UFA Extension Brainstorm Thread

[Matt-Colorado]

All, here is a place where we can all collectively dump our ideas for UFA retention/extension for discussion.

I've been jotting down my thoughts on this few more than a few seasons, I have listed 3 different methods to pitch.

The premise is simple:
In the NHL, a player playing for one franchise for majority of a 20 year career seldom happens, but it does happen. We all know the names of those guys who spent 15+ years with one team: Yzerman, Richter, Lidstrom, Clarke, Sakic, Lemieux, heck even Chris Phillips spent 17 years with Ottawa. So far Crosby, Ovechkin, the Sedins et al have yet to play a game outside of the teams that drafted them--because they get lucrative deals done before they get to free agency.

What it comes down to is a method that is fair, not gameable, and is also not insane to code--so at the end of the day, if our least favorite idea winds up being the only one that can be coded, we get what works.

1- Franchise tag method, my favorite:
-Steven Stamkos is going to be a free agent when UFA starts in 7 days.
-Philadelphia spends x franchise points to tag Stamkos.
-At this point, Stamkos hands Philadelphia an asking price which is the average of the top 5? 10? player salaries for that category: F, D, G.
-The asking price is based on the previous years salaries.
-Philadelphia then has 1 week to sign Stamkos to another contact, based on his asking price. The week buffer is to provide the retaining team time to create salary cap if needed.
=This method is one where the market that we as GMs have created dictate our franchise player's salary. Increases the value of FP and enables us to retain our best player at a price that isn't team friendly but not insane.

2- Sign before UFA begins:
- The playoffs have ended, Philadelphia spends x franchise points (a lot of franchise points) to enter negotiations with Stamkos with an asking price based on his current years card, as in, the card used in his UFA year.
- Pays a certain % more than the asking price to sign Stamkos before UFA begins.
Works in favor for the team if Stamkos had a down card (for example Boston and Cory Schneider next year), and in Stamkos's favor if his card is based on a 65 goal season.
=A touch of realism where you pay a player based on past years performance.
=Is theoretically the best way to guarantee you keep your player, therefore it should be the most expensive FP-wise, and somewhat of a gamble using the current year's card.

3- Test the market method:
- Steven Stamkos is a pending free agent
- Philadelphia spends x franchise points to have Stamkos come back to Philly after agreeing to a salary with team 2, allowing Philly to match.
- Philadelphia then has a week to decide / find salary. (Free agency keeps advancing through the waterfall bidding phases during this week, team 2 has their remaining cap space plus x amount to bid in rounds while Philadelphia decides.)
=My least favorite idea, the most risk involved salary-wise, given our tendency to go rogue in the top two tiers of UFA (myself included) and it probably prevents the bidding team from bidding on tier 2 players as UFA goes on while their money is tied up.



Have at it gents, I for one am very excited to start this discussion and see what happens. I agree with most of you, that if this is possible it should happen sooner than later.

What ideas do you have?

[Dane-Hamilton]

Example 1. Not the worst idea, but in the NFL where it is used players are rarely happy to get hit with the franchise tag. With star players they know they can get a lot more money for longer term if they tested free agency rather than have the franchise tag slapped on them.

Just to know what asking price would be
Based on top 3 salaries
F - 9.30 Mil, D-7.98 Mil, G - 8.11 mil
Based on top 5 salaries
F - 8.46 Mil D - 7.47 Mil, G - 7.39 mil

These "tag" prices seem expensive for average players, about right for the good players but still seem cheap for the generational players. If based on top 5 McDavid salary would be 7.4 mil for 6 years

[Dane-Hamilton]

Example 3.

With some tweaks I think this would be the best way. You can resign average guys to a price lower than "tag" based on what market determines, teams can also keep their frachise guys but at a value based on the market.

I don't like the week to decide aspect team 2 would need to know their plan going forward in FA and not be held up waiting to see if they actually get the player. Going back to our current UFA retain process I kind of like it. You use FP to put in your max bid (highest you will possibly pay) if someone bids over that you lost and no time taken for a decision. Likewise if they bid under your max congrats he's yours.

[Dane-Hamilton]

The only idea I really have is the UFA retain we currently have but just let them sign out long term.

Pros
-Market determines price
-Can retain average/role players for reasonable price
-Retaining a UFA/having player play whole career in one place won't be too terribly common
-Talent deficient teams still have a chance for a Franchise cornerstone

Cons
-Overbidding can still occur
-Can lose your FP for nothing if you get outbid

[Matt-Colorado]

Jun 7, 2017 7:40:32 GMT -5 Dane-Hamilton said:

Example 1. Not the worst idea, but in the NFL where it is used players are rarely happy to get hit with the franchise tag. With star players they know they can get a lot more money for longer term if they tested free agency rather than have the franchise tag slapped on them.

Just to know what asking price would be
Based on top 3 salaries
F - 9.30 Mil, D-7.98 Mil, G - 8.11 mil
Based on top 5 salaries
F - 8.46 Mil D - 7.47 Mil, G - 7.39 mil

These "tag" prices seem expensive for average players, about right for the good players but still seem cheap for the generational players. If based on top 5 McDavid salary would be 7.4 mil for 6 years

I think top 3 is close-ish. I didn't bother to look at the salaries before hand. I'm thinking after the ELC and RFA contract, a salary in the ballpark of 10-12 for guys in their late 20s/early 30s wouldn't be too far off, save for the outlying Superstar. By the time McDavid and the other young guns get to UFA we would probably have a salary structure down pat.

[Matt-Colorado]

I also recall Glenn saying last offseason that he wanted asking prices to increase to more realistic values for stars--this would likely increase that top 3 for the tag.

[Dane-Hamilton]

Only thing I'm worried about with the top 3 asking price is if we don't let the big names get to FA and get those big contracts the top 3 "tag" will start dropping. I don't have the numbers anymore but without Crosby contract top 3 would take a pretty big hit.

Just Crosby as an example, if implemented this year he could tag him for lets say roughly 8.6 since he no longer is included in top 3 forward salaries. He would get him at a well below market deal. Maybe we could set a minimum to start with as well i.e. forward is 9.3 million or top 3 salaries whichever is higher.

[Jon-Seattle]

Top 3 salary + 10%

[Dane-Hamilton]

Jun 7, 2017 11:52:32 GMT -5 Jon-Seattle said:

Top 3 salary + 10%

I wouldn't mind that but this only allows for superstars to be retained. I think it should somehow be tied to bidding but I know thats hard to do because why would you waste a round of UFA bids if you know a team will just retain.

Maybe we can actually work asking price in. Based on Toffoli last year I believe he was asking 6,352,500(5,775,000*1.10 for the discount). I think a fair number for a player with his card could be 25-50% above asking with no discount on long term signing so...

25% above asking - 7,940,625 cap hit
30% above asking - 8,258,250 cap hit
35% above asking - 8,575,875 cap hit
40% above asking - 8,893,500 cap hit
45% above asking - 9,211,125 cap hit
50% above asking - 9,528,750 cap hit

Not sure what you guys feel would be a fair market price to retain a player with a card like Toffoli as a UFA. I'm sure if he was on the market last year he would have received toward the upper end but not sure he would have been signed out 6 years at that price.

We would also have to use an average of the last 3 years card, or last years card whichever is higher so as to avoid a player on a down year getting a big discount.

[Dane-Hamilton]

I would also suggest putting a NMC on retained UFAs. NMC in effect for half of the contract length? That will simulate a player wanting to stay with the franchise for his career and also avoid sign and trades. If you want to trade him after 1 year would have to be a 2 year deal and trade value would go down as he would be a UFA after that. If you want him 6 years he will be in his hometown for at least 3 years of that contract.

[Dane-Hamilton]

Just spit balling but wouldn't be opposed to the asking price + X percentage given it is for a good chuck of FP. maybe 10 FP per Mil asking. To keep toffoli at 35% above asking the team would have to pony up 85. Also make FP to retain tie into the value of the player.

[Dane-Hamilton]

Glenn, would it be possible to know what Jamie Benn would have asked if he was an RFA this year? One of the best overall forwards and a 7 stamina.

[Matt-Colorado]

Jun 7, 2017 13:23:46 GMT -5 Dane-Hamilton said:

I would also suggest putting a NMC on retained UFAs. NMC in effect for half of the contract length? That will simulate a player wanting to stay with the franchise for his career and also avoid sign and trades. If you want to trade him after 1 year would have to be a 2 year deal and trade value would go down as he would be a UFA after that. If you want him 6 years he will be in his hometown for at least 3 years of that contract.

I'd like to see a NMC on retained UFAs for at least half of the term. I like your ideas Dane.

[Scott-New Jersey]

You guys are talking about top players what about if you want to resign a not so top player or a young kid
who just has not made it yet?

[Jon-Seattle]

Jun 8, 2017 7:42:45 GMT -5 Scott-New Jersey said:

You guys are talking about top players what about if you want to resign a not so top player or a young kid
who just has not made it yet?

I think we already have RFA and bridge contracts to deal with such players. If you want to resign a middling performer because you think he might be something then no one will make it to unrestricted free agency. if you have a "young guy" who you bridge and resign in restricted free agency after you've drafted him that's up to 9-10 years depending on if he has a card to start or not. You don't think that's enough? If a player hasn't figured it out by the time he's 28 is a team really going to be signing him long term before finding out his market? How often does a middling player often play out 15+ years for the same franchise compared to a real franchise player.

You guys who have been around a while seem to distrust free agency and I can see why, there has been very little to go around until the last year or so. All of a sudden we have a chance to drive parity with legitimate free agency that should tear apart some of the teams that have been powerhouses for the last few years, allowing bottom dwellers to finally get a shot at good players or getting a leg up by being smart with there cap and you want to shut it down.

It's like you look at your teams and start seeing stars up and down your roster and you get gold fever, you gotta keep them all to yourself because only you know their true value.

I know I'm in the minority's that doesn't even want to see something like this but if we have to do it I think teams should only have the option for the best possible players and that it should cost you so much in terms of franchise points and cap dollars so that only guys like Crosby or the Sedins (maybe not at this point but of the last few years) get these kind of deals. Real top line franchise players. I don't want to see a team resign half his guys just because he can when they're slotted for UFA, that's unrealistic and the cap by itself should have torn that team apart but because of different discounts the rich suddenly get richer.

I know that was a long rant more so than anything but if you want this league to have some real parity you'll make this a costly process.

We're finally about to see some good UFAs the next few years and now you want teams to be able to resign everyone. From what I can tell this league has had a few strong teams that have lasted over the years because they really haven't lost anyone and haven't had to pay very many really good but not great players. We're about to see an end to that and you want to go back to the way it was before.

TL/DR - you'll destroy UFA and never have parity, leaving the bottom dwellers to stay that way forever, overpaying for crappy talent just to get by while their counterparts laugh their way to the playoffs with cheap talent, only giving up their scraps when they know they've gotten everything they can out of a player.