Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2011 17:02:12 GMT -5
Hi guys, I've done a funny exercise about our pool. I've crunch $Cap data from NHLnumbers by players and applied them to our teams...hummmmm...interesting. You could see the results in the attachment. Data are from today. You could see the team ranks from top to bottom in pts, with the sum of cap numbers corresponding with their players ( REGular roster, FARM team and what I've considered significant INJured players). A total cap is also added. You could see the numbers of players in each of these groups and the name of players I've considered injured. You could see there is a strong correlation between PTS and $CAP (data in blue) - good mentions to A Team as he is in the leading group despite a cap under $100M, and to Kozzie as the cheapest team without being at the bottom of the rankings! The first years of the pool there was a lot of major trades and now there is a strong concentration of the better players in, roughly, half of the teams - we see this with the cap numbers. Now, there is not so much trade because bottom teams didn't have a lot to give if they want to get out of the hole, and top team didn't have any reason to part with their top players! So I'm just asking...do we need a Cap to make the teams closer? P.S. : Maybe I will add a study about the prospects, as the bottom teams are supposed to be, generally, better staffed in this kind of players. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by mutumbo on Feb 3, 2011 18:23:41 GMT -5
I'm definitely interested to look at this when I'm not at work. But as far as NEEDING a salary cap to improve... All I can do is point to where this team was when Yabud was running it... Which was right near the bottom of the barrel. That being said... I've never been in a salary cap league before (this being my first fantasy league I ever joined) and it would be interesting... But, haha, maybe not in this league that is already established.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2011 19:18:02 GMT -5
I am against the idea because this is a control to balance the teams without some owners doing a lot of work.
We did something similar in one of my head-2-head leagues - we made our contracts "permanent", so that even if a guy gets traded he will still end up in the pool after he hits max years as a keeper. While this will give the crappy teams a chance to draft some proven talent what it actually is doing is letting the owner off the hook to fix what he broke.
What should happen is the owner sells his best assets for prospect and picks and rebuilds, like most professional teams do.
That is what I am doing here and I believe that I do not need any "help" to do so, which is what a salary cap would do.
|
|
|
Post by drury2396 on Feb 4, 2011 13:11:12 GMT -5
Adding a salary cap would completely change the dynamic and format of this league. When people chose to partake in this league, they chose this format - not a salary cap keeper which is a completely different deal than this one.
Your study doesn't really unearth any surprises, Patrice. The best teams usually have the best players who usually have the highest salaries...pretty obvious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2011 16:33:33 GMT -5
Hi guys, don't really think we're gonna move in a cap world, I know. I was just a bit surprised to see how much there is a Cap-gap between first-half teams (100M$ club and bottom teams. It would mean, for a team like mine, to be able to grab 5 or 6 really proven guys (each in the range of 6M$ cap) to be up with the best...not an easy task. But...wait a minute, maybe....Is Gomez available in your team ;D ? But no problem, just wanna put some spice in the talks, maybe the "Suggestion rule change" thread wasn't the right place to post it. I'm still having fun in this league, dont' worry
|
|