Jump to content


Cheap Thieves


  • Please log in to reply
251 replies to this topic

#21 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 25 September 2009 - 04:56 PM

View PostMNmiracleCJS, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 6:09 PM, said:

And I can see why, must be incredibly enthralling for a hockey nut. I'd be lying if I said I'm not jealous. Thanks for the explanation guys!
It was an article that Daniel wrote himself...While the league is AMAZING, I'll wait until a 3rd party picks up the story. :club:
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#22 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 25 September 2009 - 05:13 PM

View PostMNmiracleCJS, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 6:14 AM, said:

I must say 1.) I'm impressed with a league in which Budish and Leddy are worth roster spots2.) I'm impressed anyone outside of MN and their respective franchises knows who Budish and Leddy are3.) I'm not going to pretend to know any sort of rules or scoring for this pool but why in god's name is Bobby Ryan on the farm team?
The new rules we are going to implement this year make it better to keep him on the farm (Ryan) because we are switching our max in terms of number of years a player can be signed from 5 years, to 3 years. Ideally, with the old system it was best to call up a good player as a rookie and sign them to a cheaper 5 year contract. We can use our farm players for the stretch drive and the playoffs so for a team like mine, I won't need Ryan or Oshie to win my division. It makes a bit of sense to keep them on the farm, then call them up for the playoffs so I don't have to pay them more and can keep them a bit longer. I already have Corey Perry in ANA so that's why Ryan didn't get called up sooner. The new rule states that if a player has played 125 NHL games at the start of a season he must be called up or he goes on waivers.I can leave them both on the farm this year, but would be forced to keep them on the team next year... I'll probably call them both up. You can for the first month and then send them back to the farm, but I'll probably keep them.
Posted Image

#23 digitalmonkey

digitalmonkey

    Unenjoyable Annoying Retard

  • Members
  • 32,712 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sudbury
  • Interests:sports, music, movies, photography
  • Favorite Poker Game:Hi/Lo Chicago

Posted 25 September 2009 - 05:54 PM

View PostDanielNegreanu, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 8:13 PM, said:

The new rules we are going to implement this year make it better to keep him on the farm (Ryan) because we are switching our max in terms of number of years a player can be signed from 5 years, to 3 years. Ideally, with the old system it was best to call up a good player as a rookie and sign them to a cheaper 5 year contract. We can use our farm players for the stretch drive and the playoffs so for a team like mine, I won't need Ryan or Oshie to win my division. It makes a bit of sense to keep them on the farm, then call them up for the playoffs so I don't have to pay them more and can keep them a bit longer. I already have Corey Perry in ANA so that's why Ryan didn't get called up sooner. The new rule states that if a player has played 125 NHL games at the start of a season he must be called up or he goes on waivers.I can leave them both on the farm this year, but would be forced to keep them on the team next year... I'll probably call them both up. You can for the first month and then send them back to the farm, but I'll probably keep them.
By the way, i don't think the 3-year max limit should kick in next year. I think it should start the year after that.
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

#24 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 25 September 2009 - 07:13 PM

View Postdigitalmonkey, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 6:54 PM, said:

By the way, i don't think the 3-year max limit should kick in next year. I think it should start the year after that.
I kinda of agree with you, what is your reasoning for that?
Posted Image

#25 digitalmonkey

digitalmonkey

    Unenjoyable Annoying Retard

  • Members
  • 32,712 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sudbury
  • Interests:sports, music, movies, photography
  • Favorite Poker Game:Hi/Lo Chicago

Posted 25 September 2009 - 07:21 PM

View PostDanielNegreanu, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 10:13 PM, said:

I kinda of agree with you, what is your reasoning for that?
Because I had a plan for guys like Stamkos and Neal just as you probably had a plan for Ryan and Bob for Toews. Bringing in the new rule right away seems somewhat unfair and punishes us for managing our teams under the way the rules were. By delaying the new rule it gives us time to adjust and doesn't take away from the intent of the new rule. If we implement this new rule based on this seasons stats then we should have implemented the Toews rule this year also. And thanks for asking and listening.
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

#26 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 25 September 2009 - 07:23 PM

View Postdigitalmonkey, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 8:21 PM, said:

Because I had a plan for guys like Stamkos and Neal just as you probably had a plan for Ryan and Bob for Toews. Bringing in the new rule right away seems somewhat unfair and punishes us for managing our teams under the way the rules were. By delaying the new rule it gives us time to adjust and doesn't take away from the intent of the new rule. If we implement this new rule based on this seasons stats then we should have implemented the Toews rule this year also. And thanks for asking and listening.
I agree with you. Had I known about the rule changes I would have called up Ryan and Oshie last year. You make a good point and we'll go with it. However, draft pick changes will change immediately in terms of the salary structure.
Posted Image

#27 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 25 September 2009 - 09:08 PM

Opening night dilemma, who would you sit?Alexander Semin, WAS. vs TorontoSimon Gagne, PHI. @ New JerseyCorey Perry, ANA vs San JoseOlli Jokinen, CAL. @ EdmontonHenrik Sedin, VAN @ ColoradoAnze Kopitar, LA vs. PhoenixBobby Ryan, ANA. vs San Jose That is 7 sick forwards all with decent match ups, who would you bench?Goalie decision:NYR vs OTTSJ @ ANAVAN @ COL Who would you start?
Posted Image

#28 Zach6668

Zach6668

    2009 Stanley Cup Champions

  • Moderators
  • 43,356 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, ON

Posted 25 September 2009 - 10:05 PM

Kopitar and NYR.
QUOTE (serge @ Tuesday, May 12th, 2009, 7:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
LETS GO PITTSBURGH
QUOTE (Acid_Knight @ Monday, March 10th, 2008, 4:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Zach is right about pretty much everything.

#29 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 20,978 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 26 September 2009 - 03:20 AM

View Postdigitalmonkey, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 9:54 PM, said:

By the way, i don't think the 3-year max limit should kick in next year. I think it should start the year after that.

View PostDanielNegreanu, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 11:13 PM, said:

I kinda of agree with you, what is your reasoning for that?

View Postdigitalmonkey, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 11:21 PM, said:

Because I had a plan for guys like Stamkos and Neal just as you probably had a plan for Ryan and Bob for Toews. Bringing in the new rule right away seems somewhat unfair and punishes us for managing our teams under the way the rules were. By delaying the new rule it gives us time to adjust and doesn't take away from the intent of the new rule. If we implement this new rule based on this seasons stats then we should have implemented the Toews rule this year also. And thanks for asking and listening.

View PostDanielNegreanu, on Friday, September 25th, 2009, 11:23 PM, said:

I agree with you. Had I known about the rule changes I would have called up Ryan and Oshie last year. You make a good point and we'll go with it. However, draft pick changes will change immediately in terms of the salary structure.
I think for next year we should make it a 4 year max contract and then 3 years the year after if you don't want to implement it right away. Any time that you change a rule it's going to have an effect and we need to get things going on getting adjustments in our pool as soon as possible to change some of the structural issues that we've talked about.Just because you and Dale would have planned differently is no reason to delay putting in a good rule.The reason for the Toews rule not going this year was a practical one. We would have had to make sure to communicate with all the teams in a timely enough fashion the procedure for it and made sure that the teams that weren't at the draft would submit callups to take place after the draft but before the waiver period. With our transition I'm not confident that would have happend.
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#30 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 26 September 2009 - 03:45 AM

View PostFCP Bob, on Saturday, September 26th, 2009, 4:20 AM, said:

I think for next year we should make it a 4 year max contract and then 3 years the year after if you don't want to implement it right away. Any time that you change a rule it's going to have an effect and we need to get things going on getting adjustments in our pool as soon as possible to change some of the structural issues that we've talked about.Just because you and Dale would have planned differently is no reason to delay putting in a good rule.The reason for the Toews rule not going this year was a practical one. We would have had to make sure to communicate with all the teams in a timely enough fashion the procedure for it and made sure that the teams that weren't at the draft would submit callups to take place after the draft but before the waiver period. With our transition I'm not confident that would have happend.
I can use a poker analogy to show why Dale is right. At the WSOP November 9 last year Kelly Kim was the short stack at a 10 handed final table. In the small blind he had a marginal hand and folded, knowing that he'd have a full round to find a hand to play. On that hand a player went broke, so he would have the button 9 handed. All of a sudden the players were told there would be a redraw again! This was obviously unfair and I helped to get the decision reversed. It is unfair to implement a rule that doesn't give a team any opportunity or much time to do anything about it. That's why we also couldn't change the draft pick salaries to $3 this year, because it would make all pre-existing trades for draft picks unfair. Now players have a full year to make those decisions. However, you can't retroactively put players in more games in the previous season so that you could sign them to 5 years. By delaying it one season, we ensure that we give all owners an opportunity to prepare full for the drastic change. There is no immediate rush to implement this rule because you "say so." None of our owners are planning on quitting based on this rule. Most importantly, this rule delay will actually HELP the bad, young teams because now they can lock in some long term lower salaries that will help them become competitive quicker. Think Magically Delicious and all of his rookies. He can get some great contracts in which will help him. Switching to 3 years this season hurts the bad teams a heck of a lot more than the good teams.
Posted Image

#31 mrdannyg

mrdannyg

    Cheese Salesman

  • Members
  • 18,326 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 September 2009 - 05:18 AM

I would start Vancouver and bench Kopitar or Gagne.
Long signatures are really annoying.

#32 Ottawa_Biatch

Ottawa_Biatch

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 7,138 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario

Posted 26 September 2009 - 08:48 AM

I don't really like it's fair for me to offer an opinion on this as I am still fairly new the pool, so I'll leave it to the vets to decide what is best as they obviously have the most experience. The only thing is that whatever the decision is in regards to this, should be done sooner rather then later as it will be nice to know, as it affects on who we call up from the farm and when.
--------------------------------------

Follow me on twitter

http://twitter.com/Ottawa_Biatch

#33 Ottawa_Biatch

Ottawa_Biatch

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 7,138 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario

Posted 26 September 2009 - 09:06 AM

Nevermind, just read the AHL forums, me = idiot
--------------------------------------

Follow me on twitter

http://twitter.com/Ottawa_Biatch

#34 FCP Bob

FCP Bob

    Limit Holdem Dinosaur

  • Root Admin
  • 20,978 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scarberia

Posted 26 September 2009 - 09:45 AM

View PostOttawa_Biatch, on Saturday, September 26th, 2009, 12:48 PM, said:

I don't really like it's fair for me to offer an opinion on this as I am still fairly new the pool, so I'll leave it to the vets to decide what is best as they obviously have the most experience. The only thing is that whatever the decision is in regards to this, should be done sooner rather then later as it will be nice to know, as it affects on who we call up from the farm and when.
You're now a full fledged member of the AHL and you shouldn't be afraid to give your opinions on anything.We're all in it together.
Bob

info@fullcontactpoker.com

#35 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 27 September 2009 - 07:19 PM

Get used to this biiiatches: 1st Period Anaheim 2:00, Corey Perry 1 (James Wisniewski) Los Angeles 3:50, Ryan Smyth 1 (power play) (Michal Handzus, Teddy Purcell) Anaheim 5:19, Bobby Ryan 1 (Corey Perry, James Wisniewski) 2nd Period Anaheim 12:04, Bobby Ryan 2 (Ryan Getzlaf) Los Angeles 15:13, Ryan Smyth 2 (power play) (Anze Kopitar, Dustin Brown) 3rd Period Anaheim 6:40, Ryan Getzlaf 1 (power play) (Bobby Ryan, Scott Niedermayer) Los Angeles 9:04, Anze Kopitar 1 (power play) (Ryan Smyth, Dustin Brown) Anaheim 17:25, Joffrey Lupul 1 (Saku Koivu, Teemu Selanne) Los Angeles 18:47, Anze Kopitar 2 (Ryan Smyth, Trevor Lewis)
Posted Image

#36 serge

serge

    Leafs nation Grand Poobah

  • Members
  • 41,477 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 28 September 2009 - 06:28 AM

Preseason Leaders in Goals:Stahlberg, Viktor, Tor. 8 6 MUSTANGS ROOKIE Kopitar, Anze, L.A. 5 5 THIEVES BEST PLAYER Simmonds, Wayne, L.A. 6 5 MUSTANGS ROOKIE
I am a huge Leafs fan, I am not going to apologize for my love of the greatest team on earth.
GO LEAFS GO

#37 serge

serge

    Leafs nation Grand Poobah

  • Members
  • 41,477 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto

Posted 29 September 2009 - 04:10 PM

I like to point out..Viktor Stalberg was acquired with the Cheap Thieves 1st round pick..Got Antropov and a 1st rounder for niedermayer last year
I am a huge Leafs fan, I am not going to apologize for my love of the greatest team on earth.
GO LEAFS GO

#38 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 01 October 2009 - 01:32 AM

View Postserge, on Tuesday, September 29th, 2009, 5:10 PM, said:

I like to point out..Viktor Stalberg was acquired with the Cheap Thieves 1st round pick..Got Antropov and a 1st rounder for niedermayer last year
Wow so you did me like the Leafs? I'm the Leafs!!! Ugh. Good trade anyway. I don't need Antropov at all but he's good for you.
Posted Image

#39 Ottawa_Biatch

Ottawa_Biatch

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 7,138 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario

Posted 03 October 2009 - 01:45 PM

Big mistake not playing Darcy Tucker today, imo.
--------------------------------------

Follow me on twitter

http://twitter.com/Ottawa_Biatch

#40 DanielNegreanu

DanielNegreanu

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Root Admin
  • 7,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 03 October 2009 - 06:39 PM

View PostOttawa_Biatch, on Saturday, October 3rd, 2009, 2:45 PM, said:

Big mistake not playing Darcy Tucker today, imo.
He may be available for trade. Looking for an overaged over the hill d-man like Lidstrom in return.
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users