Buds Board Keepers League

i dont see why this necessary at all tbh.

there are so many other ways bbkl doesn't mirror exactly how you would build an NHL team, so why take such issue with this one. if moderately paid all round defenseman help you more than a high paid offensive guy, then fucking get those guys - the smart GM's already figured this out long ago.

i own doughty because i like drew doughty. i couldn't give less of a shit about changing categories we've used successfully for 4 years just to improve his value moderately.

this just seems like such an insignificant thing to be taking issue with. i think it's cool how certain types of players have evolved into having more value in bbkl then they would in the NHL - it's unique and those GM's who are smart enough to notice it first have benefited.

now we're going to change it why?...just because? it's summer and we're bored?

1. Truth be told Shiv, I don't need you responding to anything I write on here.
2. I said Karlsson's value is elite like it should be. If you want to build a team of Cowens and Hamonics on the backend you are going to have to make up for the lack of offense by stacking your forwards.
3.I never missed any point about there being a discussion, don't assume things.
4. I don't want to be in the CC.

anton wroteCOLONi dont see why this necessary at all tbh.

there are so many other ways bbkl doesn't mirror exactly how you would build an NHL team, so why take such issue with this one. if moderately paid all round defenseman help you more than a high paid offensive guy, then fucking get those guys - the smart GM's already figured this out long ago.

i own doughty because i like drew doughty. i couldn't give less of a shit about changing categories we've used successfully for 4 years just to improve his value moderately.

this just seems like such an insignificant thing to be taking issue with. i think it's cool how certain types of players have evolved into having more value in bbkl then they would in the NHL - it's unique and those GM's who are smart enough to notice it first have benefited.

now we're going to change it why?...just because? it's summer and we're bored?

Well said Anton and I completely agree with you 100%.

Adding a 17th category could lead to less ties, which IMO would be a good thing.

Then lets add a category that isn't only having an affect on a very small amount of players.

Why not add ES points?

anton wroteCOLONthis just seems like such an insignificant thing to be taking issue with. i think it's cool how certain types of players have evolved into having more value in bbkl then they would in the NHL - it's unique and those GM's who are smart enough to notice it first have benefited.

This was the same reasoning given against changing our policy on Centers. "GMs who targetted wingers who get 800 FOW should be allowed to keep them". But two seasons later, our league has improved a lot because of it.

SuperMario wroteCOLON

anton wroteCOLONthis just seems like such an insignificant thing to be taking issue with. i think it's cool how certain types of players have evolved into having more value in bbkl then they would in the NHL - it's unique and those GM's who are smart enough to notice it first have benefited.

This was the same reasoning given against changing our policy on Centers. "GMs who targetted wingers who get 800 FOW should be allowed to keep them". But two seasons later, our league has improved a lot because of it.

that was a loophole.

This isn't.

Guys, stop calling each other idiots. Doesn't help a discussion at all.

Secondly, we're not talking about any changes for this season. Notice is needed, 6 weeks is not notice. This isn't a loop-hole or mistake, this is a value adjustment conversaiton.

I struggle with adding more value to guys like Karlsson, Weber, Doughty, Letang, etc who are already worth their approproate value in the BBKL. Perhaps not by ALL GMS, but I know what I have traded for their likes, and what I've traded them for. I'll say it again, a lot of the current 'decreased value' is a one-year symptom of the cap pinch. Different sets of catgeories and types of players are of course valued differently by varios GMs, that's evident in each trade discusison we have, and the GMs telling other guys that their wrong isn't good for the league - having different values is how a trade takes place, I've said it 100x. No GM should be making trades that they do not believe moves their team forward. Whatever the reasoning that is 'forward'.

Campbell has great impact on his BBKL team just like he does on a real NHL team, does he fit on a cap-tight contender? Nope... just like in the NHL.

Dan Boyle is a great dman in both the BBKL & the NHL, however he's difficult to trade in either due to his cap - once again, accurate in the NHL, reflected in the BBKL.

Shea Weber ? Yep he's great and a welcome addition on any team, requires a cap decision -> EXACTLY like in the NHL.

Hell it's not different than the decisions the Hawks, Bruins, Canucks, etc have had to make. Fitting players into the cap is always a weighing of pros and cons.


Do I agree that SO is a rarely used stat, and +/- is an inaccurate measure? yes on both.

I am more open to removing those categories, than I am to adding DefPoints -> I'm 100% opposed to a new catgeory that doesnt' represent all (skater) positions. It's a real shift in value (and one that benefits me at that).

TOI is a fairer measure, that adds tons of value to top pairing dmen, it removes value from bottom pairing goons at all positions, however will be primiarly deteremined by GP (which is bad) and likely by Goalie GP as well.

For these reasons (and others thoughts that are smaller reasons) I am opposed to adding DEFpoints, and do not believe TOI would be as effective as we would like.

I believe the constant arguement for +/- is that anyone can win it any week, which reflects some randomness that is hockey - and for that reason I think it should be kept.

SO I could leave or take -> would be a great tie-breaker for playoffs IMO.


Even Strength points is a very interesting catgeory IMO. It's a rather different lsit from STPTS/pts.

SO is an overblown stat in the fantasy world.

In the NHL it's merely a self-serving goalie stat, unless thus team wins 1-0. That's the only time i see a SO having any importance.

I think the salary issue is being blown way out of proportion. We are in a weird transition due to the lockout and new CBA. Salaries are going up and so is the cap. The discussion will not be a prevalent next year. the cap crunch is skewing some views, imo.

isn't the cap locked in for 2 years - in the new CBA?

then they expect it to take a huge jump in year 3?

The KHL and Europe is luring away (some) mid range players ( Wellwood ) , opening more spots for rookies on cheap ELCs.

I've looked at even strength points... can we move on from that? It yet again helps forwards more then D and would only widen the gap of value.

Nick I think you over estimate the impact def would have lol. forwards smash point categories and because there are so many of them, the only way to make them even, a d vs f, would be a category for dmen alone. There are tons of sites dedicated to these arguments with numbers to show their impact. Yes it would make an impact but it isn't a game changing amount like you believe.

I don't love TOI but it is a far greater measure of who matters to a team then SO. It definitely wouldn't fix everything but at least it would be a start.

I do agree we need to drop the emotion here and to help with that, I challenge everyone to do their homework here. There are many sites available with a simple google search that will show you both opinion and mathematical rational behind why stats are good and bad. There are other options than DEF as well, I just keep circling back as that is the only one stat that makes the gap close. The rest require two or three moves which would be dumb.

like I said at the beginning, I am fine with staying status quo if that is what everyone wants. This isn't a boredom thing. Being bored might have contributed in me looking up the stats so in depth for my money/friends league, but i'll say it again, it was because after reviewing the scoring system, I found a flaw in ours. That is why I made the suggestion.

shooker wroteCOLON
like I said at the beginning, I am fine with staying status quo if that is what everyone wants. This isn't a boredom thing. Being bored might have contributed in me looking up the stats so in depth for my money/friends league, but i'll say it again, it was because after reviewing the scoring system, I found a flaw in ours. That is why I made the suggestion.

you viewing it as a flaw is the problem here, it's not a flaw - it's simply a quality of our league. i don't see a purpose in trying to mirror or copy-cat the NHL is every single regard - especially when it comes to changing our scoring system. part of the bbkl gm experience is trying to figure out what sort of team it takes to win in this league.

no GM in their right mind would build a team like Tony's in real life - but here he's competitive and regularly steals cats from top teams every week - it's a unique strategy and it's cool to see.

anton wroteCOLON

shooker wroteCOLON
like I said at the beginning, I am fine with staying status quo if that is what everyone wants. This isn't a boredom thing. Being bored might have contributed in me looking up the stats so in depth for my money/friends league, but i'll say it again, it was because after reviewing the scoring system, I found a flaw in ours. That is why I made the suggestion.

you viewing it as a flaw is the problem here, it's not a flaw - it's simply a quality of our league. i don't see a purpose in trying to mirror or copy-cat the NHL is every single regard - especially when it comes to changing our scoring system. part of the bbkl gm experience is trying to figure out what sort of team it takes to win in this league.

no GM in their right mind would build a team like Tony's in real life - but here he's competitive and regularly steals cats from top teams every week - it's a unique strategy and it's cool to see.

this wouldn't take away from that at all. All it would actually do is allow another method in which to build a team.

so its changing something for the sake of changing something

Ye, I don't believe the 'balanced league' had any numbers at all behind how they compressed their categories to determine who the top 20 were. It was hardly a perfect list though... With 16 categories are values will be different from any comparison.

We have 13 skater categories, Hits, Blocked Shots & Shtoi are clearly D dominated (3). G, A, Pts,SOG are forward dominated (4), FO centre only.

Even though STPTS is forward dominated, there are dmen in the top 30 -> Markov iirc top 5, Campbell,Timmonen, Phaneuf and others in the top 30.

PIMS, +/- no bias either way.

That's a nice split of categories. Especially given that there are more top dmen who make a large impact in a spread of categories than there are forwards (ie -> no forwards had 100bs, 100hits, with good scoring, whereas lots of dmen do, some even add insane shtoi).


Adding a category that only one position group of players can contritbute to will severly shift value. I can confidently say that from a statistical standpoint.

It's actually not THAT hard of math to make a single value to rank all players with. Standardize each category, sum across all catgeories & average over the 16. If someone wants to undertake that, we can get into a real conversation of who is having impact, who is valued, and who's value are we missing. But until that's done, this is an inaccurate converstion of unfounded speculaiton.

DefPoints might find more value for Campbell & Boyle, but it adds value to Karlsson, Weber, Phaneuf, Green, Keith, Letang -> who already have top end impact in the BBKL. And have been traded/acquired at prices which should be expected.

Need to clearly state what the percieved flaw is, reach consenus on that front. Than we can switch to a solution.

I do not believe there is a value gap from the best Dmen to the best fowards (Crosby, Stamkos, Ovy & Malkin exmpt, hyper-stars), to the best dmen. However I do believe there could be an arguement made that there is an over-impact of extreme category 3rd liners (F&D) who make it seem like their impact is cloer to the stars. Categories like Even Strength points, and toi close that gap (IMO).


Now, looking away from the top liners whom I believe we have valued rather welll. It's some bottom end guys, when cap is considered, that have a BBKL impact out of line with their NHL impact.

Matt Martin, Nik Grossman, etc. because in the BBKL they DOMINATE a category, one per team NBD, but 2-3 and suddenly the 55 blocked shots from forwards who are rounded, makes little impact with the 200+ blocked shots.


I just tried to make an example where a 50 pt high cap dman is not worth his value, (Campbell), however he clearly is. Huge Stpts, high Pts, Assists - no he doesn't have trade value, but yes he is making a big impact.

I am not talking about that site I showed you. I only showed you that to show you some reasons behind it. There are plenty of sites that will say what I am trying to say, Im done with this all lol.

balanced league also only had 11 stats, it is totally different then our league as it misses certain stats we have. even with def, we still wouldn't have 9 dmen in our top 25 like there is in the balanced league.

I'd wager in a 'net' impact measure, disregarding cap, we have several dmen in our top 25. Because magnitude of impact in a categorory would be considered (which it should be). DD, Weber, JJ, Phaneuf, Kronwall, Beau, would rank very well.


We would have zero goalies because 12 categories w/o impact would bring their scores way down.