|
Post by Commissioner on Feb 23, 2004 18:40:28 GMT -5
Okay gentlemen. Just something we are kicking around for a change next season. Let me know what you think. Feel free to comment POSITIVELY on this proposed rule change below.
Current rule:
Any player 26 years of age or under is eligible for an NHL re-rate.
Rule modification currently being kicked around:
Forwards: 25 and under are eligible for and NHL re-rate. (Down one year of eligibility)
Defensemen: 26-27 and under are eligible for an NHL re-rate (stays the same or slightly increases)
Goalies: 28 years of age and under are eligible for an NHL re-rate. (Up two years of eligibility as goaltenders take longer to develop FULLY by NHL standards)
Reasoning for the proposed change: Different positions develop at different speeds typically in the NHL. Goalies take a lot more time to develop. Defensemen generally take a little longer for development as well. So, in an effort to stay realistic with the NHL, this was proposed at our last meeting by several brilliant members of our BOD. ;D
This isn't the EXACT rule change proposal. It is merely an idea that I wanted to share with 'the masses'. Your feedback is appreciated.
Nathan Kopsack NsHL Commissioner
|
|
|
Post by torontogm on Feb 23, 2004 18:43:34 GMT -5
I like it.
|
|
|
Post by CapitalsGM on Feb 23, 2004 20:19:31 GMT -5
I love the idea, you're right Nate it makes the NsHL that much more realistic. I am in for it for sure! On a side note, with this take place in the 2004 off-season and therefore, we can use those rules on our players in this years off-season?
Capitals GM Spencer Cawker
|
|
|
Post by ottawagm on Feb 23, 2004 21:12:50 GMT -5
I like the idea of goalie, cuz goalie do tend to take develop later in their careers. Defenceman, I am inpartial too.
Not sure about the forwards. There are some surprises like Bertuzzi as well as Doan ;D, both were late bloomers.
You can't blame me for taking care of I disagreeets.
|
|
|
Post by FlyersGM on Feb 23, 2004 22:07:44 GMT -5
Current rule: Any player 26 years of age or under is eligible for an NHL re-rate. I like the idea. Is it possible to raise the age for all positions because there are a lot of late bloomers whom are great players now as mentioned above. In return for raising the ages, there would be a limit on how many NHL rerates a team can use..??
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner on Feb 24, 2004 10:40:35 GMT -5
What we don't want happening is for our ratings AS A WHOLE to go up. Our league average OV is 65.9 and I want to keep it that way. If you look around the FHL sim world, their are many unrealistic rosters/leagues with every other player being an 80+ OV. I simply don't want this.
Here is a realistic proposal to the current changes on hand.
NHL Re-rates stay the same at 26 years of age or younger.
PDP (Player Development Points) ages go up.
For instance. Players eligible for PDP's as follows:
Forwards: 26 years of age and younger (SAME) Defensemen:27 years of age and younger (+1 year) Goalies: 28 years of age and younger (+ 2 years)
Again, this allows for the late stage devlopment of goalies and defensemen you typically see in the NHL.
Thoughts, comments??
|
|
|
Post by ex-BluesGM on Feb 24, 2004 10:51:43 GMT -5
I like the second suggestion a little better. Either way its a good idea but Jason is right there is the occasional later bloomer. I would definetly like to to see the ages go up. Most players don't really reach their stride 'til about 27. That's an avg.
Either way I'd like to see that change! Good thinking ;D
|
|
|
Post by HabsGM on Feb 24, 2004 13:10:33 GMT -5
An this will be valid next year ?
|
|
|
Post by LAKingsGM on Feb 24, 2004 13:26:58 GMT -5
We are exploring the option. This is not set in stone but we are merily mentioning it for comments, thoughts, or questions. Which is stated above, several times.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas Golden Knights GM on Feb 24, 2004 14:24:18 GMT -5
I think I like the 2nd suggestion better, but one more possibility:
Because there is an occasional 'late-bloomer', a team may be allowed to get 1 NHL re-rate for ages up to say, 31, instead of the 2 NHL re-rates. It could be worthwhile for a team who has a player who really has improved in the NHL.
I agree that I don't want to see the ratings skyrocket as a whole. One more thought is to make one team pick a player on their pro roster who had a poor NHL season to drop. That would be a lot more complicated to decide exact rules on, but it could be something to consider. Maybe it could be up to the NsHL rather than letting the GM pick, because the GM would surely just pick a 4th liner, while the NsHL would be fair enough to pick the player who had the worst NHL season.
|
|
|
Post by ex-BluesGM on Feb 24, 2004 16:37:35 GMT -5
I like Pitts' Suggestion like, if we take a re-rate on a player whose over 28 then we don't get anymore. I don't like the idea of having to drop a player, esp since this league strives for authenticity, sure many teams drop players every year but no one is forced to, hence Jody Hull's reign in pro-hockey ;D
|
|
|
Post by HabsGM on Feb 24, 2004 18:44:33 GMT -5
Let's do it it's OK with me . Souray is gonna kick ass .
|
|
|
Post by CapitalsGM on Jul 8, 2004 23:10:55 GMT -5
Any new news on this? I was thinking about the NHL re-rates and then I searched up and found this under 'PDP.' I like the idea for the new ages being set for both NHL re-rates AND PDPs.
I know some GMs just like the idea for PDPs but I personally feel that it should be the same for NHL re-rates and PDPs and therefore, I am leaning towards the new theory but it also being in effect for NHL re-rates.
Spencer Cawker Capitals GM
|
|
|
Post by FlyersGM on Jul 9, 2004 1:07:37 GMT -5
Any new news on this? I was thinking about the NHL re-rates and then I searched up and found this under 'PDP.' I like the idea for the new ages being set for both NHL re-rates AND PDPs. I know some GMs just like the idea for PDPs but I personally feel that it should be the same for NHL re-rates and PDPs and therefore, I am leaning towards the new theory but it also being in effect for NHL re-rates. Spencer Cawker Capitals GM Spencer, keep in mind, the proposal is for next season, so if you are making your decision based on your current needs you may be jumping the gun.
|
|
|
Post by CapitalsGM on Jul 9, 2004 2:22:00 GMT -5
It's not for current needs, Jack. Just an idea and I think it's more fair and probably a better idea to have the new age rules in effect for both PDPs and NHL re-rates.
|
|