| 0 |
Subject: Comments on the State of TSN Hockey this Year
Posted by: Caper
- [3510101810] Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 13:26
As we approach the mid-point this season there are some items that I am interested in getting opinions on. I find the value of money is far less this year. It seems that any more than $70 million will be superfulous. The price of the top wingers is low enough that I can have whoever I want with almost no regard for $$$$. The relative de-valuation of goaltenders, IMHO, has reduced the value of spending big money there ( I don't like the way that goaltenders seem to get all or nothing in pts now).
There is only one really expensive d-man that you want and he is hurt.
If I add the costs of the top 3 centers ( I used Forsberg instead of Thorton to drive up costs), the top 4 wingers, the top 3 d-men and the top 2 goalies; the total is $78.5 million. That is not a lot.
Again, I also really find the value of goalies down this year. I hate to tie up too much $$$ there anyway because the return does not seem to be there. The shootout has made it imperative for a goalie to get the win to score.
I am interested in getting the opinion of you experts on this topic....... |
| 1 | Die_Habs
ID: 26211512
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 14:27
|
I am pissed that in my one auto league, where I started one week late compared to my opponents, I am behind by 800 pts on the leader. However I am on average 15 million ahead in RV and I can't seem to move on the 4 guys ahead of me over the last month.
|
| 2 | smallwhirled
ID: 170452415
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 17:13
|
Well, here's my take.
First off, I do wish the players were more expensive, maybe a la 2002-2003? The way it is right now, it hurts the high RV teams, IE, most of us. But, looking back, I wouldn't change a thing. Personally, this is just the way I've always played. Attain a massive RV, and then see how many guys I can catch in the 2nd half. I really don't know how to play another way....but that's just me.
The real issue has to be the "apparent", as I'd label it, price movers finangiling fiasco that happened. I could go on and bitch about my team personally, where I think if the game were to be kept one way I would've had an even bigger competitive RV advantage, but that can be later....;)
Those who got out on their horse early probably experienced the biggest boost that I've seen in all my years playing. Getting off to a great start this year has been more important than any other year....because making up ground is tough, and because "early" RV is a huge function of "early" points, first 3 weeks (good drafting).
All you have to do is look at an old team history page. Once people started getting into the groove....seriously, making under 500K per day was a disappointment. Goalies going down 3 or 400K. Price gainers going up 300.
Then, all of the sudden, price dampening button gets pushed, and it is back to the old game. Max ~210K on either side. Spread days you'd see top gainer less than 150. All what we were used to, but not through the first month of this particular season.
That is my huge gripe about TSN this year. The switch in the price formula. TSN can deny it all they want, but it takes almost no research to prove what I'm saying.
If we had 80 mil in Dec, fine. 60 mil in Dec, fine too. Really couldn't care because you kinda are playing the field so it's all relative to everyone else anyways....just don't go out and change it all up midstream without saying anything.
There was a point in time when I was trying to earn RV, and played over aggressive, thinking I could take more advantage of the price movers. Then they come out....much lower than what they had been....and it screwed up my plans for a couple of weeks. Because all of us know, once you get down to 0 trades, especially in the first 3 months of the year, it's gonna take either total team vacation....or a couple of refreshes to get back on your feet.
Still, I like the game a lot. Will always continue to play...each year has different quirks. Since the free game changed 3 years ago, each and every year has been slightly different....but fun. Maybe a couple of guys wouldn't have cared about RV as much as usual had things played out this way, who knows. I'd probably still have it though because as I said earlier, that's how I play.
Sorry for that long ass rant. I do think I'm going to be using over 80 mil here in the next week the way I've laid out my plans.....
|
| 3 | walk
ID: 236779
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 17:36
|
I love the game, as usual, as hockey is my fave sport to watch and to play on TSN (smallworld). Smallwhirled has a good point about the price change formula mid-stream thing, that curtailed the advantage of those managers who excel and strategize around quickly gaining value.
I do feel that our price gaining strategy always has a few kinks due to unknowns or resurgent folks outperforming expectations, and that's part of sports in general, and the drawback to our strategy. I have three top 20 teams in franchise value, but only one is in the top 200 WWR-wise (due to poor management by moi) because other managers are also strong at identifying those mid-priced high-performing players (Svatos, Lehtinen, Phanouf, any goalie other than Hasek and Brodeur (lately), Staal, etc.). This is exacerbated by initial prices being set based on the performance of players not one, but two years ago. No fault of TSN; this is our issue in terms of our strategy.
Smallwhirled plays it aggressively with franchise value, but you also know, sir, who to pick regardless of price, and you are top 25 and don't have too many folks to leapfrog in the second half.
I love the shootouts and the higher scoring games which results in a major goalie grab-bag, but now it's time to focus on points.
I don't know if I would change any scoring scheme TSN uses...that I would have to give a think, but I enjoy the game immensely.
- walk
|
| 4 | KoGs
ID: 13961511
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 20:54
|
Presumably this change in price change formula came as the smallworld staff realized almost every single player is under-priced. Jagr started the year at 6 mil? Give me a break lol.
|
| 5 | KoGs
ID: 13961511
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 21:01
|
It's funny the only reason I am playing the nhl game pas the first month this year is because they screwed up in basketball and refunded my team. And now as a result I am doing better than I have ever done in hockey. Maybe I should give up basketball for good :)
|
| 6 | R9
Leader
ID: 02624472
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 21:15
|
I too would like to see the player's prices increased. The top goalies and forwards should be easily 10 mil (Foppa and Ilya more like 11) and the top Dmen like Mccabe and Redden over 7. Force RV to always be an issue, right up until the last couple weeks, like it is in every sport. In baseball, every year we have to use a cheapie hitter or pitcher right down to the line. In hockey, most of us have had a stud lineup for over a month already, and its still January. Having big price gains and low starting prices just makes RV a less powerful factor.
I've been stuck around 100-120 WWR for about a month now (maybe longer) and with my RV advantage all but gone as more top 100 managers approach 70 mil (I'm ~75) its going to be a tough climb.
|
| 7 | smallwhirled
ID: 170452415
Tue, Jan 24, 2006, 21:18
|
Yeah, actually, we kinda think that TSN saw the crazy changes in hoops to begin the year, and then just changed it.
|
| 8 | chipsnbeer
ID: 360472211
Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 14:06
|
I think they undervalue goalies, any IPO they set at least 3m, but the back-ups that start the season are 500k. You know that every year a backup will be the starter as in the case with Auld. I say all backups chould be at least 4m.
I agree defencmen should be priced higher, 5-7m for a good one.
|
| 9 | The Beezer
Leader
ID: 191202817
Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 17:08
|
I see a few reasons that have combined to help the folks who were burning trades early in the season:
- higher price volatility when they were using their trades (as stated above)
- Olympic break means schedules are compacted, so there are fewer "must-trade" gaps that have to be covered. There have only been a couple of periods where a large number of players are facing extended time off and require a large number of trades to be used in a few days
- I didn't follow the strategy so naturally we should have assumed that it was correct :)
Making up ground in the second half is going to be brutal but I think it's doable.
|
| 10 | The Dienasty
ID: 132591
Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 20:30
|
Certain players were indeed priced way under what most people who follow the game closely would have IPO'd them at, but then that's where i believe the problem is... The people who looked after price setting didn't know enough about the game.
Henrik Zetterberg didn't have an outstanding 03-04 campaign, but everyone knew he was going to play a bigger role in Detroit this year and likely be a stud forward. TSN didn't pay attention to this and did not price him accordingly. Same can be said for the likes of Gagne, Spezza, Heatley, Nagy, Sullivan and Datsyuk, among others.
|
| 11 | KoGs
ID: 52715301
Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 20:47
|
Then again this is what seperates the good managers from the not so good ones. The ability to recognize these undervalued players faster than others. This is also what seperates those who have a ton of money from those who do not. If you think about how a player makes money.....it's when enough managers buy that player to make his price rise. So if you have a player who is making money, then you can be gauranteed that he is at least a decent pick if others have taken action to get him. So if you recognize a good pick faster than the next guy, obviously you will make more money than him.
|
| 12 | Joelis
ID: 389331817
Wed, Jan 25, 2006, 23:00
|
Smallwhirled and R9 hit the nail on the head (big surprise eh).
I am used to slow starts and gaining tons of ground late in the year. Won't happen this year. There are enough "cheap" players available (ie. everyone) that will keep the lower RV folks from losing much ground at all this year.
Its very strange that you can have anyone you want on your team already in January with just a low $70 RV basically.
Oh well. Its not over yet.
|
| 13 | smallwhirled
ID: 170452415
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 00:46
|
Oh defintitely, it's not over. But day after day things just keep on happening that hurt us. One of them just happened again tonight in Forsberg. I was going to go Gomez > Forsberg in 2 days. Now I'm stuck with a guy to sell and really, IMO, NO attractive center options.
All flier, 2nd teir picks. Just pisses me off the way things are going.
I do wish everyone was more expensive, or the top teir of wings (Naslund, Iginla, St. Louis, and Tkachuk were real good viable options). That would help some.
Cheap, backup 500K goalie really do hurt the game too. Anyone could always just go to Auld at any point and at least get something semi decent.
But truthfully, as I said earlier...and I'm still miffed about it too....the mid stream price change really wasn't fair. Those who got out early got just had such a HUGE benefit this year. Teams that started slower had to do maybe double the work to comeback compared to a normal year of TSN hockey. If one guy comes out of the gate and has 60 mil after the first month, and another guy is just at 55...and then they change the formula, the guy at 55 just has so much more work to do. I know I'm beating this into the ground, but it really wasn't fair.
But hell, all in all, it's a really fun game. We're all having a blast. There's just a few things that could be tightened up, as everybody has mentioned. All good points.
|
| 14 | urkel
ID: 289950
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 06:29
|
I'm not happy about not being able to make up ground using RV in my divisions either, nor about having pretty much the same players all year as those managers who have 15m less RV than me. But what can you do.
As far as the price change, you're right, it definitely wasn't fair, especially with no warning or announcement - the people it hurt the most were the ones who were playing the game well, careful managers who were conserving trades.
BUT it's a good thing that they did do the price change thing. Because if it hadn't happened, we might all have RV's in the 90's and even triple digits, and the masses might have RV's in the mid to high 70's, and even the managers with the lowest RVs will be able to have all the studs and still have 10m in the bank.
I think the mistakes were made early - players priced too low, and ridiculously huge price changes, and TSN did what they could to limit the damage.
Hopefully next year they will get it right from the start.
|
| 15 | KoGs
ID: 52715301
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 09:05
|
I thought the exact same thing about Forsberg, Smallwhirled.
|
| 16 | urkel
ID: 289950
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 09:07
|
OK, I noticed something very disturbing.
Anyone take a look at the post-Olympic schedule?
Take a look at OTT's schedule for the rest of the year... they are a hold for the rest of the *season*. No slow spots. No 3 day breaks. Not even a 1 in 5. Worst spot in their schedule I could find is a single 2 in 6.
You could easily stack your team with OTT guys from this point in, and then leave half your team on on autopilot for the rest of the year.
Need some fill ins? Look no farther than SAN. Pretty much the same schedule as OTT for the rest of the year. In fact their sweet schedule has already started.
You could build this team right now:
| Spezza | 5.11m | 55 TSNP/g | | Thornton | 7.15m | 50 TSNP/g | | Marleau | 4.60m | 42 TSNP/g (51 since Thornton) | | Heatley | 6.06m | 58 TSNP/g | | Alfredsson | 7.23m | 62 TSNP/g | | Cheechoo | 3.91m | 41 TSNP/g (60 since Thornton) | | Schaefer | 1.79m | 28 TSNP/g | | Redden | 5.12m | 45 TSNP/g | | Chara | 4.69m | 34 TSNP/g | | Meszaros | 1.24m | 24 TSNP/g | | Hasek | 6.69m | 62 TSNP/g | | Nabokov | 6.27m | 24 TSNP/g | | | 59.86m | |
As you can see, there are only a few spots you might want to substitute in some studs from other teams. Schaefer, Chara, Meszaros, Nabokov.
Unless those guys really start stinking it up, This could be very bad for the game.
|
| 17 | KoGs
ID: 52715301
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 09:33
|
If this is indeed the case (haven't actually looked myself), then the key will be finding ways to make quick in and out swaps.
|
| 18 | The Dienasty
ID: 132591
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 09:40
|
Good observation about Ottawa's sched, urkel. No doubt they're going to be popular players to own real soon, but it's going to take a bit more than autopilot if managers are going to make a move to the top. Trade conservation is going to be key down the stretch to pick up games during lulls in scheds, even Ottawa's.
For instance, Ottawa has a day 2 break beginning 03/22, Washington plays twice during that break, so a Heatley/Alfredsson -> Ovechkin -> Heat/Alf move would produce 2 extra games and you wouldn't have to miss any of the Ottawa wingers'. 2 trades are used, but potential for an immediate reward, to the tone of 200+ TSNP, is worth the risk. Those who can these types of moves enough times will make up ground eventually.
It is scary however to think that a team like the one you presented could be had for under 60m.
|
| 19 | The Dienasty
ID: 132591
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 09:43
|
the key will be finding ways to make quick in and out swaps.
Yeah, i should have just said that, lol.
|
| 20 | urkel
ID: 289950
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 09:55
|
That's true about the in and out swaps. I'm afraid though that most of the good managers will identify the same in and out swaps.
I think differentiation will be pretty challenging, and it could be hard to make up ground if you're already 1000 points behind your division leader.
|
| 21 | Dr. Doom
ID: 387231512
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 10:24
|
Okay, a team with 73M to spend without playing the schedule, based purely on remaining schedule and year-to-date PPG, same strategy, pick 'em and hold 'em projects to outscore that team by 2200 points, not using McCabe, Hossa, Kovalchuk, Gagne, Forsberg, Crosby, Marleau, Brodeur, Naslund, Iginla, Cheechoo.
All is not lost.
|
| 22 | walk
ID: 236779
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 11:04
|
Right, Ottawa having a strong sched favors those with heavy money franchies, cos Heatley, Alf, Hasek, Spezza and Redden are not relatively cheap.
Agreed on the issue that players' prices were too low to start -- need more players $8M-$10M. The production though, is the way the cards fall (so, hypothetically, Naslund, St. Louis and Iginla would have been $9.5M and all still not be on anyone's teams. TSN has to mostly price folks based on the previous year's production levels. There are exceptions though...
- walk
|
| 23 | urkel
ID: 480402315
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 12:51
|
I'm not saying that all is lost, just that diversification may be difficult as there seem to be a lot more "must have" players than usual.
Because their schedules never slow down, guys like Spezza, Thornton, Alfie, Heatley, Hasek, Redden, and maybe Cheechoo and Marleau (assuming they continue the pace they've been setting since The Trade, rather than their season average) will all be pretty close to being must-have players for the rest of the season.
I think it's much more fun when it's more wide open, and everyone has different players.
|
| 24 | chipsnbeer
ID: 360472211
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 13:23
|
I am not happy with TSN at all, anyone know of another good fantasy hockey site which takes its hockey seriously ?
|
| 25 | Joelis
ID: 389331817
Thu, Jan 26, 2006, 16:49
|
I'm thinking we might have to keep a closer eye on ownership numbers down the stretch and just take chances with low owned players who might be ready to "break out"...
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|