Future in-week injury subs regulation

[kyuss]

As if Mik didn't need any more bad luck... datsyuk out for 2 games at least with LBI.

I'm just glad this should be the last year where some teams' seasons get wasted because of in-week injuries during our playoffs, where GMs can't sub the injured players even if they have the depth to do it.

Fantrax allows us to find a viable solution, unlike CBS.

[Matthew]

would subbing be allowed for players with just day to day injuries, or would it have to be long term?

[The BBKL Insider]

oh look, a rule that benefits me.

"hey guys, Brian Little is back and has 3 games left, i'd like to sub him in for Brock Nelson who has 1 game left"

#profit

[Matthew]

oh look, a rule that benefits me.

"hey guys, Brian Little is back and has 3 games left, i'd like to sub him in for Brock Nelson who has 1 game left"

#profit

I was thinking that could start happening too. Or a guy could use 1 player for his Periphs at the start of the week, and then another for offensive stats at the end of the week if he is behind in that area.

[The BBKL Insider]

oh look, a rule that benefits me.

"hey guys, Brian Little is back and has 3 games left, i'd like to sub him in for Brock Nelson who has 1 game left"

#profit

I was thinking that could start happening too. Or a guy could use 1 player for his Periphs at the start of the week, and then another for offensive stats at the end of the week if he is behind in that area.

yup, gonna be some serious issues with this rule.

[kyuss]

would subbing be allowed for players with just day to day injuries, or would it have to be long term?

everything has yet to be discussed.. that's just one of the things up for discussion.
You already mentioned some other issues.
Things will need to be regulated obviously.

For example, you could ask GMs to name their potential subs for each position before the week starts..

You could allow to put in subs only for a number of games equal to the ones missed by the starter (we can decide the date on Fantrax)..

As for the DTD, personally I think that shouldn't be a discriminating factor, cause we are talking single weeks here, a DTD missing a couple of games might mean missing all his games in the week..

[Handsome&FairMike]

oh look, a rule that benefits me.

"hey guys, Brian Little is back and has 3 games left, i'd like to sub him in for Brock Nelson who has 1 game left"

#profit

I was thinking that could start happening too. Or a guy could use 1 player for his Periphs at the start of the week, and then another for offensive stats at the end of the week if he is behind in that area.

yup, gonna be some serious issues with this rule.

Agreed - especially with the disparity in the league... Not to punish those who have dominated over the years and built up a great system, but for those teams who can barely roster a full team, introducing a rule like this at this stage I don't think is going to fly... unless its for very specific reasons with specific stipulations (i.e. guy gets injured on Mon-Wed and isn't going to return for the rest of the week). Otherwise, if you're going to be able to sub bodies, might as well go to a nightly roster... I'm not a fan of that though.

Like it as it is... build depth in case of injuries or use that depth to trade multiple bodies for stud players. Be on top of your players, so you know if they might come back. If they get injured thats bad luck (not like everyone else hasn't had that happen at some point of the year).

[Matthew]

^I think it's just during the playoffs, no? Disparity wouldnt be as big of an issue.

[CAM]

oh....the old emergency injury callups during playoffs chat. Hope it gets approved some year.

[kyuss]

oh look, a rule that benefits me.

"hey guys, Brian Little is back and has 3 games left, i'd like to sub him in for Brock Nelson who has 1 game left"

#profit

I was thinking that could start happening too. Or a guy could use 1 player for his Periphs at the start of the week, and then another for offensive stats at the end of the week if he is behind in that area.

yup, gonna be some serious issues with this rule.

Agreed - especially with the disparity in the league... Not to punish those who have dominated over the years and built up a great system, but for those teams who can barely roster a full team, introducing a rule like this at this stage I don't think is going to fly... unless its for very specific reasons with specific stipulations

aren't documented injuries a specific reason?

Like it as it is... build depth in case of injuries

..and do not be allowed to use it when injuries happen.

Be on top of your players, so you know if they might come back. If they get injured thats bad luck (not like everyone else hasn't had that happen at some point of the year).

it's like if you had a NHL team entering a playoff series, getting decimated by injuries in the first game..and that team would not be allowed to dress replacements in the rest of the series, because, hey, it's bad luck, deal with it, who cares if you would have had adept subs available.
How ridiculous would that be... well, that's how it is in BBKL.

It's been this way till this year cause on CBS there wasn't a clean way to make it work otherwise. Since it seems to be different with Fantrax, it would be a major disappointment not to take care of an obvious flaw that often becomes the difference maker in the outcome of the whole season.

Oh, and it's not like the team hit by injuries wouldn't still feel the effects:
starters and replacements are often of different levels.. think about replacing a Datsyuk with a 4th liner...

I don't understand why a team already hit by bad luck shouldn't be allowed to at least try to minimize its negative effects by using its depth, if it has any.

[kimmer]

so guys, what do u think about kyuss' long-winded response to this?

[Matthew]

it's like if you had a NHL team entering a playoff series, getting decimated by injuries in the first game..and that team would not be allowed to dress replacements in the rest of the series, because, hey, it's bad luck, deal with it, who cares if you would have had adept subs available.
How ridiculous would that be... well, that's how it is in BBKL.

It's been this way till this year cause on CBS there wasn't a clean way to make it work otherwise. Since it seems to be different with Fantrax, it would be a major disappointment not to take care of an obvious flaw that often becomes the difference maker in the outcome of the whole season.

Oh, and it's not like the team hit by injuries wouldn't still feel the effects:
starters and replacements are often of different levels.. think about replacing a Datsyuk with a 4th liner...

I don't understand why a team already hit by bad luck shouldn't be allowed to at least try to minimize its negative effects by using its depth, if it has any.

The issue is that this is not the NHL. We can't call up our own minor leaguers and put them into a game unless an NHL team has done so. Therefor bbkl teams that have built rosters deep in active nhlers as opposed to teams deep in non active NHL prospects will have a distinct advantage.

If a change such as this is to be instated it should be done slowly to give teams time to adapt. For example, letting teams know that this change will be instated 2 seasons from now, so less deep teams have the time to create nhl depth. A change may also need to be made to waivers is this change went through so teams couldn't keep 15 NHL players in their minor leagues and thus meaning other teams can never acquire depth.

Also, not everyone wants to check their lineups everyday during the season.

Note: it doesn't matter to me either way if there are injury Callups. I do think it would have to be an add that takes times and has a lot of rules to make it work, such as what Steve pointed out.

[Fraser]

Overall I agree with what Mik is saying, but ultimately I do think we would need to adapt waivers if we made changes. As its too easy to bury NHLers and have a large reserve creating too much of an advantage under new potential injury replacement rules.

[The BBKL Insider]

We actually have quite a strick waiver rule.

[Fraser]

Personally I'm fine with the way things are. And I see no issue with the current GP restrictions, but I could see the argument for dropping the age.

[Matthew]

We actually have quite a strick waiver rule.

There were star NHL players buried in teams minor league systems this year while some teams couldn't even get crappy nhlers to fill games played.

Tyler Johnson/yakupov/Seth jones/kuznetsov

If a player has played over 120 games, and a gm wants, they can keep him buried in the minors his entire career without calling him up - seems silly. There should be a fail safe to make sure NHL waiver eligible players don't get buried, IMO. Probably a fail safe over hording starting goalies too if there is games played (I hoarded 2 this year).

Anyways, I'll shut up now.

[Lee]

If a player has played over 120 games, and a gm wants, they can keep him buried in the minors his entire career without calling him up - seems silly. There should be a fail safe to make sure NHL waiver eligible players don't get buried, IMO. Probably a fail safe over hording starting goalies too if there is games played (I hoarded 2 this year).

Not true, would have to clear waivers the following season.

[Matthew]

If a player has played over 120 games, and a gm wants, they can keep him buried in the minors his entire career without calling him up - seems silly. There should be a fail safe to make sure NHL waiver eligible players don't get buried, IMO. Probably a fail safe over hording starting goalies too if there is games played (I hoarded 2 this year).

Not true, would have to clear waivers the following season.

Yeah? So once a player goes over 120 and you've never played him on your roster he still needs to go through waivers at the beginning of tge year to stay in your minors? Thanks. I didn't know. Now I feel dumb.

[Fraser]

^ I didn't know that either.

[kyuss]

If a player has played over 120 games, and a gm wants, they can keep him buried in the minors his entire career without calling him up - seems silly. There should be a fail safe to make sure NHL waiver eligible players don't get buried, IMO. Probably a fail safe over hording starting goalies too if there is games played (I hoarded 2 this year).

Not true, would have to clear waivers the following season.

Yeah? So once a player goes over 120 and you've never played him on your roster he still needs to go through waivers at the beginning of tge year to stay in your minors? Thanks. I didn't know. Now I feel dumb.

yeah, obviously you can't keep players over 120 GP in the minors without going through waivers at roster submission.

Now I understand a little better all these arguments about hoarding players.

There were star NHL players buried in teams minor league systems this year while some teams couldn't even get crappy nhlers to fill games played.

Tyler Johnson/yakupov/Seth jones/kuznetsov

btw, it's not like those players are owned by chance, or were gifted to those teams.

You mention Kuznetsov, and it's a fitting example.

To have him, I had to pay and then wait *4 YEARS* to have any benefits:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2819

to save you some time, here are some comments from back then:

I don't know what Scott offered but from the return Mik got here I can guarantee Scott's offer was better. Both Topher and Shep did amazing in this trade. Mik lost big imo.

it's as if tony and shep were chattin it up, ready to post a nice 2 team deal and was just like...might as well milk mik while we're at it.