Jump to content

NJDevs '16-17 Fantasy Hockey


NJDevs4978
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, redruM said:

so you traded Rinne & Smith for Zuccarello??

 

Any chance you want to trade Patrick Kane...

Basically, yes. I mean maybe including Smith was too much, but I have 2 solid goalies anyway and needed some scoring depth. Hate to root for the Rags or any of their players, but the deal has worked out so far.

Kane is not on the block.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, NJDEVS1730 said:

Basically, yes. I mean maybe including Smith was too much, but I have 2 solid goalies anyway and needed some scoring depth. Hate to root for the Rags or any of their players, but the deal has worked out so far.

Kane is not on the block.

Replacing Bobrovsky with Elliot is clearly an upgrade - but I'd question why either of those players would be dropped by game 2 or so (with no injuries).   It's at minimum a tradeable asset you could have held on to for another forward.  At worst, drop your depth d-man or forward so you could still pick up Elliott... etc

You clearly upgraded Smith with Zuccarello; but at the cost of Rinne.  If you wanted RW talent to start- I would have just went with Phil Kessel or Blake Wheeler.   Of course, that's easy to say without the draft clock ticking.     I think looking at the draft values is still relevant given how early it is in the season.

Let's just say it was Rinne (3-29) and Smith (16-224) for Zuccarello (7-95) and Elliott (9-117)     (Bobrovsky was pick 15-207)
I think in that light the trade looks a bit better;  I make out since I didn't actually lose Elliott's value; and I regained Bob shortly thereafter.

So ultimately, we both got what we were looking for.   I got the better discount; but you shouldn't be hurting terribly  -  unless Rinne regains 2014-15 magic... which was a bit of an outlier anyway in terms of GAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aylbert said:

Replacing Bobrovsky with Elliot is clearly an upgrade - but I'd question why either of those players would be dropped by game 2 or so (with no injuries).   It's at minimum a tradeable asset you could have held on to for another forward.  At worst, drop your depth d-man or forward so you could still pick up Elliott... etc

You clearly upgraded Smith with Zuccarello; but at the cost of Rinne.  If you wanted RW talent to start- I would have just went with Phil Kessel or Blake Wheeler.   Of course, that's easy to say without the draft clock ticking.     I think looking at the draft values is still relevant given how early it is in the season.

Let's just say it was Rinne (3-29) and Smith (16-224) for Zuccarello (7-95) and Elliott (9-117)     (Bobrovsky was pick 15-207)
I think in that light the trade looks a bit better;  I make out since I didn't actually lose Elliott's value; and I regained Bob shortly thereafter.

So ultimately, we both got what we were looking for.   I got the better discount; but you shouldn't be hurting terribly  -  unless Rinne regains 2014-15 magic... which was a bit of an outlier anyway in terms of GAA.

Very well put. Yes, on paper it does look like a pretty bad trade for me, but we both filled our needs as we couldn't have gotten our current teams through the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A -19 point swing almost a month in.. if I was looking for an obvious indication of how badly my team is under performing that'd be it.

I know it's silly to write a team off this early in the season, but between Quick, Huberdeau and Little missing probably over half the season I'm kinda fvcked.

Have yet to register a goalie W, by the way.  Is it a league record to go an entire month without registering a single W?!

Edited by Devilsfan118
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Devilsfan118 said:

A -19 point swing almost a month in.. if I was looking for an obvious indication of how badly my team is under performing that'd be it.

I know it's silly to write a team off this early in the season, but between Quick, Huberdeau and Little missing probably over half the season I'm kinda fvcked.

Have yet to register a goalie W, by the way.  Is it a league record to go an entire month without registering a single W?!

You can always trade for a goalie, still early enough to save the season...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm feeling really good with Taylor Hall in the 3rd round...      I think with Zacha he will do great things and will break well past his 27g highs;  he just won't be shooting 20% forever.
Stamkos and Giroux have been pretty good too. 

I desperately need blocks though; Maata will help me out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Devilsfan118 said:

Not without creating another hole, it would seem.

Just gonna have to play with FAs until Quick gets healthy.

So the question becomes fill the hole where 1 player creates all the stats for 4 categories...

or create a small hole where 18 players account for the stats for 10 categories

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, redruM said:

So the question becomes fill the hole where 1 player creates all the stats for 4 categories...

or create a small hole where 18 players account for the stats for 10 categories

It's not an exact science. If you gain an average of five points in the four goaltending categories but lose an average of two in the ten offensive ones it's a +20/-20 wash. It's a nice balance I think where yeah one or two goalies really affect the four goaltending categories but by the same token the goaltending categories give you less than 30% of your total points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, NJDevs4978 said:

It's not an exact science. If you gain an average of five points in the four goaltending categories but lose an average of two in the ten offensive ones it's a +20/-20 wash. It's a nice balance I think where yeah one or two goalies really affect the four goaltending categories but by the same token the goaltending categories give you less than 30% of your total points.

I just think the goalie categories are much more volatile, because of the fact there are ONLY 82 games, versus 656 games, maybe I'm way off base... which is why I seem to spend a high draft pick every year on a goalie, and this year actually got a quality backup with another high pick  just in case...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, redruM said:

I just think the goalie categories are much more volatile, because of the fact there are ONLY 82 games, versus 656 games, maybe I'm way off base... which is why I seem to spend a high draft pick every year on a goalie, and this year actually got a quality backup with another high pick  just in case...

The problem is most goalies themselves are volitaile too.  It's a bit like running back in the NFL where there are only a few consistently good ones and the rest are filler/inconsistent.  Normally I pick one high other than this year which was special circumstances - having Allen as a keeper and lucking into Lundqvist insanely late.  Last year I picked Dubnyk in the third...meh.  At least I got Allen in the 12th although he wasn't a big help later on in the season when Elliott got the job back.  The previous couple years I picked Quick and Crawford early and it was fine, not super but not a disaster.

Problem with picking a goalie early is having stud forwards are pretty much essential if you want to be a good offensive team.  I wasn't big on picking defensemen early this year - partly cause I had Klingberg anyway - so I just rapped out Pavelski, Backstrom and Wheeler as my top three before finally picking a defenseman.  I was going to go forward with my fifth rounder, but Lundqvist still being there caused me to change.  I don't even know who I would have picked anyway looking back at the draft, maybe Lucic or D. Sedin?

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This just in - Moves like Jagr is on the verge of being parted out for draft picks. Offer me your first round pick next year for McDavid and see what happens.

(Sort of) Kidding aside - ho-ly sh!t what a miserable start. 

Edited by Devilsfan118
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So I think looking at goalies; we should add a second slot for them next year (or maybe a half slot- ie 120 games instead of 160).     We have a glut of goalies; while reaching for depth forwards.   It would also mix up the draft by devaluing elite goaltenders slightly; unless you double down early on goalies and give up some key forwards.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aylbert said:

So I think looking at goalies; we should add a second slot for them next year (or maybe a half slot- ie 120 games instead of 160).     We have a glut of goalies; while reaching for depth forwards.   It would also mix up the draft by devaluing elite goaltenders slightly; unless you double down early on goalies and give up some key forwards.  

There is no half slot, you're either playing 82 games or 164, or adjusting the game limit for all positions, which would take away from the 'authenticity' of playing eighteen skaters and a goalie 82 games a piece, and having the same number of starters you have in the NHL (four C/LW/RW, six D and a goalie) with the same size roster.

There was a season or two where there was two goalie slots with a 164-game limit, instead of the top goalies being overvalued it was the #2 guys getting overvalued because everyone wanted a second starting capable goalie to get an edge in the counting stats and a couple of the ones who didn't get them were just merry-go-rounding backups on the wire obsessively.  And it hardly makes sense to have a 'limit' nobody would ever hit anyway.  With 82 games you have to be a little more judicious instead of just piling up the counting stats (wins, shutouts).

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

19 hours ago, aylbert said:

So I think looking at goalies; we should add a second slot for them next year (or maybe a half slot- ie 120 games instead of 160).     We have a glut of goalies; while reaching for depth forwards.   It would also mix up the draft by devaluing elite goaltenders slightly; unless you double down early on goalies and give up some key forwards.  

A glut of goalies?

I stopped looking a week ago but I can tell you from the outside looking in there aren't many quality goalies to spare right now.  I think you guys all overvalued goaltenders in the draft and ended up with two starters each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.