|
Post by Hawks on Jul 3, 2015 13:59:28 GMT -5
I think its just too big of a change, the influence it'll have on the salary cap is more than you think IMO.
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Jul 3, 2015 14:43:48 GMT -5
There might be a few point that could be done but at expense of Jon and Gavin to have to do more then they already. 11 seasons and it has worked quite well. But like it was said in prior post salary cap is set in certain way that if any changes were to come, it would have to be done slowly like it always have been. Read stuff Joe, but tough to do when league has been so well setup and working well.
Our farm works find as all players have a two way contract already but interesting part could be that teams can have 23 players up in PRO team at all time and cannot be move to farm after the trade deadline with an increase in Cap. But as long as it does not add to work to the top two guys here.
|
|
|
Post by Nordiques - Chris on Jul 3, 2015 22:49:34 GMT -5
I know previously we could only trade 1 RFA in offseason - I think this restriction was lifted, correct?
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 4, 2015 5:46:39 GMT -5
I know previously we could only trade 1 RFA in offseason - I think this restriction was lifted, correct? Correct, lifted last season, no limit.
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Jul 4, 2015 19:54:12 GMT -5
I have a suggestion for UFA bidding.
Right now we have a system where the highest AAV wins (so a 1 year 10 m bid would be better than a 2 year 19 million bid). But that leads to people just giving out a bunch of 1 year contracts and the constant cycling of players.
For simplicities sake, I am basically suggesting that we put a minimum contract term on bids over a certain amount. As an example, any bid over 5 mil has to be at least two years, and any bid over 7.5 has to be three years. Im not married to the thresholds, just the ideas.
What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 4, 2015 19:59:55 GMT -5
We do that for the unassigned list. Against it for FA. We keep trying to handicap gm's with money by helping gm's with none.
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Jul 4, 2015 20:44:08 GMT -5
We do that for the unassigned list. Against it for FA. We keep trying to handicap gm's with money by helping gm's with none. I'm not sure I follow? This nice is to force teams to be smart with their contracts rather than just using 10 mil rentals
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 4, 2015 21:10:04 GMT -5
So you want to force gm's with money to longer contracts to hold down prices. What part of what i said don't you follow.
|
|
|
Post by MontyBurns on Jul 4, 2015 21:51:13 GMT -5
The idea would be to actually increase the overall cost. So that rather than committing 10 mil to a player you have to commit 30 mil.
Also, with regard to your earlier comments about helping teams without cap space, ive got a ton of it, even after signing my RFAs. I just made a suggestion that I thought made a lot of sense for the betterment of the league. Im all about adding strategy wherever we can (and in a way that wouldnt require any additional Commish work!).
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Jul 4, 2015 22:04:11 GMT -5
I have a suggestion for UFA bidding. Right now we have a system where the highest AAV wins (so a 1 year 10 m bid would be better than a 2 year 19 million bid). But that leads to people just giving out a bunch of 1 year contracts and the constant cycling of players. For simplicities sake, I am basically suggesting that we put a minimum contract term on bids over a certain amount. As an example, any bid over 5 mil has to be at least two years, and any bid over 7.5 has to be three years. Im not married to the thresholds, just the ideas. What do you think? The reason we have salary brackets for unassigned players 29 and under is so that teams don't give out high salary 1-year contracts that will basically get cut in half the following year after year on 1-year deals when they don't play into their salary. By using the bracket system it locks teams to a commitment of that salary offered. With UFA it's basically the same thing, if you sign a player for 3 years then you are committing to that salary for the next 3 years, if you sign them to 1 year then that's your choice to spend the money but lose them the year after.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 4, 2015 22:05:46 GMT -5
As Jon explained to you there is a big difference between RFA and UFA. Your idea doesn't help anyone and punish's GM's who offer big 1yr contracts.
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Jul 4, 2015 22:12:26 GMT -5
Oh and btw, as usual I will impose my usual bulling tactics, of tying up your money for 3 days if you bid on my bids. LOL
|
|
|
Post by gmcanucks on Jul 4, 2015 22:12:19 GMT -5
I have a suggestion for UFA bidding. Right now we have a system where the highest AAV wins (so a 1 year 10 m bid would be better than a 2 year 19 million bid). But that leads to people just giving out a bunch of 1 year contracts and the constant cycling of players. For simplicities sake, I am basically suggesting that we put a minimum contract term on bids over a certain amount. As an example, any bid over 5 mil has to be at least two years, and any bid over 7.5 has to be three years. Im not married to the thresholds, just the ideas. What do you think? I actually like Shawn's idea. There were a lot of crazy 1-year bids over the last couple of years, and I think teams would think twice if they had to honor that contract over a 2, 3 or 4 year period. It would reduce the cost of players overall and make things a little more realistic. I mean in real life no way a player is accepting a 1-year $10 million dollar contract over a 3-year $9 million dollar deal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 22:23:42 GMT -5
I have a suggestion for UFA bidding. Right now we have a system where the highest AAV wins (so a 1 year 10 m bid would be better than a 2 year 19 million bid). But that leads to people just giving out a bunch of 1 year contracts and the constant cycling of players. For simplicities sake, I am basically suggesting that we put a minimum contract term on bids over a certain amount. As an example, any bid over 5 mil has to be at least two years, and any bid over 7.5 has to be three years. Im not married to the thresholds, just the ideas. What do you think? I don't like this idea. Teams that stay flexible are able to bid on the best free agents. Get a top goalie, defenceman, whatever, pay him $10 million and have him for one year. Then if he sucks next year, he's back in the pool and you don't have a team hamstrung with a shitty albatross contract. Use that money and get the best FA again the next year. It's salary cap management.
|
|
|
Post by AvsGM on Jul 4, 2015 22:42:05 GMT -5
Teams signing UFAs to 1-year contracts also replenishes the pool each season. Free agency is pretty weak this year, could you imagine if half of those players weren't there? If anything UFA salaries would go even higher with teams bidding on substantially less players, and if those high salaries were bracketed with minimum years then those are even more UFAs you won't be seeing available for a while.
|
|