|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 7, 2011 12:35:07 GMT -5
Here are the minimum contract thresholds required to sign a player for x amount of years:
<500k 1 year contract (150% raise due next year) 500k to 795k 2 year deal max 800k to 1.495M 3 year deal max 1.5M to 3.45M 4 year deal max 3.5M to 5.45M 5 year deal max 5.5 and higher 6 year deal max
If a player is under the 500k league minimum, he will be in line for a 150% raise next year. If this raise keeps him below 500k, he is still your property and he can play in the minors for you at that cost. If he needs to be called up during the year, his salary for the current year will jump to 500k and a you will need to make a determination next year if you want to sign him to a FHL contract. This is discussed immediately below.
If you do decide to sign the player called up or sign another player whose new salary (with the 150% raise) takes him to or over 500k next year to a FHL contract, you will determine the number of years you wish to sign him for and his contract amount will be based on his cards value as a function of the range for the years you wish to sign him for.
For example, you have a guy with an average card 30-20- 27 for example and wanted to sign him for 3 years his yearly contract amount would be about 1.15M (the mid point of the 3 year term salary range). If he had a poor card, has yearly value might be 850k and if his card was very good, you may be looking at 1.35M per based on the same logic.
Any player signed thusly to a FHL contract will be a RFA after the FHL contract has expired. This is true unless of course he was already on a FHL contract that he was cut from in which case he would become a UFA.
At the end of each year, you can walk away from any contract that is under 500k with no penalty and the player will revert to FA status.
I think this provides a good framework for players being priced accordingly while affording protection for teams who draft these guys.
I will also send this message out via email to alert everyone of the minimum amounts needed.
Barring strong collective feedback regarding this issue, we will move forward and try to complete this round tonight at 8:00.
If you gave any feedback, good or bad, please post it here for others to digest as well.
If anyone wants their bids for this round reset based on this message, please alert me and I will do so as well.
Thanks, Glenn
|
|
|
Post by Justin-Cincinnati on Aug 7, 2011 13:18:12 GMT -5
Looks good to me. I guess you can keep my bids in the system.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 7, 2011 14:51:01 GMT -5
Just to make sure everyone has enough time to request deletion of bids and at the request of a few owners, I am going to extend this round so that it closes tomorrow (Monday night) at 8:00 PM.
Glenn
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 7, 2011 21:23:26 GMT -5
For example, you have a guy with an average card 30-20- 27 for example and wanted to sign him for 3 years his yearly contract amount would be about 1.15M (the mid point of the 3 year term salary range). If he had a poor card, has yearly value might be 850k and if his card was very good, you may be looking at 1.35M per based on the same logic. Read more: www.www.gtgfhl.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=freeagency&action=display&thread=884&page=4#ixzz1UOpe8BTNSo this means his FHL salary won't be based on his card once he reaches the 500k level but on the owners decision on how long to sign said player? So if one of these guys has a Marchand year, the owner will be able to sign him at extreme value? Maybe I misunderstand this part of the ruling.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 8, 2011 7:13:07 GMT -5
For example, you have a guy with an average card 30-20- 27 for example and wanted to sign him for 3 years his yearly contract amount would be about 1.15M (the mid point of the 3 year term salary range). If he had a poor card, has yearly value might be 850k and if his card was very good, you may be looking at 1.35M per based on the same logic. Read more: www.www.gtgfhl.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=freeagency&action=display&thread=884&page=4#ixzz1UOpe8BTNSo this means his FHL salary won't be based on his card once he reaches the 500k level but on the owners decision on how long to sign said player? So if one of these guys has a Marchand year, the owner will be able to sign him at extreme value? Maybe I misunderstand this part of the ruling. If 3 years at around 1.4M per year is extreme value for him then yes, that is correct. As cards change from year to year based upon a player's performance, what looks like a steal at first may become less of a bargain as time goes on. This obviously is the case for older guys that are signed as either RFAs or UFAs as well.
|
|
|
Post by Dane-Hamilton on Aug 9, 2011 14:34:37 GMT -5
Just a quick question. Are the contracts on the team page for free agents what we are actually paying them or what we would pay them if their contract was taken until 2013.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 9, 2011 15:29:34 GMT -5
Just a quick question. Are the contracts on the team page for free agents what we are actually paying them or what we would pay them if their contract was taken until 2013. The amount shown is the yearly amount which can be lowered by signing them for multiple years.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Aug 9, 2011 16:01:51 GMT -5
Glenn and All, In looking at the decided upon UFA signing plans, with respect to this last round of players especially... "" If a player is under the 500k league minimum, he will be in line for a 150% raise next year. If this raise keeps him below 500k, he is still your property and he can play in the minors for you at that cost. If he needs to be called up during the year, his salary for the current year will jump to 500k and a you will need to make a determination next year if you want to sign him to a FHL contract. This is discussed immediately below.
If you do decide to sign the player called up or sign another player whose new salary (with the 150% raise) takes him to or over 500k next year to a FHL contract, you will determine the number of years you wish to sign him for and his contract amount will be based on his cards value as a function of the range for the years you wish to sign him for.Read more: gtgfhl.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=freeagency&action=display&thread=884&page=4#ixzz1UZF0u5yF"" I see a slight issue with this plan. At the conclusion of the players contract he is due a very generous 150% Raise. This will bring a 200,000 Contracted Player to one of 500,000 the following season. Being as though, MOST of our FHL teams will need to add 14 or so more of these type players.... This process is going to add 7 million dollars to team Caps the following year!!!Player X signed for 1 year at $200,000...resigned at 150% = $500,000...Multiplied by 14 Players = $7,000,000. (*Based on adding players for the 45 Man Roster ) I know full well, that we can DROP these players if we wish, but my goal was to try and select as many players as possible that have a higher percentage of cracking the NHL ranks in the shortest time. So, are we going to raise our Salary Cap Limits yearly to accommodate this type of process, or are we going to continuely add to the FREE AGENT bucket? Mind you, the players that get dropped by teams, are most likely going to be players with Over-Valued Contracts and less probability of making an NHL or FHL team. For example, I can easily see a guy like Brian McGratton getting a 200,000 contract from a team for 1 year; being let go by that team because he is due to earn a 500,000 contract. He will become a UFA and now his minimum amount due will be 500,000. Him and others like him, possibly a worse player, will have similar minimum contract values and thereby causing huge Cap related problems for the years to follow.
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 9, 2011 16:27:52 GMT -5
Good God, where did Chris buy the Big Brain all of a sudden ?
J/K Christopher...GOOD stuff to keep Glennie on his toes.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 9, 2011 19:31:44 GMT -5
Glenn and All, In looking at the decided upon UFA signing plans, with respect to this last round of players especially... "" If a player is under the 500k league minimum, he will be in line for a 150% raise next year. If this raise keeps him below 500k, he is still your property and he can play in the minors for you at that cost. If he needs to be called up during the year, his salary for the current year will jump to 500k and a you will need to make a determination next year if you want to sign him to a FHL contract. This is discussed immediately below.
If you do decide to sign the player called up or sign another player whose new salary (with the 150% raise) takes him to or over 500k next year to a FHL contract, you will determine the number of years you wish to sign him for and his contract amount will be based on his cards value as a function of the range for the years you wish to sign him for.Read more: gtgfhl.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=freeagency&action=display&thread=884&page=4#ixzz1UZF0u5yF""I see a slight issue with this plan. At the conclusion of the players contract he is due a very generous 150% Raise. This will bring a 200,000 Contracted Player to one of 500,000 the following season. Being as though, MOST of our FHL teams will need to add 14 or so more of these type players.... This process is going to add 7 million dollars to team Caps the following year!!!Player X signed for 1 year at $200,000...resigned at 150% = $500,000...Multiplied by 14 Players = $7,000,000. (*Based on adding players for the 45 Man Roster ) I know full well, that we can DROP these players if we wish, but my goal was to try and select as many players as possible that have a higher percentage of cracking the NHL ranks in the shortest time. So, are we going to raise our Salary Cap Limits yearly to accommodate this type of process, or are we going to continuely add to the FREE AGENT bucket? Mind you, the players that get dropped by teams, are most likely going to be players with Over-Valued Contracts and less probability of making an NHL or FHL team. For example, I can easily see a guy like Brian McGratton getting a 200,000 contract from a team for 1 year; being let go by that team because he is due to earn a 500,000 contract. He will become a UFA and now his minimum amount due will be 500,000. Him and others like him, possibly a worse player, will have similar minimum contract values and thereby causing huge Cap related problems for the years to follow. I need to correct your math. 150% of 200k is 300k. 150% of 300k is 450k. This means you will have this guy for 3 years under 500k if you like.
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Aug 9, 2011 19:42:14 GMT -5
Oh, it is written as such: "he will be in line for a 150% raise next year" which would indicate 150% more than his current salary. 200 ( current salary ) + 300 ( 150% Raise ) = 500 But, if in actuality it is what you say: 150% of 200k is 300k. 150% of 300k is 450k. This means you will have this guy for 3 years under 500k if you like....( in this example, the player is earning 150% of his original salary, not a raise of 150%. ) Well Sir, then I am ok with that pro-cess! Ok, I'm cool with that!
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 9, 2011 20:22:37 GMT -5
Oh, it is written as such: "he will be in line for a 150% raise next year" which would indicate 150% more than his current salary. 200 ( current salary ) + 300 ( 150% Raise ) = 500 But, if in actuality it is what you say: 150% of 200k is 300k. 150% of 300k is 450k. This means you will have this guy for 3 years under 500k if you like....( in this example, the player is earning 150% of his original salary, not a raise of 150%. ) Well Sir, then I am ok with that pro-cess! Ok, I'm cool with that! Yeah, i was thinking about this after posting it (riding home from a late night of work) that my wording could have been a little clearer. My raise was meaning his new salary would be x. Good, we are all on the same page.
|
|
|
Post by Ian-Halifax on Aug 9, 2011 21:53:30 GMT -5
So we sign a prospect for 100k and next year he has a ridiculous card, we can choose to just raise his contract 150% and keep him in the minors? If this is true, what is stopping us from calling them up the first week of the season and playing there the rest of the year at 500k?
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Aug 9, 2011 21:58:53 GMT -5
well, that is exactly what happens in the real world! A guy is drafted or signed to an ELC ( Entry Level Contract ), he has a wonderful camp, sticks on with the big club for the 10 games allowed....and then whammo...he's here for good.
Whats wrong with that? Its not as if your going to find a team full of 100K players that is starting for an FHL Club....BUT, If it did happen...It would be a pretty damn good drafting/scouting job by you/GM!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 9, 2011 22:05:25 GMT -5
And you are only going to realize that savings for one year and then you will have to give him his contract or somebody else will, I don't see this happening too often however but good point, we have to cover all the bases
|
|