Farm Team Additions: Yes or No

[Steve]

Hey Everybody:

There has been a few GMs that have asked me whether or not we should add additional players to our farm teams.

Some believe that 16 is plenty large enough for the farm team. If we stick with the status quo, this just makes sure that some GMs don't hoard good prospects and it forces them to make a decision.

Other GMs want to add to the farm. They believe that most farm players haven't really had a chance to develop yet, hence a large farm is desirable.

Majority will rule. If no is the decision, we can look at it again next year.

If yes is the decision, we may have to conduct a 2nd vote to decide how many should be added.

[Deleted]

Yes.

Sent from my Nexus S using proboards

[Deleted]

No 16 is more then enough, most team I look at (including my own) have plenty of "prospects" who will never impact this league or the real NHL on them.

[phillycrunchgm]

Remember if there are zero adds you'll be dropping to fill from the draft boys

[jcuozzo]

I think if we add we need to subtract from fa moves so we have less prospects and more of a farm team to shuffle.

[Moose]

I voted to add 3. My reasoning is i don't want to lose any of my current prospects when i add during the entry draft.

[Stu]

no. 16 in the farm is good with me

[Ryan]

I didn`t expect this to be a vote since in the Rules it says:

``The Farm team size will expand to 20 players over the next 2 seasons``

Since I was under that impression from day 1, I built my farm through trades and FA pickups to maximize NHL players that are farm eligible so I could call players up daily and maximize my roster starts, every day.

I voted to add 3, since that`s what I thought was happening over the next two seasons as we move to 20 (in the original Rules as well). If we are sticking at 16, my picks are OTB as I won`t be drafting.

[Steve]

Ryan, I don't know what to tell you other than sorry, I guess I really messed up here. Talk about embarrassing , as I should have checked the rules first.

I know part of it is I want you guys to have a decision in what we do, so pretty much any rule can be changed or expanded on as you guys seem fit.

I still expect the yes votes to carry the day though... hopefully some of the other GMs will come on the site and vote soon.

[Deleted]

Apr 9, 2013 16:21:57 GMT -5 Ryan said:

Since I was under that impression from day 1, I built my farm through trades and FA pickups to maximize NHL players that are farm eligible so I could call players up daily and maximize my roster starts, every day.

I know I am probably in the minority here, but I hate the fact that this type of thing is even aloud. IMO there should be a limit of call ups/downs per week to something like 3 or less.

Or some sort of condition where players being called up sent down are able to be picked up ala waivers.

[Ryan]

Steve, no need to be sorry OR embarrassed, lol. I noticed that everyone else explained why they voted and I thought I would explain my reasoning too! This wasn't a jab at anyone whatsoever!!

Anthony, it's a strategy that's just as available for you to use as well! Many did this throughout the season and there's no reason you can't as well so it's still a level playing field. All depends on how you want to run your team.

[Deleted]

Apr 10, 2013 14:06:12 GMT -5 Ryan said:

Anthony, it's a strategy that's just as available for you to use as well! Many did this throughout the season and there's no reason you can't as well so it's still a level playing field. All depends on how you want to run your team.

I understand that it is a strategy, and if it is not changed then next year I will be doing the same as others who have already been doing. It is just my opinion that it shouldn't be an option. To me it evens the playing field between the GM's who have put together a solid team with solid players and teams who don't have good players but utilize twice as many GP's to stay competitive. Which I am personally against.

Having said that like I said above, if its not changed I plan on doing the same and have already started adjusting my team to that "strategy"

[Moose]

I think this has been discussed before but I also think a weekly maximum transactions of call ups and/or free agent pick ups would improve this league. I hate streaming players.

[Steve]

Well to be honest, I'm not a huge fan of streaming either; however, this is what we did in the IFHL and this is what we brought over to the GMHL. There was talk of changing this in the old league, but I believe the consensus was to keep it.

That being said, since it is part of the rules, then as a GM that is dedicated to trying to win it all, it is definitely a strategy that I'll employ faithfully.

Trust me when I say it is a major pain to adjust the master lists here and on Yahoo each day, but it is what it is.

As I've said many times before, if there is something you don't like, and some of you don't like so many roster moves, we can always change these rules to reflect what the majority want.

Another possible option to limiting moves is enforcing a time limit that a player has to stay on your Pro team if he is called up. In a couple of leagues I'm in, you have to keep your player on your Pro team for 48 hours as of the time stamp of the transaction on Yahoo. Another couple of leagues have a 72 hour time limit.

All of these leagues have a clause whereby an injured player can be immediately replaced without waiting for the time requirement to expire.

I can honestly say that I prefer the 48 hour time limit myself as it allows you to make line up changes without massive changes every day, it actually requires some strategizing by a GM prior to making the move, and although it is somewhat restrictive, it does seem to work a lot better than the 72 hour clock does.

If anyone wants to put in a proposal or have me conduct a poll, then send me a PM or an e-mail stating what you would like to see.

[jcuozzo]

I 200% agree. I hate the streaming and would prefer weekly as well.

[Moose]

I think adding more rules that are outside of yahoo's settings is a bad idea. I consider myself a pretty aware GM but I must admit all these rules are confusing. It seems so easy to simply adjust the yahoo league settings to (let's say) 5 transactions per week.

Sorry....this streaming topic always gets me worked up.

Streaming is bullshit!!! Pass it on. Lol

[Deleted]

I am surprised yet happy that others seem to be in agreement with me on this. I like the idea of limiting transactions (call ups/downs) to 5 per week. I not sure how the yahoo system works but I would say trades should NOT count against the transactions.

Do I have a 2nd on the above to bring to a vote?

[Ryan]

What would then be the point of even having a farm team? If we are thinking about putting all these restrictions on when/how we use players on the farm team, would the point then be to draft players, store them and HOPE they work out after 2-3 years?

If GMs don't like using or "streaming" players on their farm team then why have a farm team? Can someone please tell me how a farm team is useful (or purposeful) if we are restricting its use?

If you want changes, let's get rid of farm teams.

[Steve]

Apr 11, 2013 5:05:31 GMT -5 Ryan said:

What would then be the point of even having a farm team? If we are thinking about putting all these restrictions on when/how we use players on the farm team, would the point then be to draft players, store them and HOPE they work out after 2-3 years?

If GMs don't like using or "streaming" players on their farm team then why have a farm team? Can someone please tell me how a farm team is useful (or purposeful) if we are restricting its use?

If you want changes, let's get rid of farm teams.

To me, farm teams are about drafting and waiting for potential to develop in the players that you acquire. It is only a handful of players at the most that jump to the NHL from Juniors, so you need somewhere for Granlund, Scheifele, Lehner and other potential stars to develop without having to use a roster spot on these guys.

If we limit the amount of moves in a week, you still have the opportunity to use your farm, but you can't just stream your players in and out of the lineup as an extension of your bench, which is what some of us, like me, are doing.

In the real world, teams don't stream their players from their AHL affliates. They call up players initially as a short term fix for injuries or as a reward for good play on the farm. Most don't stick more than a few games, so to me, this is what we should ideally try to emulate.

Like I said before, I can go with either choice as I have some pretty decent farm eligible players that fit perfectly into a streaming scenario.

We'll put it to a vote and go to a collective decision. I'd like this first vote to run its course first though.

[Steve]

Apr 10, 2013 20:55:53 GMT -5 @basalt13 said:

I am surprised yet happy that others seem to be in agreement with me on this. I like the idea of limiting transactions (call ups/downs) to 5 per week. I not sure how the yahoo system works but I would say trades should NOT count against the transactions.

Do I have a 2nd on the above to bring to a vote?

Yahoo does not count trades against a weekly transaction limit. It also doesn't count drops. It only counts additions to your team. If we do decide to limit the transactions, I'd probably want to institute something like replacement of players that go on IR as not counting against your weekly count as well, but at this stage, it is only a passing thought.

[phillycrunchgm]

I employ the streaming strategy because it allows for use of the farm. If the thought is to have a farm where we wait 2-4 years for development then I agree, dump the farms. The streaming causes GM to actually be more active because it isn't a set it and forget it approach.

I'm in one that has a 48 hour rule and that works well as Steve mentioned.

I'm also in another that has a 21 man active (4rw, 4c, 4lw, 6d, 1u, 2g) roster with 9 on the bench and up to 5 IR slots with a 7 move add/drop weekly. However because of the 30 men up you can utilize the farm or vets if you chose; it also has a farm of 6 players that is really for the draft picks and once you pull a guy up from there he stays on the 30 man list or gets dropped and is a Free Agent after that. It also allows for dropping, trading, and changing those young pups as you see fit. The nice part about that is its less work for the "Steve" and allows for farm while locking in guys if you pull them up.

Just a couple other ideas on roster size and usage.

[phillycrunchgm]

So, 7 people want to add at least 1 spot and 6 people want to not add any.

So do we add 1/2 of a player...like Gerbe or someone else under 5' 7"...lol

[Deleted]

We each get an Oompa Loompa I guess.

Sent from my Nexus S using proboards

[phillycrunchgm]

yo, I'm 5'7" with skates and helmet and only 3'5" wide...lol

[Deleted]

Thought I would throw my 02 cents into the discussion of farm teams and streaming.

I too agree on streaming. Its a pain in the ass for roster managment. I would also agree we should place a maximum of 5 rosters moves per week, maybe even less. Maybe we can increase the bench size, as the Yahoo Roster limit is 30, so maybe have a 30 man roster, and no IR postions. The deep benches should alleivate the need for streaming.

I am awaiting the BIG announcement tomorrow...