|
|
Post by Devils on Oct 31, 2006 16:21:23 GMT -5
Just a suggestion, and I suppose this is the perfect place for it, but I would like to see a ruling that requires teams to put forth 4 completely different forward lines every game. This will eliminate teams from double shifting their top guns onto the fourth line and add a sense of realism to the league. I understand some gm's will complain that they like to add a 7th defenseman to the mix but this is simply pointless in the grand scheme of things. Having 4 completely different forward lines forces teams to build depth teams, as opposed to heavily stocked top lines. I myself abused the current rules by double shifting Palffy and you all saw the results. I would like to hear what others have to say on this subject, but my past experience dictates that the suggested new ruling will be a positve change to the league. Obviously someone will have to be appointed to make sure that everyone is keeping their lines in check, and I would gladly take that job if it comes down to it. I'll await some responses.
GM Stefenelli
|
|
|
|
Post by warriors on Nov 1, 2006 10:34:10 GMT -5
yeah i would like too see teams use a 4th line...i never double shifted jagr or lecavalier but i did like to use the 7th defenseman
|
|
|
|
Post by BulldogsGM on Nov 1, 2006 16:08:52 GMT -5
I actually made a similar suggestion earlier in the year. I'd say only allow folks to double shift one forward. It allows you to cover for a last minute injury.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampyre on Nov 1, 2006 16:31:18 GMT -5
Why limit people in their choice of lines?
If someone is consistently double-shifting players, then doesn't that increase the fatigue level and potential for injuries.
If so, then the increased risks to the player's conditioning offsets any possible advantage to double-shifting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devils on Nov 1, 2006 16:40:23 GMT -5
Honestly what risk? Palffy has a 40's DU and was double shifted in almost every game of the season. It didn't have a single negative result for me as he never was injured, and putting up 125 points doesn't show me any fatigue. Just throwing in numbers to explain my point here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vampyre on Nov 1, 2006 23:22:54 GMT -5
I think the DU rating has to do more with recovery time after injury or CD loss....I think that the EN rating would come into play more for double shifting. But then again, I'm no expert in how this works.
|
|
|
|
Post by knights on Nov 1, 2006 23:27:45 GMT -5
I think the DU rating has to do more with recovery time after injury or CD loss....I think that the EN rating would come into play more for double shifting. But then again, I'm no expert in how this works. I am pretty sure that you are right. |
|
|
|
Post by ruffraiders on Nov 2, 2006 0:14:50 GMT -5
I don't think anyone should be forced to role 4 full lines, but they should have to dress 2 players a game. Wither or not you play someone is your choice. I double shifted Randy Robitialle and Mathieu Schnider from game 3-7 to compensate for the losses of Richards and Niedermayer and I probably would have lost (IMO) with Rupp and St. Jaques in. Just like real hockey, it's all about startegy. You can't remove a strategic option that doesn't drasticly improve ones team in an unfair way. Anyone can double shift any player, and (argueably) does the most damage to their own team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Commish on Nov 2, 2006 7:53:09 GMT -5
Although having teams roll four lines isn't a bad idea in theory, I don't think we as a league should start telling one another how to coach our own clubs. Any team that chooses to only roll three lines should have that right. Besides, a team that roll's only three lines faces greater fatigue levels and also and increased chance of injury, so in really it doesn't make that much sense to only use three lines of players as opposed to four.
I admire Mark for posting this suggestion and obviously we'll generally make rule changes based on what the majority of you want, but I can't really see this rule change going through. I myself use four lines but that's only because I don't want my top players to tire out to quickly and then become less effective.
Keep your thoughts coming!
|
|
|
|
Post by Commish on Nov 2, 2006 8:04:15 GMT -5
DU (Durability) is that rate at which players recover from fatigue, the chances of them getting injured and the ability of players to recover from injury.
EN (Endurance) is simply the rating which dictates how many minutes a player can play before suffering from fatigue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devils on Nov 2, 2006 10:54:02 GMT -5
So be it. Was worth a shot.
|
|
