How do the ratings work?

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Hanni

I wasn't sure where to put this but this seemed as good a place as any, this got me thinking.

I looked it up and Fleury, Gibson and Holtby have all played every game, only Hotlby has higher EN and DU ratings than Dubnyk (my goalie). My backup has played 12 games this year because I didn't want to lose Dubnyk to fatigue but now I'm thinking this was foolish, at what CON rating does a player go down for fatigue? Maybe I'm better off playing a 98 CON Dubnyk over a 100 CON Mike Smith.

afaik you can't "lose" a goalie over fatigue like you do with skaters (they have to be 95 or over) ... I don't think they actually drop below 95, but I might be wrong. Generally I play my backup when the starter is below 98 or so, but I'm not sure there's actual guidelines on how to get the best out of your tandem based on CON.

[dsavillian]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, goalie CON is dumb

I've only played holtby on 99CON twice or three times this year.

My team is really good at keeping the shots down, but still. What's the point of a backup?

[TurdFerguson]

I'd also say that I've not been forced to play my backup for CON reasons at all this year. Maybe something changed in the game sliders? Injuries also seem WAY down - i've had 1 this season.

A more stable roster is nice from the lines perspective but it has not forced me to make any trades either.

[JiriHrdina]

I don't like to change any of the sim levers mid-season - can really change how teams perform which isn't fair. We set the levers this year with the recommendations that were included in the ratings package. But I agree injuries are too rare.
The goalie thing perhaps requires a different approach - where we simply give them all less durability across the board (lower by 20 points say) to encourage the back-up to have some value.
All thing we can look at in the off-season but dangerous to touch during the season.

[dsavillian]

Oh yeah, don't change it mid season. Food for thought for the offseason.

What about a minimum number of backup games (or maximum number of games for a goalie over the season)?

[JiriHrdina]

Yeah that's not a bad idea.
We'd have to track it somehow but seems easy.
What if a team doesn't hit that minimum? What is the consequence?

[devo22]

loss of a pick? Maybe a 3rd?

[Knut]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Yeah that's not a bad idea.
We'd have to track it somehow but seems easy.
What if a team doesn't hit that minimum? What is the consequence?

I think we just have to reduce DU across the board. Tracking backup games played etc would be time consuming and unnecessary. Why should a guy with Dubnyk be forced to sit a healthy goalie. In reality he plays most games for Minny in the NHL.

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by Hes

I think we just have to reduce DU across the board. Tracking backup games played etc would be time consuming and unnecessary. Why should a guy with Dubnyk be forced to sit a healthy goalie. In reality he plays most games for Minny in the NHL.

There's no tracking involved. Pick a max number and check the GP at the end of the year

This requires no DU tinkering and lets the league set an exact target.

[Hanni]

Originally Posted by Hes

I think we just have to reduce DU across the board. Tracking backup games played etc would be time consuming and unnecessary. Why should a guy with Dubnyk be forced to sit a healthy goalie. In reality he plays most games for Minny in the NHL.

Mike Smith has already played 12 games!

I really didn't mean to make an issue out of it, I was just asking if I was overly cautious with goalie CON, obviously I was.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Hes

I think we just have to reduce DU across the board. Tracking backup games played etc would be time consuming and unnecessary. Why should a guy with Dubnyk be forced to sit a healthy goalie. In reality he plays most games for Minny in the NHL.

Very few NHL goalies can play over 70 games and still be effective in the playoffs. They simply will burn out

For example after 64 games In case of Minny (NHL) their backup (Darcy Kuemper) has played 14 games.

CPHL perspective, I would definitely like to see something done next year to force teams to utilize their backups.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by dsavillian

There's no tracking involved. Pick a max number and check the GP at the end of the year

This requires no DU tinkering and lets the league set an exact target.

You would need a system in place though. What if a GM leaves part way through the year. You would have to actively track it.

Reduce durability and increase injuries should have the desired effect without having to track anything.

[MJK]

I think we tinker with durability only if it has been proven somewhere that low CON effects performance, because if it doesn't, whats the point if goalies never go down with injury?

If there is no correlation, I think we look at something like playing backups minimum a certain # of games.

[dsavillian]

It's probably a discussion for the offseason, but I don't see why there couldn't be a cap on the player (not the GM).

The stat pages track games played. It's pretty easy to review the goalie stats at the end of the season and hand out penalties for overages. It doesn't matter who the GM is or what team the player ended up on.

Honestly, you could just pick a target based on NHL stats. If the most overworked goalie in the NHL plays 72 games, I'd say it would be reasonable to cap CPHL goalies at the same. Teams with a #1 and #2 structure would essentially have to play the backup for 10 (or whatever) games. Teams with a #1a and #1b wouldn't see a difference.

[MJK]

The penalty would have to be significant, if it's only a 3rd or 2nd, playing my starter could be worth more to me depending on where I sit in the standings.

[3thirty]

Cap penalty for the next season? Most contending teams would be hurt by that. Lose 3 million or so? Something to think about.

[Swayze11]

Why do we care? Do you not want best on best with very little variables?

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by Swayze11

Why do we care? Do you not want best on best with very little variables?

Oh, I'm also very ok with the status quo.

[TurdFerguson]

I'm pretty sure the solution is a dispersal draft

[Swayze11]

Originally Posted by TurdFerguson

I'm pretty sure the solution is a dispersal draft

Agreed 100%

This would solve all the issues.