all means you should be allowed to I'd say.

Max line seconds, yes, 70 is appropriate.

Min line seconds, no, if you put out a line for 10 seconds, doesn't really affect anything in a positive or negative way.

Game sliders, hmm, I'd try just with the new rules at first. It should open up the league a lot more.

Revenue sharing, uhhh no.

Lower the AHL max, yes defnitely. $1M sounds appropriate.

Injury suspensions yes, however somebody that gets injured indefinitely should be like a 10 game suspension, not a 6 game one.

[Virtual Jarmo]

Lowering the UFA age could make sense. With the way our draft classes have gone, players are helping very quickly and for a long period of time. Lowering it to, say, 25, instead of 27. Or even 24. Figure you still get six years of control.

[Parker]

One issue I see with lowering the UFA age is that it counters any attempts to keep players in junior longer. If you know a player's clock is ticking the moment you draft him, you're going to make sure he starts contributing as soon as possible. If a simple enough system could be developed, I'd rather see an MLB-style system where UFA eligibility is based on service time rather than age. That'd actually help keep players down longer, since you'd want the guy to be as developed as possible before you give him an NHL roster spot and start his clock ticking. For example, if I knew I was losing Brett Connolly after his sixth full NHL season, I sure wouldn't have given him a full-time job with a STR of 55, no matter how well he was developed in other areas. Under the current system, I wanted him up as soon as possible because the older he gets, the more expensive he gets, whether he's an NHL rookie at age 19 or age 23.

[Virtual Jarmo]

Service time is an interesting thought. Pain in the dick to keep track of. Like most everything else.

I think it would dictate how some people draft and how they select their underagers. That'd be interesting.

[SharksGM]

NHL UFA eligibility already goes by age and seasons played (27 or 7 seasons played). I don't see why we couldn't do the same as the old CBA and gradually lower the UFA age. Adding in the seasons served seem mostly pointless, it only really affects guys who played as 18- or 19-year olds. Granted we probably have more of those than the NHL so tracking it would be somewhat more difficult... although it won't be an issue for EHEC draftees for another 5 years anyways.

[Virtual Jarmo]

NHL UFA eligibility already goes by age and seasons played (27 or 7 seasons played).

I like that plan. Seven years is plenty of time to have a player.

[Calgary.Flames]

Sounds good to me too.

[AnaheimGM]

All sounds good to me too, the aspect I like the most is about the 4 lines tactics!!

[Virtual Jarmo]

All sounds good to me too, the aspect I like the most is about the 4 lines tactics!!

Only issue is enforcement. And that's a big issue.

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

[AnaheimGM]

All sounds good to me too, the aspect I like the most is about the 4 lines tactics!!

Only issue is enforcement. And that's a big issue.

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

Great idea, i approve!!

[GoJetsGo]

All sounds good to me too, the aspect I like the most is about the 4 lines tactics!!

Only issue is enforcement. And that's a big issue.

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

If we can only use one each of H+G and NZT (non first line), can the give back be 100 seconds allotted between the two? Either 60-40 or 50-50 splits.

[Parker]

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

Yeah, I'm down with that. I'm a fan of Minny's shift length idea too.

[Virtual Jarmo]

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

Yeah, I'm down with that. I'm a fan of Minny's shift length idea too.

I like that, too. That's definitely realism. Top line plays the most.

Great stuff so far, guys. Far from done with improvements or discussion. Keep your ideas/commentary coming.

[Commish Bub(NYR)]

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

Yeah, I'm down with that. I'm a fan of Minny's shift length idea too.

Ditto. And because I'm a lazy Sid and can't be bothered to look it up myself, what are the other limitations that we've recently set on using H&G and NZT again? No first line, but what else?

[Virtual Jarmo]

Thinking I'll say you can use 3 but you do not double up NZT or H&G. So, say you want to use 2 R&G, 2 PP, or 2 D&C, that's fine.

What's everyone think about that?

Yeah, I'm down with that. I'm a fan of Minny's shift length idea too.

Ditto. And because I'm a lazy Sid and can't be bothered to look it up myself, what are the other limitations that we've recently set on using H&G and NZT again? No first line, but what else?

No first line, no more than 70 sec (50 max on one line), max two lines.

[MinnesotaGM]

I think the things I like the most that have been discussed are lowering the AHL salary max, injury suspensions, and draft adjustments.

Seems like we'll have to do some research regarding shift lengths and the penalty/scoring sliders and see what transpires.

I don't want to fuck with tactics too much because I don't really want to tell guys how to run their teams. No matter what I do, somebody will find a loophole. Not having NZT/H&G on the first line is already an upgrade. Not sure how much farther I want to take it.

Main reason why I suggested HNG/NZT on 3rd/4th lines that alone would increase offensive production which in that case we could leave sliders where they are.