The 6 Rule Proposals and Voting

Dear My fellow FUNHL GMs:

So with Weekend over AND 6 Rule Proposals to be voted on, time to go over AGAIN,  when VOTES  are due so I can send out the results both by email AND on the Blog.

In addition, I will give you my opinion as to when each proposal if passed would take effect.

Actually, 9/12 votes would be good for ALL of the Proposals this year, 2017-18  EXCEPT Propospal # 3 - The Omnibus because of the unlimited promotion/demotion clause for prospects, gives some GMs an unfair advantage this year and would change drafting strategy for prospects and thus ALL of the Proposal #3 , except for eliminating WD2 could NOT take effect until next year 2018-19 (i.e. eliminating the WW, IR).  (Rule# 73)

So just in case you only voted for #3., maybe you should give more thought to the proposals 1, 2, 4-6.

More importantly, IT is expected that ALL 12 GMs will vote for all 6 proposals.  I have received 6 votes for each one of the six proposals AND up to 8 for the first 3.

Please Remember Voting ENDS on WEDNESDAY NIGHT.  I leave for Calgary Early Thursday morning so I would like to post the results on the 27th evening before midnight, MST

Either place your vote on the Blog or send it to me at b0bc@yahoo.com.

Comments that advocate a position in the past or current is just that comment; They are not votes.  You can change your vote if you wish as long as I know, or it is the Blog.

Please VOTE Yes or No.  AND AGAIN I  repeat, if you do not vote, that is considered  a NO; as well as if you abstain, that is a NO.

For any  proposal, 9 yes to pass, 4 no to defeat.

My vote  will be on the blog.

Thank Bob

Proposal # 6 The Waiver Draft 2 Value Added Provision

Proposal #6

For Waiver Draft Two ONLY,  ALL players selected would have RFA status (whether they did before or not) except for dropped promoted prospects who retain their previous status.

The benefits of this proposal would certainly be increasing player valuations for undrafted players; a pick-up of 2nd half performers would now be RFA; and 8 "new" RFA players per team


Thank you,


Bob

Proposal 5: FP position exemption at a Waiver Draft

Proposal #5.

That, in a waiver draft, the obligation to drop a number of
players from any given position be reduced by one for every Franchise
Player holding said position on that team. The total number of drops
required shall remain the same (8).

-For example, the Great Whites have Carey Price G MTL as a Franchise
Player. At the waiver draft, the team would normally be obligated to
waive at least one goaltender. Since one of their FPs is a goalie,
the obligation is reduced from 1 to zero, thus leaving the team with
the ability to keep a healthy goaltender on the roster in the event
that Price is injured.
- In my opinion, the current league status is biased against having
goalie FPs. I seek to remedy the situation.
-It should be noted that this FP exemption, does mean you don't have
 to drop a centre if you have 2 FP centres, just that you are NOT obliged
to make Centre drop.

Thank you

Bob

Proposal #4 - Revision to Rule 35 - The Injury Protection Rule

Proposal #4

This Proposal would replace  Rule 35, which has been badly abused:

Such that if a GM has a catastrophic injury (such as "week to week") which is verifiable by Online sources, like NHL.com, to ANY roster player, such as a FP, FA, RFA or a previously promoted prospect, that GM can employ this Injury Protection WITHOUT penalty, in order to fill that player's spot, with a prospect of their own.

However, a GM can only have a limit of two (2) players under protection at a time, maximum, AND MUST return the injured player back to the roster upon their return to health, as defined by that player's return to play in a game.  Their prospect then return to their unpromoted status again.

IF said prospect is out-performing  the injured  player and the GM wants to keep him on his roster, he MUST, promote said prospect and try and trade or waive the previously injured player (or another player at that position).  The Obvious exception here is with the return of an injured FP, as they can not be waived.

Thank you,

Bob

Proposal #3 - The Omnibus Proposal

Sep 21 at 10:51 PM

FuNHL Proposal

Short summary:

1) Abolish IR rule

2) Abolish Waiver Wire (as there will be no “waived” players)

3) Reduce to one WD with set date in early-mid December each year

4) Allow unlimited promotion/demotion of prospects (like a farm team) without penalty

Detailed explanation (TL; DR):

We have always tried to emulate the NHL as much as possible, while trying to keep the complexity of rules and laborious management to a minimum. The IR rule, while well intended, has stopped being what it was supposed to be, and is now mostly used after WD2 once there is no penalty to use it. By allowing promotion of prospects (see below), the IR rule becomes largely moot, and allows GMs to either plan wisely for potential injury, or make trades to address issues that arise.

The waiver wire arose as a consequence of prospect promotion, but is very onorous to maintain and monitor. Sometimes a rare player of some utility (who is not morbidly injured) comes along, but most of the WW discards were out for lengthy periods or bottom end players. By allowing GMs to promote prospects and send players back to the “farm” team, the would be WW discard remains with the team. If another team see utility in that player, who is not in use by their owning GM, there is a ripe opportunity to make a trade offer to acquire said player. As such, I don’t believe dropping the WW would reduce trading.

Each year we have a small number of undrafted players who turn out to exceed expectations, and these are picked up at WD1. But by WD2, deck chairs on the Titanic are shuffled, and the drops are of minimal utility, such that less than half the teams in the league even improve marginally through WD2. In our busy lives, the amount of work to prepare for WD2 far exceeds its utility. Moreover the intent of added gatherings/interaction via WDs is lost by WD2, often with barely half the GMs actively “attending” by phone/online, and most drafting by proxy. I think we lose little of value by dropping WD2. We can keep WD1 and set a fixed date (eg 2nd Saturday of December each year) so people can plan for it. The drop rules would stay the same, protect an active roster minus two, and keep prospects. The only difference is that players demoted to the “farm” would by default be protected but this would in turn expose more prospects if they have been brought up. Either way, the same number of players are available as usual. I hope with just one WD that we can achieve greater participation too.

All of this derives from the free promotion/demotion of prospects. This makes GM have to consider not only the long term value of futures (eg next years anticipated #1 pick) against the insurance of depth players who can step in for injury. This is exactly what NHL GMs have to consider when they manage a farm team and NHL roster as both future and immediate value have merit. It also creates greater utility for prospects, giving them added value (and attraction) for trade purposes. We do not increase the number of prospects (as I think 8 long term locked up players is ample) as there is justifiable resistance to have even more players tied up and undraftable each year.

Here is the End of the Long Version of Proposal for Voting.

Thank you

Bob

Proposal #2 - Elimination of Waiver Draft #2 ONLY

For those wanting to keep things very simple, a stand alone change:

Abolish WD2 and set a single WD each year for the second Saturday in December

Usual protection/drops rules apply; Waiver Wire, IR penalties would also still apply

Thank you,

Bob

Proposal #1 - Amending the IR (Rule 35 and 35.1))

Proposal #1

For the Injury Protection rule we need to return to the original intent of FP protection when an FP is seriously injured. The criteria is as follows:

a) FPs only (up to 2 - in which case you in trouble)

b) The FP MUST be catastrophically injured or sent to the minors or holding out (i.e. > 1 month) such that the Player being listed on a official injury report (Nhl.com, yahoo.com, etc) is moot.  For Examples refer to Stamkos over the last two years, Drouin in year one as a FP, Crosby's concussion year.

c) FP demotion for a prospect has NO penalty with respect to loss of a Waiver Draft pick

d) The League Founder (Cam) owes you a beer since FP DEATH is a very rare event phenomenon, but if and  only if your FP is out for 50% of the season or longer.

e)  Upon a FP's return to he must returned to the roster and prospect demoted.

Please send your vote to me via email (private) or post on the Blog

Thank you

Bob

Rules for Proposals and Deadlines.

Dear Fellow GMs of the FUNHL:

It is my duty to send out an update covenant to you all indicating many of the changes, like going online to name a large one and Waiver Wire changes taking effect this year (players on the Wire for 1 week only for bids and then into the ether).

With Rule Changes coming, maybe, we should review the voting system...see attachment. 

In particular, small changes, say IR or WD2 changes, pre-ED, one needs a 9/12 (75%) majority.  (Rule 54.1)  Major changes that may affect the nature of the pool [like number of drafted players, positions, etc., generally 12/12 is needed at the ED or after.  Now, I do not suspect that sort of drastic proposal, but I have heard some interesting talk.

Goalie stats are returning to 3.60pts per 60 minute shutout, or 0.06pts/min after the frustration of last year's experiment with 3.49999.  This is not a proposal, but a change in the data.

Doug, please check my covenant revisions, in case of redundancy.  As so you all...

Send me any proposals for me to send out to everyone by email and blog.  Votes come to me in private or to the Blog.  The Deadline for proposals is this Friday by 6 pm MST.  We have thrown around a lot of ideas, time to get serious, or not.  Voting will occur up to Sept 27th at 6pm mst and then results will be tabulated and emailed out and blog posted.

I expect 12 votes.  9 yea votes to carry a proposal. 4 nays votes to defeat.  A lack of a vote is a no vote, as is abstaining.

This email will posted on the Blog later tonight.