I think that 200/300 TOI are good. I also like the idea of waiting until at least Season 10 before we make changes. That gives everyone a chance to plan and adjust. Although realisticly any goalie will work in this league.

Not only would retiring mid-season be hard to enforce, it penalizes a team going into the playoffs. If a goalie hits his TOI during the season he would retire after that season is over. BUT what about a goalie who hits 190 in a season and is then benched? I don't think he should be allowed to play the entire following season...again hard to enforce but needs to be addressed.

I see both sides of the issue that blee just brought up. I think a goalie close to the line should not get to play an extra season. I flirted with that loophole myself. But I also think an owner has to be able to say, hold on, I want to reserve that guy.

Now I wasn't around for the original discussion when it was determined that goalies would be measured differently than skaters, but...

Why don't we just throw out the TOI measurement... since we mostly seem to agree that the original limit was too liberal... and go with retirements for goalies after six (or seven or eight) seasons, just like regular players?

No, I think it needs to be TOI. Reason being that goalies are certain to play fewer than 82 games per year. Depending on his stamina, that would mean each goalie would have to retire with significantly different numbers of games played.

Of course, you could just call that strategy when selecting a goalie.

However, I really really don't want to have to get into the "19 games played" warehousing game for goalies. If we adjust the total TOI downward, that should work, if that's really want everybody wants. Like I said earlier, though, I like the current limits. What's wrong with keeping goalies for a long time? It makes for better role-playing. It only affects the entry draft, and I like the strategic aspect of depleting the skaters every year in the draft. Makes it more challenging.

I vote for TOI enforced after the season ends

yogs, thanks for all the kind words in your thread. I happen to think we just got lucky, although I told the boys after the first game that we need to bring our best because we are playing the best. I believe your goaltending must have set new records this season

I drafted a G this time around. Of course I didn't need him, and I didn't even sign him because that would've given me 4 goalies. It seems to me, and the rest of you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I bet every team here has atleast 3 goalies. (I do) How about capping the limit at 2 netminders per team? The need to lower TOI wouldn't be as great.

A good suggestion, but if we cap the limit on netminders at 2 per team, isn't that even more reason not to draft goalies?

I have five goalies now. I ended up drafting two, though I didn't "need" any.

My original plan was to upgrade my 4th goalie in the 6th round. In the 4th round all the goalies were still there, and the next forward I wanted should still have been available in the 5th (which he was). So I took the value pick instead, and now my rook is good enough that he'll start in the rotation this season (which is why my veteran is holding out).

Here's the stupid part - in the 6th round I targeted a goon forward. When my turn came up, all the goon forwards were gone. I would still rather have drafted any forward on the board - the guy would probably never play - but the draft board assigned me a fifth goalie! I kept him because he's still better than the previous 4th goalie.

With respect to yogsloth's statement about depleting all the skaters in the draft being strategic, it proves my point. Encinitas already had five goalies, all of whom played last season. Encinitas was not going to draft a goalie. That 16th, 17th, or 18th skater on the Yorba Linda roster (for example) would be far more valuable as a developmentary resource to a team like Encinitas (or mine ) than to YLY.

The number of draftable players is assigned based on sim's expectation of players needed. Due to the way our league is currently structured, an entire section of the draft board is not being used.

If we come to a point where some of those draft picks need to be used on goalies, then it will help redistribute the talent base. Kind of like when the NCAA limited the number of football scholarships a university could hand out. Teams like Nebraska, Ohio State and Michigan could no longer just take all the players they wanted to just to keep them from other teams, with no intention of ever playing them. It's why smaller universities are more competitive these days.

God, I get gabby on weekend mornings. Must be the caffeine.

I don't think it would be a reason not to draft a goalie damag. What having only 2 goalies would do is force teams to play their goalies. Either by having a stud play most games, or split time. The more a goalie plays, the sooner he would need to retire. GM's wouldn't be able to ease their goalies along, or see if a 4th or 5th goalie is any good.

Plus, when the draft rolls around, if there's a goalie on the board that looks like he may be better than one a team may have, then a GM has to decide on if he should draft a new guy and dump the old one.

As for making a goalie retire mid-season, that's just completely and utterly wrong.

Ahhh, now I see your point b_d. That is another, less complex way of looking at it. Thanks.

I think I would want to be able to develop a goalie & not be stuck with a bad one. I agree we will forced to play a goalie more, but if we reduce the TOI, it should serve our purpose of retiring goalies sooner. If we put a goalie limit, I think the minimun would be 3, not 2.

I agree that a 'hard' TOI limit is too hard to enforce & should remain an end of season responsibility. It only will take one more season till the goalie has to retire. The only problem that will occur is holding goalies for playoff play only. However after a few seasons that will be resolved, because the other goalies will reach their TOI & be forced to retire.

If you have a 3 goalie limit you're giving GM's the chance to prolong their goaltenders careers.

If you go with 2 goalies it affects everyone the same. Plus if it's only 2 goalies per team, then the TOI doesn't have to be cut so drasticly. It could be reduced to 300 for non-FP and 400 for FP.

As for being stuck with a bad goalie, then you or any other GM would have to decide, do I want this guy or should I replace him? All GM's would have to be more of a GM.

I'm inclined to take this suggestion seriously.

First of all, I agree with b_d's arguments.

Second, it would also satisfy yogsloth's argument that depleting the skaters is a strategic consideration... a GM could still choose to draft that way if he desired.

Third, I usually fall into making an analogy of this league with Major Junior hockey... players have an elegibility limit therefore ensuring roster turnover... and Major Junior teams almost never carry three goalies, a third guy is either a short-term emergency callup, or if a Major Junior team really finds itself needing an in-season change in nets, a trade is made.

Whoa whoa whoa.

I am HUGELY against a 2 goalie limit. Really, I don't want ANY limits on the number of goalies I can carry. Part of the fun is riding the hot hand. The guy that kicks butt one year might not do it the next, but then might do it again 3 years from now. Being confined to two goalies will create significant stamina issues and will just plain suck.

Well, on a lighter note...

Glad to see Brian Burke is an MLD fan, the Ducks have adopted the warehousing concept wholeheartedly this season.