Quote:Originally posted by akamai+Dec 7 2016, 02:06 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1' id='QUOTE-WRAP'><tr><td>QUOTE (akamai @ Dec 7 2016, 02:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Could we do something like "your top two lines cannot exceed a combined total of X% wanted ice time"?

I don't want to penalize teams who've worked to have depth for bringing on and calling up active players who've just come out of juniors since it will take so long for them to matter, statistically. That said, I don't really want to punish teams who are fielding a roster, period, by inactive signings and chewing gum either, but the buck has to stop somewhere, and it's discouraging to the other teams if a very thin roster with a few stars at the top are beating a team with more actives, more balance, and better depth.

If it's a combo of the top two lines, then yes, you can still have a Minnesota, and yes, you can still have a Manhattan, but it means they're forced to sacrifice some performance out of their next-best line if they choose to play their ice time that way.[/b]

<!--QuoteBegin-Eggy216@Dec 7 2016, 02:17 PM


It's a start, but I could do say 25/25/25/25 on every line and get around that without a problem while keeping a 6 forward system.[/quote]


So you'd probably need it to be that the players of the first two lines cannot exceed some total percent.

This would probably lead to something like no six forwards can account for more than 75% of total EV ice time. Viewed differently, there are 300% points available to forwards (100% * 3 forwards). If you allowed your top 6 to play 75% of EV time, they would account for 225 percentage points. This would allow a GM to do something like:
Line 1: 40
Line 2: 35
Line 3: 25
Line 4: 0

OR double-shift a player and run lines 1 and 2 for lower amounts, but be able to run one or more players from these lines on lines 3 and 4.


If we wanted to base it on individual play instead, we could look at the following example. Let's say that we're okay with a 3 line system for teams on the whole. League average last season was 7.7 PIMs per game per team. So let's round up to 8. That means each game will have 8 minutes of PK time and PP time on average, leaving 44 minutes of 5v5 time. If your best forward gets 50% PP time and 50% (seems to be pretty common based on the lines listed for last season) he'll get 8 minutes of ice-time there. If we'd like a cap of 24 minutes for a forward, that means he could play, at most, 16 of the remaining 44 minutes, which is about 36%. So if you make it that no player can exceed 36% EV strength time, and no more than 100% of PP and PK combined (e.g. Nathan Russell plays 70% PP, he can only play 30% PK), then we would, in theory be right around that 24 minute mark. If you wanted, you could do something like "For every additional 1% of EV time over 36%, a player loses 5% of special teams play, you could help keep it balanced out. E.G. Sean Leonidas plays 40% EV time. This is 4% over 36, so his PP+PK can only be 80%