Sign Guestbook Back to FHL
| Date | 2014-08-24 10:24 |
| Message | #4. continued . . . in other words, this proposal was made to help create parity in the FHL and help the weaker teams get stronger quicker. By limiting assets such as prospects or future prospect picks, it would seem to harm these weaker teams. What are your thoughts on this concern? |
| Date | 2014-08-24 10:20 |
| Message | 1. Re: Philly prospects - my opinion would be, they are now "open season." Meaning if one of those prospects are still calder eligible, they can still be drafted during the 1 round prospect draft. However, if like Monahan, they aren't, they can't be selected during the prospect draft and must be drafted as regular player. IMO there are enough prospects out there w/o Phillies. 2. Re: Reapers assets. Reapers have aquired Barkov prospect rights and any draft picks (including position) from the Inferno. GM Terror correctly explained that. 3. Ruling on Burns and Buffy. I say we go with what the mags say at the beginning of each season. Which according to Jeff means Burns = d and Buffy = f. 4. It has come to my attention that one GM is not happy with the prospects remaining as assets. In their opinion GMs that have more prospects, now have a leg up (i.e. Goons, Blazers have 4, Terror, Farmhands have 2 and the Dukes, C-doggs and Reapers have only 1). Essentially being able to protect 16 players, while others only protect 13 or 14 etc. We need to decide on whether this is a valid concern and make a restriction on how prospects a team can have going into this draft. This "reno" proposal is a hybrid type reset (ie teams retain some assets). If we want a massive reset, we could have proposed axing all assets (including future picks - ie Dukes who have amassed many, many picks in the future). |
| Date | 2014-08-22 06:22 |
| Message | my entire roster is untouchable right now. |
| Date | 2014-08-22 03:32 |
| Message | Thanks Cam. Rob can you clarify the prospect situation (ie. is Monohan prospect draft eligible?), and clarify the Byfuglien and Burns situation? |
| Date | 2014-08-22 09:06 |
| Message | Scott's team is dissolved except for his prospect and all his picks which go to the Reapers. The 6 old GM's protect 12 each, Jono chooses 2 players from each teams remaining players, we all go into the draft with 12 active players. |
| Date | 2014-08-22 06:34 |
| Message | My understanding is the Reapers retain all of Scotts asset's. They then protect 12 like everyone else, following the statement that all GM's submit a 12 man protection list. He then picks 2 players off all other GM's teams, bringing his roster up to 24. We then go into the redraft in this position. Correct? |
| Date | 2014-08-21 09:49 |
| Message | Restored. I got messed up by the statement "The club would then enter the "reno" draft with 12 protected players (same as all other GMs)." How exactly is this working then? We protect 12 players each. Reapers select 2 from each team. That would bring that roster to 39 players if they keep the Inferno assets. But based on the above statement Reapers will only have 12 players going into the reno draft. I guess Jono's question of 'Do I have to take two guys from Dukes?' is valid then. Can he pluck two off his team and then promptly release them in favour of players on the original Inferno lineup? |
| Date | 2014-08-21 05:31 |
| Message | My thoughts: Any prospects from Phil's team are prospect draft eligible but retain their activation status...ie. Monahan can be redrafted as a prospect but would only have 2 years left before he would need to be activated. Rob? |
| Date | 2014-08-21 05:25 |
| Message | Why is the Reapers roster gone? My understanding is that the Reapers have taken over all of the Inferno's assets including picks and Barkov. Another question. What is the status of a player such as Monahan? He is no longer eligible for the Calder so is he no longer eligible for the prospect draft? Formerly Phils asset, with 2 yrs eligible as as a prospect. Clarification appreciated  |
| Date | 2014-08-20 08:27 |
| Message | We need a ruling from Commish Brown on the status of Byfuglien and Burns. The new Hockey News mag has the Sharks intending on moving Burns back to D full time this season. Winnipeg intends to continue with Byfuglien at forward. He is currently listed as a D on C-Dawgs. |
Page 111 of 550 << First < 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 > Last >>