Buds Board Keepers League

maybe Karlsson is out of the top 50 because he only played 17 games?

anyway, frankly i don't even get the 6 D in the top 50 argument:
all the bbkl teams are forced to dress at least 6 D, so it's not like you can choose to dress a forward instead. If that was the case i would get this argument where top D's get compared to F's, but here, if anything i think the top defensemen's bbkl-relevancy should be measured by comparing their efficiency to the one of the average defenseman.

Keep forgetting we arent using 11-12. I suggested we use them as 82 games is a better measure than 48. Have to remind myself every time now lol.

It is an issue because if dmen arent as effective as forwards, it makes high price dmen (5m+) a waste of cap. Most 5+ m dmen are franchise players in real life but here they are (exceptipn of a few) actually a negative asset. They dont impact a match up enough to justify a team going for a suter over a kevin klein. Why would you play suter 7m when he doesnt even impact bbkl scoring as much as frans neilson?

That in a nutshell has been what these past 14 pages were about.

I'm just going to say in advance, before countering that argument, just flip back a couple pages. Every issue has been brought up and discussed. Both sides of the argument are clearly there to see, I just don't have the energy to continue this. I've stated my arguments way too may times in the last two days lol..

This really is my last post on the topic.

shooker wroteCOLON It is an issue because if dmen arent as effective as forwards, it makes high price dmen (5m+) a waste of cap.

nope, if anything comparison should be between effectiveness of high price dmen and of lower paid D's.

Most 5+ m dmen are franchise players in real life but here they are (exceptipn of a few) actually a negative asset.

negative asset now? lol, stretching it a little bit eh? and the cap will be low only this season.

They dont impact a match up enough to justify a team going for a suter over a kevin klein.

now if you're comparing to Klein, that might be a valid point.

Not that i would be in favour of 'fixing' it* if it would mean adding a crappy stat like PPTOI.

*It's not like when people acquired Suter they didn't know the rules and couldn't know its bbkl value already..

figures mik would play devils adocate after progress

shooker wroteCOLON

Nick wroteCOLONembarrassing.

how lol? This has turned into a three person conversation, every point has been made imo and we keep going in circles. We have established dmen are undervalued, we found the best stat out there to fix it, so now it is just a matter of does the CC think we need to. I personally think its obvious but others disagree. What I set out to do, happened. I am content knowing the conversation has been started, now it is time to go to the CC. I don't know how many times today I have said," but there are only 6 defensemen in the top 50, that is wrong". This isn't us giving up, this is us saying, we have said all there is to say, if people haven't changed their minds they never will. I don't think it is a negative thing at all that we don't want to drag this out, but rather a good thing. Far from embarrassing imo.

+1. If the last 15 pages are not enough to prompt a discussion in the CC, then I don't know what will be. I have other more positive things I can invest my energy towards today than writing 10 more posts arguing with Nick/others when I've made the same points before. And I think I've given enough energy to this thread with the interest of the league at heart. Ball is in the CC's court.

bills09 wroteCOLONfigures mik would play devils adocate after progress

progress is still being made IMO

So the 2011-2-12 data wouldn't be interesting to people?

The impact of random stats on the rank is pretty huge, by removing them it already showed a more desirable ranking (which is, as you said it yourself, how you value a player).


Just because the two of you (and other GMs) value players in a certain manner, doesn't make others evaluations of player value incorrect.

Just seems childish to say that you've made up your mind, because of length of conversation, when some of us are actually looking deeper into it. The stats are new, another season's data would be telling on many fronts, perhaps over a longer season some differences in how the players rack up # are magnified, or the shorter season created some odd rankins that we're basing decisions on... We should want as much info as possible before coming to a decision. Especially in regards to changing player value going into season 5? (6?) of the keeper league, needs ot be a very well justified value change.

not childish at all. it is just time for it to become a cc matter. We aren't the only ones who have made up our minds and are not going to change them, all that care have. We don't get a vote anyways and I don't see a discussion here changing anyone else's opinion. you had two pages of stats and how many people other than shiv and I commented on them. again, time for the CC to discuss this as when it comes down to it, shiv and my opinion's don't really make a difference.

Any stat change would need mass league approval, not going to be a decision made entirely in the CC, suggesting that is fear-mongering.

Nick - the point here is that in our opinion Step 1 is complete. That is:

Step 1 - Bring up an issue and establish it as legitimate enough for the CC to discuss it

Now it is time for the other steps to being instead of us going in circles here. Those being:

Step 2 - CC discusses both sides of the issue and addresses whether or not such a change should be implemented.
Step 3 - CC has a vote to determine whether the change should be pushed through to a general, league-wide vote.
Step 4 - The League votes on the change.

I have no interest in being stuck at Step 1 if it will never get us to Step 2. If you need my input for discussion in the CC, I will be happy to.

But many of the arguments on both sides been made already. And it would help if the CC spent time going through all the posts in this thread when having their discussion.

SuperMario wroteCOLONNick - the point here is that in our opinion Step 1 is complete. That is:

Step 1 - Bring up an issue and establish it as legitimate enough for the CC to discuss it

Now it is time for the other steps to being instead of us going in circles here. Those being:

Step 2 - CC discusses both sides of the issue and addresses whether or not such a change should be implemented.
Step 3 - CC has a vote to determine whether the change should be pushed through to a general, league-wide vote.
Step 4 - The League votes on the change.

I have no interest in being stuck at Step 1 if it will never get us to Step 2. If you need my input for discussion in the CC, I will be happy to.

But many of the arguments on both sides been made already. And it would help if the CC spent time going through all the posts in this thread when having their discussion.

thanks shiv, you are better at putting things into words then I am. That's exactly the sentiment I share.

The CC has discussed, and it will be reviewed mid-season when we can compare the impact of PPTOI for dmen.

At which point it will be voted upon.

while we're at it jordan eberle makes 6 million and only really hits 4 categories.

i propose we add a new category: "toe drags completed" to better simulate his value as a player.

We'd have to add the Jason Blake Shots to the Chest stat as well.

Dion misses net and hits boards cat, while we're at it