|
|
Post by playmaker26 on Sept 30, 2013 11:08:14 GMT -5
Little dilemma here...should I make roster moves for those teams? If someone takes over midseason and I made roster moves for the teams, and they place in the money, I'm not sure if it's fair that they get paid?
Would like to get some opinions on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by roenick27 on Sept 30, 2013 11:25:54 GMT -5
If they are taking over mid season etc, then they need to know that going in...
I say do it
|
|
|
|
Post by burnsy00 on Sept 30, 2013 11:33:08 GMT -5
I think so long as its unbiased moves and its for the betterment of the teams then I think it should be done to keep the teams competitive to attract new GM's
|
|
|
|
Post by seadawg on Sept 30, 2013 11:50:09 GMT -5
I think you should set the starting roster as you see fit (I know you can be objective) and after that you make roster moves only if there are injuries.
and it goes without saying that you don't make any waiver/free agent pick ups either
if (or when) we find owners, they can start making whatever moves they want
I'd also suggest that any new owners don't pay for the current season, but they do have to pay now for next season. This will mean a bit less money for the winners, but it will be easier to find owners if they don't have to pay for a partial season in which they didn't participate in the draft and didn't have the benefit of roster moves early on.
If they pay for next season now, that shows us they are committed to the league long-term, so I don't mind that they play for free this season.
|
|
|
|
Post by playmaker26 on Sept 30, 2013 16:08:46 GMT -5
I think you should set the starting roster as you see fit (I know you can be objective) and after that you make roster moves only if there are injuries. and it goes without saying that you don't make any waiver/free agent pick ups either if (or when) we find owners, they can start making whatever moves they want I'd also suggest that any new owners don't pay for the current season, but they do have to pay now for next season. This will mean a bit less money for the winners, but it will be easier to find owners if they don't have to pay for a partial season in which they didn't participate in the draft and didn't have the benefit of roster moves early on. If they pay for next season now, that shows us they are committed to the league long-term, so I don't mind that they play for free this season. I agree with all of this. |
|
|
|
Post by burnsy00 on Sept 30, 2013 17:13:58 GMT -5
I am cool with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by playmaker26 on Oct 12, 2013 12:44:19 GMT -5
The Norsemen has an injury to Lehtonen but has no goalie on his farm. I could call up Schneider but do you guys think I should just leave all of the prospects called down?
|
|
|
|
Post by roenick27 on Oct 12, 2013 12:50:13 GMT -5
The Norsemen has an injury to Lehtonen but has no goalie on his farm. I could call up Schneider but do you guys think I should just leave all of the prospects called down? I have some goalies I could move potentially for prospects from that team if the guys in here would consider that an option. I would think mist feel not trading with vacant teams makes the most sense but I figured I'd toss it as an option |
|
|
|
Post by playmaker26 on Oct 12, 2013 13:06:37 GMT -5
I wouldn't do any trades/free agent moves with the available teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by burnsy00 on Oct 12, 2013 13:23:22 GMT -5
I would leave lehtonen in.
|
|
|
|
Post by seadawg on Oct 12, 2013 16:18:23 GMT -5
I'd move Schneider up. Anyone taking over the team would do that. It only makes sense to have a bench goalie and Schneider isn't a prospect any longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by playmaker26 on Oct 13, 2013 9:39:14 GMT -5
I'll call him up.
|
|
