|
Post by Sharky on Jul 11, 2014 16:44:12 GMT -5
Last year nobody played over 70. In the NHLs history that is not normal though. Brodeur and Kiprusoff specifically! I think the max should be 75 with increased fatigue settings. I think the days of guys playing 70-75 games are over. It's a different NHL now with more demanding schedules and travel. I'm not talking about 30 years ago. Travel really hasn't changed much in the last decade. It has probably gotten easier since the 90s. It actually got a lot better with the conference realignment. Last season Pavelec, Niemi, Lundquist, Rinne, Backstorm and Howard all were all on pace to play 70+ games (granted shortened season). The season before that Rinne, Kiprusoff and Hiller all played 70 games or more. In 2010-11 Kiprusoff, Price, and Ward all played 70 games or more. That isn't even including guys above 65 games, because there the above numbers will double to triple, depending on the season. Do I need to go on? I'd rather base this on the last 5 NHL seasons, not the last 82 games.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Jul 11, 2014 16:48:43 GMT -5
I think the max should be 75 with increased fatigue settings. I just fear what it would do to lower EN goalies who can only play 30-35 games as it is, would it cut them down to 20-25? That's rough for a team who doesn't have an elite starter and swaps out goalies. Plus adjusting the fatigue settings is almost impossible to test. I'd couldn't just run a season real quick, I'd have to sim every single day and switch out goalies for every team (as if a GM was running it) to simulate what a regular GM would down and not run goalies down to 95CD, which is what would happen if I ran a test season. If it is a big issue you could just increase the settings back to normal in the first portion of the season. I say just let those teams figure it out. Play a 58 OV goalie if they have to. In the NHL, teams without goalies usually suffer because of it. I think it should be the same way in the JGHL. This is coming from a guy who will be hurt by this change... my starter is currently Fred Andersen!
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Jul 11, 2014 17:22:55 GMT -5
I think the days of guys playing 70-75 games are over. It's a different NHL now with more demanding schedules and travel. I'm not talking about 30 years ago. Travel really hasn't changed much in the last decade. It has probably gotten easier since the 90s. It actually got a lot better with the conference realignment. Last season Pavelec, Niemi, Lundquist, Rinne, Backstorm and Howard all were all on pace to play 70+ games (granted shortened season). The season before that Rinne, Kiprusoff and Hiller all played 70 games or more. In 2010-11 Kiprusoff, Price, and Ward all played 70 games or more. That isn't even including guys above 65 games, because there the above numbers will double to triple, depending on the season. Do I need to go on? I'd rather base this on the last 5 NHL seasons, not the last 82 games. The shortened season certainly shouldn't be used as support for or against this proposal. Here's the number of goalies with more than 70 starts since the Lockout, by season: 2005-2006 - 3 2006-2007 - 4 2007-2008 - 6 2008-2009 - 4 2009-2010 - 6 2010-2011 - 3 2011-2012 - 2 2013-2014 - 0 Looks like a bit of a trend to me. Last season in the JGHL with had 14. There hasn't been one goalie in the NHL in the last 3 full season to start or play 75 games. We had 9 last year. To me lowering the EN factor further means you'll have two tired goalies half the time. Limiting the number of starts makes a lot more sense. Under Jon and Gavin's proposal, you're #1 could start 67 games and would probably enter the game in relief three or four times a season. There's your 70 games. As for Darren's point, I think we should, in the interest of realism, either set a minimum number of minutes the back-up has to play in the season (My first choice - I'm thinking 800 makes sense) or legislate minimums for hook criteria that are allowed. This might be more difficult as I'm not sure how the simulator works in this area. Either way, one would hope there's enough integrity in the group that no one would try to manipulate the system. Every once in a while guys we have to forget about personal interest and do what's right to make the league better and more realistic.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 11, 2014 17:35:15 GMT -5
legislate minimums for hook criteria that are allowed. you might have something here.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Jul 11, 2014 17:50:37 GMT -5
I'm not talking about 30 years ago. Travel really hasn't changed much in the last decade. It has probably gotten easier since the 90s. It actually got a lot better with the conference realignment. Last season Pavelec, Niemi, Lundquist, Rinne, Backstorm and Howard all were all on pace to play 70+ games (granted shortened season). The season before that Rinne, Kiprusoff and Hiller all played 70 games or more. In 2010-11 Kiprusoff, Price, and Ward all played 70 games or more. That isn't even including guys above 65 games, because there the above numbers will double to triple, depending on the season. Do I need to go on? I'd rather base this on the last 5 NHL seasons, not the last 82 games. The shortened season certainly shouldn't be used as support for or against this proposal. Here's the number of goalies with more than 70 starts since the Lockout, by season: 2005-2006 - 3 2006-2007 - 4 2007-2008 - 6 2008-2009 - 4 2009-2010 - 6 2010-2011 - 3 2011-2012 - 2 2013-2014 - 0 Looks like a bit of a trend to me. Last season in the JGHL with had 14. There hasn't been one goalie in the NHL in the last 3 full season to start or play 75 games. We had 9 last year. To me lowering the EN factor further means you'll have two tired goalies half the time. Limiting the number of starts makes a lot more sense. Under Jon and Gavin's proposal, you're #1 could start 67 games and would probably enter the game in relief three or four times a season. There's your 70 games. As for Darren's point, I think we should, in the interest of realism, either set a minimum number of minutes the back-up has to play in the season (My first choice - I'm thinking 800 makes sense) or legislate minimums for hook criteria that are allowed. This might be more difficult as I'm not sure how the simulator works in this area. Either way, one would hope there's enough integrity in the group that no one would try to manipulate the system. Every once in a while guys we have to forget about personal interest and do what's right to make the league better and more realistic. That hardly qualifies as a trend downwards. Show me 2-3 more seasons of 0-2 and I'd agree. Last year without the lockout you'd have seen 2-4 goalies hit 70 games as 6 were on pace for it. Nobody knows better than myself that the shortened season has some irregular stats (I did the ratings for it and it caused a lot of issues), but you can't just discount that 6 goalies were on pace for over 70 games, especially when the schedule was compressed to fit in 48 games in less time than usual. Plus, the NHL really hasn't changed much since the lockout. If anything, I'd expect the goalie GP to increase in the coming years with improved travel schedules. I am not against putting in a max GP. I am against making the max 65 -69 games as was suggested in this thread. It just doesn't seem like a good level based on the post-2004 lockout NHL. It should be at least 72 IMO. All post 2004 lockout seasons except for one have had goalies play 70+ games.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 11, 2014 18:03:58 GMT -5
I see Jake's point. We are forcing gm's to play what might be very inferior back-up's 15 times.
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Jul 12, 2014 8:00:00 GMT -5
I see Jake's point. We are forcing gm's to play what might be very inferior back-up's 15 times. Again that's what happens in real life, Ray. Peter Budaj started 21 times for the Habs last season.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 12, 2014 8:03:13 GMT -5
I see Jake's point. We are forcing gm's to play what might be very inferior back-up's 15 times. Again that's what happens in real life, Ray. Peter Budaj started 21 times for the Habs last season. I understand your point Joe, but we lack that human element and are stuck with a bunch of numbers that won't change all season.
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Jul 12, 2014 11:13:39 GMT -5
Again that's what happens in real life, Ray. Peter Budaj started 21 times for the Habs last season. I understand your point Joe, but we lack that human element and are stuck with a bunch of numbers that won't change all season. That's where management comes in. You plan it so you're not starting your number 2 guy against the Oilers or the Canadiens. You do what the NHL teams do. Zatkoff doesn't start a lot of games for the Penguins against the Bruins or the Rangers. He plays against Buffalo and Florida. In the JGHL, you'd play your number 2 guy against the Canucks That's why a designated number of starts and/or minutes is a better way to go than lowering the endurance ratings. With designated starts you can decide who to play your back-up against, but if you lower the EN ratings, your #1 guy could be tired when you head into that key game with Florida or Montreal.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Jul 12, 2014 13:00:15 GMT -5
The votes clearly indicate that more people are in favor of limiting starts, the question now is how? Personally I'd like to just cap the starts but Darren pointed out the loophole for pulling your goalie and I'd prefer not to lower the fatigue settings as it would have too much of an impact on non elite goalies, which is not the objective. So I really don't know what we should do
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Jul 12, 2014 13:02:43 GMT -5
We could cap starts and have a minimum number of minutes the back-up or backups must play. Say we cap it at 67 starts. 15 starts X 60 is 900, but we'd have to allow for a couple of games in which they get pulled, so how about 800 minutes as a minimum.
That eliminate the advantage of making your hook settings such that your back-up would be pulled quickly.
|
|
|
Post by LeafsGM on Jul 12, 2014 17:37:39 GMT -5
Loophole and all, it still forces everyone to start their backups for a minimum amount of games. If people start setting their backups to be pulled after 1 goal in games they start, they'd still be putting their team at a disadvantage. No one wants to start games by giving up instant goals if they have a shitty backup. I vote to go with the 67 starts max and leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Jul 12, 2014 18:34:42 GMT -5
I think at the very least we should have a gentleman's agreement among the GM's to not set their goaltender pull settings ridiculously low. To have goalies pulled six minutes into the game after giving up a goal would make a farce of the new rule. That's why I suggested a minimum number of minutes for the back-up.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Jul 12, 2014 19:24:56 GMT -5
Just put in a 3 goal limit for the backup and cap the number of games (at a realistic 70-75 number!).
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Jul 12, 2014 22:43:05 GMT -5
Just put in a 3 goal limit for the backup and cap the number of games (at a realistic 70-75 number!). 70 should be number, 1/3 of teams did 75 or more......backups should plat at least 12. Yes might be easy for me but I may move one of my guys, possibly!
|
|