EuroList

[Donga]

this is the list that I worked from. Can someone Stickify this thread.

BUF:
-Stanislav Chistov (ANA->RSL)
-Adam Deadmarsh (retired) *

PIT:
-Christian Berglund (NJ->Rapperswil SWI)
-Marcus Ragnarsson (PHI->Almtuna SEL2)

OTT:
-Josh Holden (AHL->SWI)
-Jaroslav Kristek (AHL->Praha CZE)
-Daryl Andrews (AHL->Sheffield EIHL)
-Eric Perrin (AHL->Bern SWI)
-Rob Zepp (AHL->SaiPa FEL)

MTL:
-Alexei Smirnov (AHL->Avangard Omsk RSL)
-Martin Strbak (PIT->CSKA RSL)
-Artem Chubarov (Omsk RSL)
-Harold Druken (AHL->Basel SWI)
-Riku Hahl (HPK->Davos SWI)
-Vincent Damphousse (retired) *

CAR:
-Radovan Somik (PHI->Severstal Cherepovets RSL)
-Stephane Quintal (retired)
-Mark Messier (retired) *

BOS:

NJ:
-Ilya Kovalchuk (Kazan->Khimik RSL)
-Alexander Semin (RSL) *
-Josef Boumedienne(AHL->SWI) *
-Justin Mapletoft(AHL->Jokerit)

PHI:
-P.J. Stock (retired) *

FLA:
-Robert Reichel (TOR->Litvinov CZE)
-Janne Laukkanen (retired)
-Petr Buzek (CGY->CZE)
-Stephen Valiquette (NYR->Lokomotiv RSL)

NYR:
-Brian Swanson (AHL->Kassel DEL)
-Andreas Johansson (NSH->Väsby SEL2)
-Denis Arkhipov (NSH->RSL)
-Alexei Morozov (PIT->Ak Bars RSL)
-Yannick Lehoux (AHL->Geneve-Servette SWI)
-Shjon Podein (SEL2->JPN)
-John Tripp (AHL->Mannheim DEL)
-Karl Dykhuis (Amsterdam->Mannheim DEL)

WSH:
-Mattias Timander (PHI->Modo SEL)
-Pavel Trnka (FLA->Plzen CZE)

TB:
-Craig Johnson (WSH->Dusseldorf DEL)
-Espen Knutsen (retired)
-Jaroslav Bednar (FLO->Praha CZE)
-David Cloutier (AHL->Innsbruck AUT)
-Shawn Heins (ATL->Berlin DEL)
-Johan Holmqvist (MIN->Brynäs/Timrå SEL)
-Roman Turek (retired from NHL)
-Jean-Luc Grand-Pierre (NHL->Duisburg DEL)
-Aris Brimanis (AHL->Kloten SWI) *

NYI:
-Roman Cechmanek (LA->Karlovy Vary CZE)
-Pasi Nurminen (retired)
-James Patrick (retired)

DAL:
-Mikhail Yakubov (AHL->Spartak Moskva RSL)
-Mike Wilson (PHX->Linz AUT)
-Frederick Brind'Amour (NYI->QSMHL last game in 03-04)

DET:
-Benoit Dusanblom (retired)
-Marc Brown (AHL->Augsburg DEL)
-Brad DeFauw (CAR->Växjö SEL2)
-Karl Goehring (AHL->Jokerit FEL) *
-Eddie Ferhi (ECHL->Anglet FRA) *

PHX:
-Derek Bekar (AHL->Chur SWI)
-Igor Korolev (CHI->Yaroslav RSL)
-Sebastien Charpentier (WAS->HK MVD Tver RSL2)

STL:
-Daniel Tkaczuk (STL->FEL->ITL->DEL->RSL)
-Robert Dome (CGY->SSK SEL)
-Landon Wilson (PIT->FIN->Davos SWI)

CHI:
-Magnus Arvedsson (retired)

TOR:
-Cody Larose (SCL Tigers SWI)
-Steve Moore (injury)
-Jonas Andersson (NSH->Brynäs SEL)
-Petr Smrek (OTT->Mora SEL)
-Christian LaFlamme (STL->Kassel DEL)
-Sebastien Centomo (ECHL->HIFK FEL)

COL:
-Milan Kraft (PIT->Omsk RSL)
-Ivan Ciernik (WSH->Koln DEL)
-Pavel Rosa (LA->Dynamo Moskva RSL)
-Pierre Hedin (TOR->Mannheim DEL)
-Shane Willis (TB->Davos SWI)

ANA:
-Kenny Jönsson (NYI->Rögle SEL2)
-Al MacInnis (retired) *

EDM:
-Hnat Domenichelli (MIN->SWI)
-Michael Henrich (AHL->Zell Am See AUT)
-Dan Welch (AHL->Nottingham EIHL)

VAN:
-Greg Classen (AHL->Pori FEL)
-Dan Bylsma (retired)
-Petr Schastlivy (ANA->Yaroslav RSL)
-Pascal Trepanier (TB->Nurnberg DEL)
-Karel Rachunek (NYR->RSL)
-Burke Henry (AHL->Salzburg AUT)

CGY:
-Marty Murray (CAR->Hannover DEL)
-Steve Guolla (NJ->Hannover DEL)
-Kristian Kudroc (TB->FEL)
-Scott Stevens (retired) *

LA:
-Jan Hlavac (NYR->Geneve SWI)
-Eric Johansson (AHL->Mora SEL)
-Felix Potvin (BOS->Lada Togliatti RSL)
-Don Sweeney (retired) *
-Eric Messier (retired) *


SJ:
-Maxim Balmochnykh (AHL->Lipetsk RSL2)

NSH:
-Jason Krog (ANA->Geneve SWI)
-Alexander Svitov (CBJ->Omsk RSL)
-Jamie Wright (AHL->Lukko FEL)
-Brad Tapper (AHL->Hannover DEL)
-Kyle Rossiter (AHL->Bofors SEL2) *

ATL:
-Arron Asham (NYI->Visp SWI2)
-Daniel Corso (AHL->Frankfurt DEL)
-Andreas Dackell (MTL->Brynäs SEL)
-Lubos Bartecko (LA->Dynamo Moskva RSL)
-Trent Klatt (retired) *

MIN:
-Andrei Nikolishin (COL->CSKA Moscow RSL)
-Todd Warriner (NSH->FEL->DEL)
-Jason York (NHL->Lugano SWI)

CBJ:
-Arto Tukio (Frölunda SEL)



-Trevor Kidd (TOR->Hannover DEL)
-Jan Lasak (NSH->HC Pardubice CZE)
-Zdenek Kutlak (BOS->CZE)
-Kiriil Safronov (NSH->RSL)
-Anders Eriksson (COL->HV71 SEL)
-Jason Holland (LA->Inglostadt DEL)
-Deron Quint (CHI->SWI)
-Yannick Trembley (ATL->Innsbruck AUT)
-Karel Pilar (TOR->CZE)
-Vladimir Orzagh (NSH->Färjestad SEL?)
-Michal Grosek (BOS->SWI?)
-Rob Zamuner (BOS->Basel SWI)
-Travis Brigley (COL->Oslo NOR)
-Darby Henrickson (?->Salzburg AUT)
-Claude Lemieux (DAL->SUI)
---
-Mike Kompon (NCAA->UHL)
-Jeff Harvey (WHL->UHL)
-Tyler Dyck (WHL)
---
-Gregg Naumenko (SJ->3rd year UFA)
-Rich Pilon (STL->? played his last game in 01-02)
-Bill Houlder (NSH->played his last game in 02-03)
-Marty McInnis (BOS->played his last game in 02-03)
-Pavel Bure (NYR->played his last game in 02-03)
-Stephen Heinze (Played his last game in 02-03)
-Jonathan Schill (Played his last game in 02-03)
---
-Ron Tugnutt (DAL->2nd year UFA)
-Cody Rudkowski (STL->2nd year UFA)
-Corey Schwab (NJ->2nd year UFA)
-Steve Sheilds (FLA->2nd year UFA)
-Murray Baron (STL->2nd year UFA)
-Brad Norton (WSH->2nd year UFA)
-Bubba Berenzweig (AHL->2nd year UFA)
-Marc Bergevin (VAN->2nd year UFA)
-Jeff Finley (STL->2nd year UFA)
-Jesse Wallin (AHL->2nd year UFA)
-Chris Tamer (ATL->2nd year UFA)
-Drake Berehowsky (TOR->2nd year UFA)
-Boris Mironov (NYR->2nd year UFA)
-Steve Webb (NYI->2nd year UFA)
-Ivan Novoseltsev (PHO->Spartak RSL)
-Bill Muckalt (MIN->2nd year UFA)
-Dave Lowry (CGY->2nd year UFA)
-Bates Battaglia (WSH->2nd year UFA)
-Mike Peluso (PHI->2nd year UFA)
-Jody Hull (OTT->2nd year UFA)
-Joe Hulbig (NJ->2nd year UFA)
-Rem Murray (NSH->2nd year UFA)
-Shayne Corson (DAL->2nd year UFA)
-Roman Tvrdon (WSH->2nd year UFA)
-Jeff Bateman (DAL->2nd year UFA)
-Matthias Trattnig (AHL->Salzburg AUT)
-Mike Eastwood (PIT->2nd year UFA)
-Brian Holzinger (CBJ->2nd year UFA)
-Shaun Van Allen (OTT->2nd year UFA)
-Yanic Perrault (MTL->2nd year UFA)


Other player leaving from NHL/AHL:
-Theo Fleury (CHI->Belfast Giants EIHL)
-Patrick Aufiero (AHL->DEL)
-Patrick DesRochers (AHL->DEL)
-Chris/Peter Ferraro (AHL-Düsseldorf DEL)
-Jesse Fibiger (AHL->Wolfsburg DEL)
-Andy Hedlund (AHL->Krefeld DEL)
-Ryan Kraft (AHL->Kassel DEL)
-Chris Schmidt (AHL->Düsseldorf DEL)
-Dieter Kochan (AHL->Novosibirsk RSL)
-Fred Brathwaite (CBJ->Ak Bars RSL)
-Neil Little (AHL->Espoo FEL)

Click to read more...

 

[SPG]

Who do I need to email to release the rights of some of those guys? Can I just post it here?

 

[kasper11]

Kovalchuk should not be on this list. He is still eligible to play this season (and may have a contract signed this weekend)

 

[Donga]

Kovalchuk should not be on this list. He is still eligible to play this season (and may have a contract signed this weekend)

Oct 1st is the date. If signed after this date, he will not be eligible to play. He is technically playing in Russia at the moment. That has been my ruling.

 

[Dryden]

I'd be pissed

Kovalchuk and the Thrashers have reached an agreement in principle on a five-year contract, according to TSN.ca.

The way I see it is that Kovalchuk was a holdout and decided to keep in shape by playing in Russia for a couple games. If the HFNHL is suppossed to mimic the NHL and its rules then Kovalchuk should be allowed in. It just makes sense. If he had played in his next Russian game on Oct 12th he would have been ineligible to play in the NHL. So since he hasn't played in a game since the NHL started he's able to continue to pay in the NHL. I believe that because of this he should be allowed in.

I'll probably get kicked out of the league for saying this but I think I should speak my mind and have often done so in regards to the whole European list and prospects ratings system. As I've stated before in other threads I stongly believe that if a player played in the NHL the season before (2003-2004 in this case) then he deserves a rating and should qualify for the 2005-2006 HFNHL season. If said player retires or moves to Europe then their ratings should be decreased by say 10% for the upcoming season and then removed the following year, unless they come back. Also I believe that how we rate rookies needs to be re-evaluated. For example, I'm just going to pick a name out of a hat, Henrik Zetterberg, he should have been signed after his first year...pretty decent NHL numbers for a rookie, but he probably would have received really crappy ratings and wouldn't have been worth it for the Sens GM to sign him. Either that or the Sens GM was just too dumb to sign him. Looking at that team he's obviously very bright and knew what he was doing. But I know of one GM who wouldn't sign prospects because of this. He felt it was better to have a guy sit on his prospect list and pay the $50,000 till his player would get a decent enough rating. So said player has sat on his prospect list for the 3 years that I've been in this league and thats a spot that could be used by his team or someone else's team. Ya I'm rambling on but I'm looking at this league and we've got teams that can't even field a roster to start the year. It's almost becoming a joke and I think the admin team really needs to discuss how it does the ratings or things are just going to get worse. Case in point, is Colaiacovo really a 55? Why isn't he a 67 and I get the chance to break him in as a rookie? What about Nittymaki? He could be a solid backup for someone right now. But no he's riding a prospect list somewhere and some team has no goalie what so ever.

Oh well I guess stuff like this is only important to me and not relevant to the league as a whole. The unimportant stuff like getting out a season preview has to be rushed and is extremely vital to the survival of the league. Yet making sure rosters are complete and teams are able to field a competitive team gets put on the back burner.

Guess I'l sit back and relax and wait for my "Dryden its been nice having you in the league but I think you gotta go message" now that I've stirred up some heat and raised my opinion and voiced my concerns. I just really like this league and feel that it has its stong points but could be oh so much better if weak points like the ratings were addressed.

 

[Ohio Jones]

Kovalchuk and the Thrashers have reached an agreement in principle on a five-year contract, according to TSN.ca.

The way I see it is that Kovalchuk was a holdout and decided to keep in shape by playing in Russia for a couple games. If the HFNHL is suppossed to mimic the NHL and its rules then Kovalchuk should be allowed in. It just makes sense. If he had played in his next Russian game on Oct 12th he would have been ineligible to play in the NHL. So since he hasn't played in a game since the NHL started he's able to continue to pay in the NHL. I believe that because of this he should be allowed in.

I'll probably get kicked out of the league for saying this but I think I should speak my mind and have often done so in regards to the whole European list and prospects ratings system. As I've stated before in other threads I stongly believe that if a player played in the NHL the season before (2003-2004 in this case) then he deserves a rating and should qualify for the 2005-2006 HFNHL season. If said player retires or moves to Europe then their ratings should be decreased by say 10% for the upcoming season and then removed the following year, unless they come back. Also I believe that how we rate rookies needs to be re-evaluated. For example, I'm just going to pick a name out of a hat, Henrik Zetterberg, he should have been signed after his first year...pretty decent NHL numbers for a rookie, but he probably would have received really crappy ratings and wouldn't have been worth it for the Sens GM to sign him. Either that or the Sens GM was just too dumb to sign him. Looking at that team he's obviously very bright and knew what he was doing. But I know of one GM who wouldn't sign prospects because of this. He felt it was better to have a guy sit on his prospect list and pay the $50,000 till his player would get a decent enough rating. So said player has sat on his prospect list for the 3 years that I've been in this league and thats a spot that could be used by his team or someone else's team. Ya I'm rambling on but I'm looking at this league and we've got teams that can't even field a roster to start the year. It's almost becoming a joke and I think the admin team really needs to discuss how it does the ratings or things are just going to get worse. Case in point, is Colaiacovo really a 55? Why isn't he a 67 and I get the chance to break him in as a rookie? What about Nittymaki? He could be a solid backup for someone right now. But no he's riding a prospect list somewhere and some team has no goalie what so ever.

Oh well I guess stuff like this is only important to me and not relevant to the league as a whole. The unimportant stuff like getting out a season preview has to be rushed and is extremely vital to the survival of the league. Yet making sure rosters are complete and teams are able to field a competitive team gets put on the back burner.

Guess I'l sit back and relax and wait for my "Dryden its been nice having you in the league but I think you gotta go message" now that I've stirred up some heat and raised my opinion and voiced my concerns. I just really like this league and feel that it has its stong points but could be oh so much better if weak points like the ratings were addressed.

Dry - for the record, I've been one who has at least tried to make the case for a change (and also for the record, the resistance is not to making a change, but to doing so this year, since GMs have had no notice and have made plans based on our existing rulings... there is little sympathy for those GMs who made no plans whatsoever and are now having to scramble).

But I will say this: you can get off your high horse about the website now. This had nothing to do with getting an article up urgently and everything to do with general responsiveness. You definitely seem to be around now, and that's great, but you weren't there for an extended period when the admin team was trying to get the website moving, so we had to make other arrangments. Deal with it.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Hmm, Kovalcuk purposely did not play in Europe once the season started, so I would suggest he be eligible, versus a player actually playing in Europe. I know we've used the Oct 1st date for retirements etc in past, but on Oct 1st Kovalchuk was basically a hold-out in the NHL (versus playing in Europe). The guy has been in Atlanta for the past week and should be eligible to play IMO.

As to rating prospects and other players, teams do benefit from our rating system, the same way they get hurt. Owen Nolan isn't exactly helping an NHL team right now and will likely never play again, but Boston is able to use him as a 79 rated power forward. I think this makes up for a better rating for a player like Cola, who still can't crack the Leafs questionable defensive corps, and is an AHLer right now, more than a NHLer. And an average one at that I would submit (requisite Leafs jab).

 

[Brock]

Hmm, Kovalcuk purposely did not play in Europe once the season started, so I would suggest he be eligible, versus a player actually playing in Europe. I know we've used the Oct 1st date for retirements etc in past, but on Oct 1st Kovalchuk was basically a hold-out in the NHL (versus playing in Europe). The guy has been in Atlanta for the past week and should be eligible to play IMO.

I'm going to agree with Nick here. I think that we should allow Kovalchuk to play, because it's clear he wasn't "bolting" for Europe. He was simply an RFA holdout who was keeping sharp by playing a few games over there. He's been back for like a week now, hasnt played there. My view would be to definitely allow him to play in the league this year, for whatever lucky team has him.

 

[Dryden]

But I will say this: you can get off your high horse about the website now. This had nothing to do with getting an article up urgently and everything to do with general responsiveness. You definitely seem to be around now, and that's great, but you weren't there for an extended period when the admin team was trying to get the website moving, so we had to make other arrangments. Deal with it.

Doug I got off my high horse at the age of 5. I'm 6'3 and don't need it. IT WAS A GENERAL COMMENT ABOUT WHAT SEEMS IMPORTANT TO THE LEAGUE and not a jab about people posting things on a website that I built. It's a reference I could use cause it relates to me and its how I feel the admin team views whats important. Like I said before I'm fine with it and am now done with it. If I was really pisssed I would have just removed it and myself from the league. Cause thats how I roll.

Now I want the league to seriously step back and think about something here. There are a handful of teams that have their rosters in perfect shape and have nothing to worry about. Stand up take a bow. Cause your really lucky. Then there are another handful of teams that can't even build a roster. Go sit in the dunce corner, cause A) you'll probably never read this cause you're just not that involved and B) now that your team sucks your going to walk away C) your really unlucky and never prepared yourself for unforeseen circumstances.

Looks like the involved teams are taken care of. The teams that are in the dumps have GM's who are most ikely not around any more or because of this are probably looking to jump ship. Sure this league is free but is someone going to go through the process of rebuilding and taking 5 years to build a playoff contender. This is my 3rd HFNHL season with the Hawks it wasn't easy but atleast I had something to deal with. Most of these teams have nothing. For LA's sake Potvin atleast was shown an interest by the Thrashers just never made the club or any other club for that matter. Does that mean he's done and shoud be removed from the league?

Ahhh...why the hell am I wasting my time defending teams who won't even do it for themselves.

 

[Tampa GM]

Miroslav Zalesak has sign with Södertälje SK in the SEL. He will play in the SEL for the rest of this season. He will play his first game on the 11th of October.

 

[Ohio Jones]

Doug I got off my high horse at the age of 5. I'm 6'3 and don't need it. IT WAS A GENERAL COMMENT ABOUT WHAT SEEMS IMPORTANT TO THE LEAGUE and not a jab about people posting things on a website that I built. It's a reference I could use cause it relates to me and its how I feel the admin team views whats important. Like I said before I'm fine with it and am now done with it. If I was really pisssed I would have just removed it and myself from the league. Cause thats how I roll.

Fair enough.

Now I want the league to seriously step back and think about something here. There are a handful of teams that have their rosters in perfect shape and have nothing to worry about. Stand up take a bow. Cause your really lucky. Then there are another handful of teams that can't even build a roster. Go sit in the dunce corner, cause A) you'll probably never read this cause you're just not that involved and B) now that your team sucks your going to walk away C) your really unlucky and never prepared yourself for unforeseen circumstances.

Looks like the involved teams are taken care of. The teams that are in the dumps have GM's who are most ikely not around any more or because of this are probably looking to jump ship. Sure this league is free but is someone going to go through the process of rebuilding and taking 5 years to build a playoff contender. This is my 3rd HFNHL season with the Hawks it wasn't easy but atleast I had something to deal with. Most of these teams have nothing. For LA's sake Potvin atleast was shown an interest by the Thrashers just never made the club or any other club for that matter. Does that mean he's done and shoud be removed from the league?

The admin team already takes this matter very seriously, Dryden, but thanks for raising it. We have been working to reach and obtain commitments from those GMs whose teams are in various states of disarray. Some teams, it seems, manage to show up just barely often enough to make it difficult to say they don't participate, but still make sit difficult for them to ice a complete team. Some of those GMs are being replaced, which is really the only reason at this point we aren't ready to start the season. While there have been some who would reset the "Bad GM" clock every time a largely absent GM decided to surface and do something with his team, the trend in attitude is towards a more aggressive approach, because clearly the general inactivity on those teams is hurting our league.

One thing to remember is that teams can be working behind the scenes, signing prospects/FAs, having trade talks, but unless they post (which, sadly, not all GMs seem interested in doing) we don't hear about it until the deals are completed. So it's not safe to assume that all incomplete teams are rudderless with noone at the helm. However, that is an appropriate description for some teams, and that is being remedied. Those who able to clearly demonstrate that they are taking an active role with their team and in the league will be sticking around, those who fail to demonstrate that commitment will be replaced.

In other words, stay tuned.

 

[Dryden]

How about this for a possible solution to inactivity and dealing with bad GM's, we install a few requirements: 1) you need to post a newsletter once per month detailing what is going on with your team 2) a three strikes your out policy. For example: don't submit your lines or a newsletter or any other criteria and your gone no questions asked. People need to participate or make way for those who are interested. It's just an idea, don't know if it would work here but it does in my other league. Hmmm, may be thats how I got in.

 

[Ohio Jones]

Appreciate the suggestion, Dry - those methods have been used in the past in this league, but when a majority of your GMs don't meet those requirements, it makes it a little difficult - we don't want to have to replace 20 GMs... that said, I'd be willing to give them a try again, although I wonder if a carrot might not work better than a stick (as long as it doesn't become administratively burdensome...). I think this season has special challenges because of the lost year in between, so perhaps there's some desire to make allowances for that, but either way, the situation is being dealt with, and we look forward to moving forward shortly.

 

[SPG]

I'll probably get kicked out of the league for saying this but I think I should speak my mind and have often done so in regards to the whole European list and prospects ratings system. As I've stated before in other threads I stongly believe that if a player played in the NHL the season before (2003-2004 in this case) then he deserves a rating and should qualify for the 2005-2006 HFNHL season. If said player retires or moves to Europe then their ratings should be decreased by say 10% for the upcoming season and then removed the following year, unless they come back. Also I believe that how we rate rookies needs to be re-evaluated. For example, I'm just going to pick a name out of a hat, Henrik Zetterberg, he should have been signed after his first year...pretty decent NHL numbers for a rookie, but he probably would have received really crappy ratings and wouldn't have been worth it for the Sens GM to sign him. Either that or the Sens GM was just too dumb to sign him. Looking at that team he's obviously very bright and knew what he was doing. But I know of one GM who wouldn't sign prospects because of this. He felt it was better to have a guy sit on his prospect list and pay the $50,000 till his player would get a decent enough rating. So said player has sat on his prospect list for the 3 years that I've been in this league and thats a spot that could be used by his team or someone else's team. Ya I'm rambling on but I'm looking at this league and we've got teams that can't even field a roster to start the year. It's almost becoming a joke and I think the admin team really needs to discuss how it does the ratings or things are just going to get worse. Case in point, is Colaiacovo really a 55? Why isn't he a 67 and I get the chance to break him in as a rookie? What about Nittymaki? He could be a solid backup for someone right now. But no he's riding a prospect list somewhere and some team has no goalie what so ever.

Dryden-

I am 100% with you on this... the way the Euros and rookies are handled makes absolutely no sense to me. It sets the league back, IMO. Rookies should at least be given some kind of estimated rating when signed so they can contribute. Doesn't have to be anything substantial (IE a rating in the 70s), just enough where they would be valuable to have on the roster... for depth even. I have less of a problem with the Europen player rules, but that also needs to be addressed. The talent pool overall in this league is really hurt from this, and it's not only because of the missed NHL season (retirements, etc). Even before the lockout, the talent level had gone south because of the way younger players are dealt with. Like you mentioned with your Zetterberg example, GMs are just leaving prospects on their futures list rather than signing them. It's pointless to give a contract to a player that will just have 50's for every attribute. All that does is eat up a year on a contract (which is can only be a certain length to begin with) and $$. I understand that their salary if placed on the farm team would be comparable to the 50k of them sitting on the prospects list, but higher touted prospects are going to sign for more than 500k per season most of the time.

I like the idea of a 10% roll back in ratings for players gone for Europe. As long as they are still playing hockey somewhere they should be eligible, as long as it is reflected in their ratings, IMO.

For being the Hockey's FUTURE National Hockey League, we take quite a bit of the emphasis off of young players.

Just my 2 cents... figured it would be a good time to bring it up.

 

[Tampa GM]

Johan Franzen is now playing regularly with Detroit in the real league. I could really need his help in the hfnhl this season but I believe his rating would be so low that it doesnt make any sense to sign him. Hey, I would be satiesfied if his rating was even around 65 or whatever.

 

[Dempsey]

I too agree 100% with the european\retirees and especially young players' ratings. This league is missing out on a large amount of roster players because GMs don't want to bother signing the players when their ratings are going to be so low. In the NHL most teams are fielding around 3 rookies this year....ALL these rookies would be rated in the 50's in the HFNHL and not be playing.

One way to handle this is for rookie ratings to be reviewed every month, if a GM choses to. Their ratings could be bumped up substantially to their level of play in the NHL this far. I say "substantially" because I'm not talking about a couple ratings being challenged and bumped up a couple spots like we do sometimes before the season for veteran players. For example, I am currently looking for a starting goalie, but I have Cam Ward with a useless rating of 48OV. In a month or two, he may well be a starting goaltender in the NHL but it does me no good.

Now, an argument might be made that our ratings are based on last year's performances, I realize this. But said ratings are for the veteran players, who get the benefit of the doubt that they're performing up to par this season, too. In other words, veteran players can go off last year's ratings and generally still be current to what they're doing in the NHL this season. Rookies need to be re-rated to how they're performing currently in the NHL this season. So if we set a system in place where rookies are re-rated, our league will be a lot more current, and teams will balance out a lot better because an influx of capable players will be signed and playing on rosters, as they should be.

That brings me to my next point, which is retiring players and players who sign in Europe. With our current system of deleting them off rosters right away when they retire or sign in Europe, that's a system based on the current NHL, just like we want to have for our rookies. Pick one or the other. If we have our rookies only based on last year's performances, then we should be able to keep our European-signed and retired players, because of what they did last year.

So many teams have had players deleted from their list because of the current season, but then can't add their rookies because rookie ratings are based on last season. This is why the HFNHL is so depleted of players.

Here is what I am putting forward to make this league a lot more balanced, current, and consistent:

- Keep having the retired players and European-signed players deleted off the list as soon as it happens in real life. In this regard the league is already current.

- Have rookies based on their performance in the NHL this season. Our season is going to be a good month or so behind, which is a good "buffer" to get an indication of where rookie ratings should be. They can be re-rated right before our season starts, and in most cases this will be accurate enough to go the entire season off of. We could also re-rate the rookies every month or so, but this is optional really.

- Adopt a rule where a team must sign its prospects once they go pro in North America in real life. In the NHL teams either sign their prospects when they reach the age of 20, or they let them re-enter the draft. For us they could just become UFA if we chose not to sign them. In the HFNHL we all keep our prospects sitting in our prospects list to avoid waiver complications, paying them, etc. Really we shouldn't be allowed to do this, and if the above re-rating of rookies rule is adopted, I'm sure we would all happily sign our prospect list players who are currently playing North American pro hockey.

Adopt these three rules and the league rosters will be up to snuff with the NHL's. As it is the HFNHL talent pool is so far below the NHL's it isn't even funny, and you can see it by browsing down the rosters page here and seeing how few players there are to go around.

Mike McEwan
LA Kings

 

[HFNHL Commish]

Have rookies based on their performance in the NHL this season. Our season is going to be a good month or so behind, which is a good "buffer" to get an indication of where rookie ratings should be. They can be re-rated right before our season starts, and in most cases this will be accurate enough to go the entire season off of. We could also re-rate the rookies every month or so, but this is optional really.

First off, this would result in even more of a delay, as someone would then have to take the time to re-rate the rookies.

In addition, I can't see one month of play as being enough of a sample to come up with a good rating for a player. How many times has a guy like Brian Savage scored 10 goals in the month of October, only to score 5 the rest of the season? A hot October is no guarantee of a hot November. And re-rating players on a monthly basis is absolutely out of the question.

 

[SPG]

First off, this would result in even more of a delay, as someone would then have to take the time to re-rate the rookies.

In addition, I can't see one month of play as being enough of a sample to come up with a good rating for a player. How many times has a guy like Brian Savage scored 10 goals in the month of October, only to score 5 the rest of the season? A hot October is no guarantee of a hot November. And re-rating players on a monthly basis is absolutely out of the question.

It's too bad you feel that way, Matt. Shouldn't this be a decision by commitee? I mean, there are several GMs in this league. I don't think one person should be responsible for making the decision.

If something isn't done about the situation the league is going to become very stale. This is a league that most of us were drawn to through Hockey's Future... meaning we're interested in the league's prospects and youth. It's a shame we can't use our prospects.

I'm fine with the European rule, but like Mike said, we're losing Euros are we're not able to fills those holes with rookies as the NHL does. The talent pool is extremely depleted, and it's not because of the lockout. It truely is a shame that our talent pool has come to what it has.

And for the record, I would be willing to help rate rookies if it came down to that. It wouldn't delay things much longer than they already are.

 

[MatthewFlames]

First off, this would result in even more of a delay, as someone would then have to take the time to re-rate the rookies.

In addition, I can't see one month of play as being enough of a sample to come up with a good rating for a player. How many times has a guy like Brian Savage scored 10 goals in the month of October, only to score 5 the rest of the season? A hot October is no guarantee of a hot November. And re-rating players on a monthly basis is absolutely out of the question.

I agree - I can't imagine the work involved in this system - especially now -

One way we may want to deal with rookies - if the league even goes down this route, which i'm not sure that it wants to - is to take all rookie ratings and randomise them within a certain range. So instead of every rookie being 55 - they get a random OV between 55 and 65, never above 65. So for one season you may luck out and get a player with a 65. How to do this however is another matter - one that may be as bad/difficult as the idea of rating rookies monthly or based upon a month.

I wonder if the rules regarding retiring/Euro players is not the best answer. If a player played in the NHL in 2003/04 they can play in the HFNHL now - regardless of retirements etc - that would bolster rosters back up - maybe there is an optional 'retirement' or Euro choice - by a certain date you have to inform the league whether you want the player off the roster or on the roster - the decision is final... Again - this creates a lot of new work all of a sudden - it does fix the problems with goalies for example - but is it worth doing if we really want to get the league going again within the next week without any further delays.

I mean really, the worst case scenario is that through bad luck/management teams are short real NHL players - hey it happens in real life - look at Washington & St. Louis right now - and they will be terrible for a year.

Is it not possible for those GM's to start trading their draft picks/prospects for real NHL players?- or if they don't want to then just bite the bullet and just suck all year long with a back-up goalie with a 48 rating (as I may do if I continue to struggle to find the right offer for a better one).

Looking through the prospects lists etc. there is something of trade value on EVERY team - a team may have to sacrifice a promising talent for the future to field a competitive team now - and if they don't then that's their choice and yes, they will suck, but it is their choice.

Anyway - The admin team have done a great job getting things moving again - lets help them keep the momentum going so the league can start playing.

 

[SPG]

Is it not possible for those GM's to start trading their draft picks/prospects for real NHL players?- or if they don't want to then just bite the bullet and just suck all year long with a back-up goalie with a 48 rating (as I may do if I continue to struggle to find the right offer for a better one).

You make good points, Matthew. The only problem is the way the talent level is in the league, there aren't enough quality real NHL players to go around. There are some assets on the futures list, but they would only be rookies with "blank" ratings if signed and I've found that a lot of GMs don't want to trade HFNHL-ready talent for rookies they have to wait even longer for to develop than it takes them to develop as real players.

Anyway - The admin team have done a great job getting things moving again - lets help them keep the momentum going so the league can start playing.

Most definitely... the guys that have put a lot of work into getting the league back on its feet deserve a lot of credit. Thanks for your hard work, guys.

 

[Dempsey]

First off, this would result in even more of a delay, as someone would then have to take the time to re-rate the rookies.

In addition, I can't see one month of play as being enough of a sample to come up with a good rating for a player. How many times has a guy like Brian Savage scored 10 goals in the month of October, only to score 5 the rest of the season? A hot October is no guarantee of a hot November. And re-rating players on a monthly basis is absolutely out of the question.

Re-rating the rookies on a monthly basis isn't something that would have to be done. Just some general ratings right before the season starts though would help a lot. We wouldn't go crazy, but if a rookie is a regular in the NHL at the 20-game mark of the season, it's fair to say he can be rated higher than in the 50's so that his HFNHL team can also use him as a regular player. There are some dynamite rookies in the NHL this year who are going to get 50+ points...a ton of top six forwards that the HFNHL is simply lacking on. Not to mention all the depth players, defenseman and goalies. Right now there just aren't enough players to go around in the HFNHL.

I would even do the entire first draft of rookie ratings, which can then be turned over to whomever to finalize. I've been in this league for 7 years, and used to do a lot of admin work in the first couple years of the HFNHL including re-rates. I also ran my own league for 5 years and know the FHLSim program inside and out.

 

[Dempsey]

Some quick sample ratings

Here are just some potential OV ratings for NHL rookies being added to the HFNHL. I did this quickly and was pretty conservative on the ratings. These ratings are all a lot more accurate than 50's for all these rookies.

FORWARDS:
Sidney Crosby: 75
Alexander Ovechkin: 74
Zach Parise: 71
Thomas Vanek: 71
Pavel Vorobiev: 70
Mike Richards: 70
Milan Michalek: 69
Rostislav Olesz: 69
Jeff Carter: 69
Chris Higgins: 68
Dan Fritsche: 68
Alexander Perezhogin: 68
Cory Perry: 68
Johan Franzen: 67
Gilbert Brule: 66
Brandon Bochenski: 66
Robert Nilsson: 66
Paul Gaustad: 66
Tomas Plekanec: 66
Kyle Wellwood: 66
Antti Mietinen: 66
Ryan Getzlaf: 66
Maxime Talbot: 65
Wojtek Wolski: 65
Jim Slater: 65
Jussi Jokinen: 65
Jaroslav Balastik: 65
Ryan Clowe: 65
Matt Foy: 65
Petteri Nokelainen: 64
Ryan Hollweg: 63
George Parros: 63
Derek Boogaard: 62
Colton Orr: 61

As you can see, we're not going crazy here. These are very fair ratings.

DEFENSEMEN:
Dion Phaneuf: 71
Brent Seabrook: 71
Fedor Tyutin: 68
Ryan Suter: 67
Andrej Meszaros: 67
Keith Ballard: 67
Duncan Keith: 67
Braydon Coburn: 66
Lukas Krajicek: 66
Chris Campoli: 66
Francois Beauchemin: 66
Kevin Dallman: 66
Zbynek Michalek: 66
Brett Lebda: 66
Nolan Yonkman: 65
Maxim Kondratiev: 65
Milan Jurcina: 65
Andrew Wozniewski: 65
Josh Gorges: 64
Randy Jones: 63
Timo Helbling: 63
Jeff Woywitka: 62
Andrew Alberts: 62

GOALTENDERS:
Kari Lehtonen: 74
Antero Niittymaki: 73
Ryan Miller: 73
Cam Ward: 72
Henrik Lundqvist: 71
Pascal Leclair: 68
Hannu Toivonen: 68
Jason Labarbera: 68
Peter Budaj: 68
David Leneveau: 68

This is just a sample of some potential ratings of players that would be added into the league. They are very conservative I feel, yet are still far more accurate than 50's ratings for all these players. This alone would put 10 capable goaltenders into the HFNHL, who should be capable goaltenders in the HFNHL.

I'm sure there are a TON of more players on the prospects lists that could have decent ratings, too, that would be signed if GMs knew they wouldn't have 50's across the board.

 

[Hossa]

In my opinion....

It's unrealistic to expect rookies to be re-rated during the year, even if it's just once. It would just take way too much time, further slowing things down. While this was my first fantasy league, I joined a second one last winter, and it made me appreciate how much work goes into this league. From the rating challenges, to the way players are signed...this league already has a lot of bells and whistles.

That being said, I think that something has to be done with rating young players. Players coming out of their rookie season are simply not given good enough ratings. Antoine Vermette and Jeff Taffe are two guys who solified their places as NHL players last year, and yet are 62 overall this year. They are almost useless, even for a bottom feeding team. Perhaps an even better example is Eric Staal, who is a 67 OV, after a good rookie campaign. Now, he's a potential franchise player, and yet he's below the minimum OV cut-off. For what it's worth, in the other league I'm in, Vermette's a 67, Taffe a 65 and Staal a 70.

If young players in general were rated more generously, with less skepticism, then I think this problem of the OV would be far more moot. I mean, I can say in my case, it's not that I don't want to improve, but I want my rebuilding plan to come in part from within, not just guys I sign as UFAs. I want to be able to use Eric Staal as more than a third or fourth line center. Antoine Vermette is the type of guy I want on my third or fourth line.

The issue of players in Europe is difficult to weigh. I guess my problem with it is that if players are going to Europe and we remove them that year, there is no delay in the impact that has on our roster. The ratings are delayed, one year. So, essentially, every time a player goes to Europe, that's one less player in the HFNHL that season.

Now, I don't know if the answer is to remove players in the Europe the year AFTER they play there. But it's something to think about.

Just my 0.02$.

 

[Dempsey]

In my opinion....
It's unrealistic to expect rookies to be re-rated during the year

They don't have to be. We can stop using that as an argument against my points any time now. I've already stated that once the season begins, monthly re-ratings of rookies doesn't have to happen.

That being said, I think that something has to be done with rating young players.

Agreed 100%

The issue of players in Europe is difficult to weigh. I guess my problem with it is that if players are going to Europe and we remove them that year, there is no delay in the impact that has on our roster. The ratings are delayed, one year. So, essentially, every time a player goes to Europe, that's one less player in the HFNHL that season.

Now, I don't know if the answer is to remove players in the Europe the year AFTER they play there. But it's something to think about.

Yep. If our league is based on last year, then it shouldn't matter if players are retiring right now. If that's the case then they should retire in the HFNHL next year. However I think a better solution is just to bring everything else "forward" a year to match, most notably rookie ratings.

Can we agree that the example ratings in the above post are fair? I would input them all, and could touch up the young players' ratings as well to match (ex Staal and Vermette). I would do it all in one to two days and save the new ratings to a seperate set of league files which we could either use, or not use. It's really that simple.

My team isn't even one of the teams that would really benefit from this as I only have one measly NHL rookie on my roster (Cam Ward), but I feel very strongly about this and how much it would help the league.

 

[SPG]

My team isn't even one of the teams that would really benefit from this as I only have one measly NHL rookie on my roster (Cam Ward), but I feel very strongly about this and how much it would help the league.

Same with me... On my squad, Jim Slater is really the only rookie that it would apply to, and he would only be a 4th liner if he was rated.

I would be willing to help Mike with whatever he needed... it really would not be a long drawn out process like some seem to think it would be. This would only take probably about an hour or so of work to do, a couple days tops. This could be done before some teams even have their roster ready to go for the upcoming season (not to mention that going down this road would help these teams get up to the numbers they need).

Is there a risk here that some of the ratings might not accurately reflect their production? Sure there is, but at the same time there are several regular NHL/HFNHLers that don't live up to their rating year in and year out. That is corrected by rerating players the following year.

It takes long enough for draftees to develop in usable players in the NHL, let alone delaying it an entire year in the HFNHL. I've been in fantasy sim leagues online since 1997 and this is the only league I've been in that handles rookies the way we do. Everything else is great in this league, but I really think we need to get some youth injected into the rosters instead of having them wasting away for the time being on prospect lists.