Play.it Usa Forum

bure ha scritto: 14/09/2018, 16:00

TheDominator ha scritto: 14/09/2018, 14:38 Whatever. It's the same bullshit. Bidding 0.2 over and over.

The point is, the UFA bidding process needs reform, and every time someone talks about it, you shut it down straight away.

I don't have the power to do that, so THAT is bullshit.

you sure do.  Any time one of myself, JS, or Biron bring up proposed changes, you mouth off and get your buddies to parrot your words on here.

Even 0.5 is bullshit. It's too small of an increment.

No one prevents whoever thinks it's too small of an increment to make a much higher offer. You can directly offer the amount of money you are ready to pay for all the players you've interest for, and your problem is solved.
You're like Catholics, instead of caring only about their own business they feel entitled to dictate how other people who feel differently from them should behave.
No one is preventing you from offering milions of raise, not sure why others should be prevented from offering smaller raises.

That analogy is hilarious, because i'm an atheist.  My point was completely missed in your endless diatribe of a response.  The fact is, no matter what is offered, be it a serious offer or not, someone can always offer 0.2 multiple times and keep bumping it.  The fact that you think this is completely ok is laughable.

If a player is currently bid on for 2 million, then 0.2 increments are fine for the next gm to bid, but if a player is currently bid on for 9 million, the next bid increment should be higher, something like 1 or 1.5 million

that doesn't make any sense to me, but hey, maybe it will to others.

Then it seems simple concepts elude your understanding.  This concept would basically eliminate GMs from bidding 0.2 repeatedly when bids are about to expire.  It would mean GMs who are serious about a player, they will pay the right price for one.  As bids are closer and closer to expiry, the increment to bid on those players should gradually get higher and higher.  It would speed up the entire UFA process quite a bit, as GMs would need to actually use their brains and think about their bids and who they want on their team.

The same goes for term. If someone bids a 3 year term for a 9 million bid on a player, you shouldn't be able to make the next bid a 1 year contract, it should stay as a 3 year term

so.. as soon as someone offers a 3 yrs deal everyone else is forced to do the same? Lol, I guess strategy isn't welcomed anymore in fantasy hockey

it's a working concept that warrants more discussion.  What if the rule is enacted on players who are over a certain dollar amount?  What if as soon as a player hits a high salary bid, they're locked in at that term?  It is an outside-the-box idea.  I rarely see you come up with any of your own ideas, but you are very quick to shit on everyone else's ideas.  The only thing you've been consistently good at is finding GMs who give up on their team and then you are forced to find another GM to take over before the end of the season. Because as difficult as some here think that i am to talk with or deal with, at the very least i am involved, and at the very least i have the balls to say things that no one else has the balls to say.

as far as the only strategy i see you displaying right now is completely fucking up your goaltending for your team, and trying to sign every fucking backup in the entire NHL, good luck pal 

 

JS_53 ha scritto: 15/09/2018, 4:39

bure ha scritto: 14/09/2018, 23:59 

Ha detto quello che riempie le aste di 3x0.5  

e quindi? gli altri sono liberi di rilanciare a 0.7 per la durata che pare a loro, quindi non capisco cosa c'entra

tra l'altro è abbastanza improbabile che siano i giocatori firmati a 0.5 a depauperare il pool di free agent rilevanti x le stagioni successive 
 

TheDominator ha scritto: 15/09/2018, 4:52

bure ha scritto: 14/09/2018, 16:00 

I promise to myself this is the last time I care about replying to you if you don't care enough to quote text properly in your posts..
 

you sure do.  Any time one of myself, JS, or Biron bring up proposed changes, you mouth off and get your buddies to parrot your words on here.

my buddies? on this forum? 
would you please list the buddies of mine that are used to parrot my words around here?  
 

That analogy is hilarious, because i'm an atheist.  My point was completely missed in your endless diatribe of a response.  The fact is, no matter what is offered, be it a serious offer or not, someone can always offer 0.2 multiple times and keep bumping it. 

why is that a problem?  it's not like bumping it by 0.2 doesn't make that GM responsible for the money he offered, which happens to be more than what you offered for the same player... 
 

If a player is currently bid on for 2 million, then 0.2 increments are fine for the next gm to bid, but if a player is currently bid on for 9 million, the next bid increment should be higher, something like 1 or 1.5 million

that doesn't make any sense to me, but hey, maybe it will to others.

Then it seems simple concepts elude your understanding.  This concept would basically eliminate GMs from bidding 0.2 repeatedly when bids are about to expire. 

of course it would, I get that.. problem is, it would accomplish that useless result by unnecessarily making our free agency less realistic (you think an NHL team is forced to offer at least 1M more than its competitor to make a new offer to a free agent?) and by reducing teams' capability to operate.. which usually goes against GMs' entertainment.
 

It would mean GMs who are serious about a player, they will pay the right price for one.

how do you determine that for team B the fair price is 11.1M while for team A the fair price is 10M instead? to me it seems your change would accomplish the opposite.
 

it's a working concept that warrants more discussion.  What if the rule is enacted on players who are over a certain dollar amount?  What if as soon as a player hits a high salary bid, they're locked in at that term?  It is an outside-the-box idea. 

why? what does that accomplish other than limiting GMs' freedom of strategy?
 

I rarely see you come up with any of your own ideas, but you are very quick to shit on everyone else's ideas.  The only thing you've been consistently good at is finding GMs who give up on their team and then you are forced to find another GM to take over before the end of the season. Because as difficult as some here think that i am to talk with or deal with, at the very least i am involved, and at the very least i have the balls to say things that no one else has the balls to say.

I used to. That's where our league came from btw. Then my will to spend more time on this thing was taken away by GMs' attitude.

It doesn't look to me like only the GMs I found left. Not to mention, iirc the GMs I found where chosen only because we had no alternative options.
You're right on you staying involved in playing the game. That's a positive we all always appreciated.
How many GM candidates did you bring up over a decade though? I suspect none, despite living in the biggest hockey country in the world. So maybe that's not a topic you should bring up.
 

as far as the only strategy i see you displaying right now is completely fucking up your goaltending for your team, and trying to sign every fucking backup in the entire NHL, good luck pal

thanks for your concern pal, given our results over the past decade I'm sure I've plenty to learn from you in terms of strategy to build a competitive team.
 

Dom you're talking shit, as per tradition.

Bure, my boy, can I get back my picks?

Scaramanga ha scritto: 15/09/2018, 3:03 Oggi solo tre operazioni, 2 annuali ed un triennale per un totale di 13 operazioni 7 triennali e 6 annuali.

In attesa del transaction wall di domani 16 settembre, oggi abbiamo registrato soltanto 2 operazioni, biennali. Una primizia per questo scorcio di free agency.

Siamo ad un totale di 15 operazioni con 7 triennali, 2 biennali e 6 annuali.

Comunque ci sono giocatori che non ho mai nemmeno sentito nominare...me sembro Bagatta. 

ClaudeGiroux ha scritto: 16/09/2018, 1:50

Assumendo che io sia Buscemi, Corno e Crudeli chi sono? Js e bure?

Questi sono i veri dubbi della free agency. Altro che la durata dei contratti o la pettinatura di Justin Williams.

ClaudeGiroux ha scritto: 15/09/2018, 22:39Dom you're talking shit, as per tradition.

Bure, my boy, can I get back my picks?

of course.

it literally happens every year, the bure/dom bitch-fest

it really is tradition i suppose

Scaramanga ha scritto: 16/09/2018, 0:59 In attesa del transaction wall di domani 16 settembre, oggi abbiamo registrato soltanto 2 operazioni, biennali. Una primizia per questo scorcio di free agency.

Siamo ad un totale di 15 operazioni con 7 triennali, 2 biennali e 6 annuali.

Non essendoci ulteriori scadenze procediamo con il riepilogo della giornata di oggi.

23 operazioni in totale di cui:
9 triennali
7 biennali
7 annuali

per un totale UFA di 38 operazioni con 16 triennali, 9 biennali e 13 annuali.

Per dare significato al dato JS probabilmente vorrà sapere la media salari dei 3 tipi di contratto 

bure ha scritto:Per dare significato al dato JS probabilmente vorrà sapere la media salari dei 3 tipi di contratto 

Ottima idea.

Sent from my SM-N920W8 using Tapatalk

bure ha scritto: 16/09/2018, 23:22Per dare significato al dato JS probabilmente vorrà sapere la media salari dei 3 tipi di contratto 
 

Ma no tranqui va bene così, il giochino è tuo e va bene così! 

ma in realta’ ero serio, non mi pare quel dato di per se voglia dire granche’ altrimenti