Alright, that sounds good

I'd love if we tried to fiddle to adjust scoring ratings (OF, PA) to even out the fact that players get more points on offensively-laden teams than they would on less successful teams. Just look at Vacheslav Kozlov with 4 points in the NHL the other night. He was a free rider on three of them, at least when you compare to what he would produce in Columbus or Chicago.

But the fact is that FHL leagues use the hard data as the best measure of fairness. Nothing is perfect.

The best leagues allow each g.m. a number (3 or 5) CHALLENGES, to present an argument to adjust some (3 or 5) ratings based on presented evidence (news articles, coach comments, etc).

We should do that, to allow EVERY g.m. the ability to make their case on a few players - not all - just a few, which means the biggest distortions (because every formula isn't perfect) get addressed in a fair manner.

How about it?

BryceBruins wrote:

---

oh we do, as anyone in the BRHL can attest to, each team will be allowed to challenge up to 3 attributes on 3 of their players. Although the statistically based one ones have to be an extreme situation be it for GP or NHL situation.

---

3 rating categories on each of three players? sounds good.

so, for example, we can provide evidence from published articles that "one of the fastest players on the team" should have a SP higher than 68 ?

3 out of 20 players doesn't seem like a lot but it's enough to address what a g.m. feels to be the biggest injustices.

Philippe27 wrote:

---

I agree with challenges but not with the other idea, I find it kind of retarded actually cuz it becomes wayyyyy too subjective.

---

Exactly.

After 8 days of non-trading, the Islanders have reached a deal to move a quality backup goaltender in exchange for offensive defenseman Nummelin, utility player Clymer and a late round pick.

A new team trade block, indicating available and unavailable players, will be constructed in the next day or so.