I wanted to clear up some of the confusion surrounding using franchise points to assist in retaining a team's UFAs. Some of the confusion in born from the fact that this is a new feature and with that comes some tinkering with the concept to arrive at something that mimics the NHL as closely as possible in the "G". The other major part of the confusion relates to my inability to properly communicate my vision for the process over several threads on the forum. Therefore I wanted to consolidate all of the explanation and discussion on this thread as a prelude to updating the rulebook.
OK, so as stated the player must need to be on a team all year long to be able to use FPs to try to land him. If he was, the player will have a (FP) beside their name in the UFA section on his team page.
Players can spend FPs at a value of 1 FP = 50k worth of additional bidsThe additional bid amount that is generated by spending FPs is there as an insurance policy to help land the player. If the insurance is not used (either no FP are spent or no other teams bid was above the UFAs old teams base bid) then the old team can sign a player for as long they wish. If the insurance is used and needed to retain the player, the team can only resign the player for a 1 year deal.
Any FPs spent as insurance are spent/lost no matter if they are needed or not.If an owner wishes to retain this guy for next year and beyond here is how the mechanics will work:
Player X was on Team A all of last year and Team A has an interest in retaining his services.
In the past, Team A would place their best bid out there and see if they won him back. This year Team A will have the option of spending FPs (as detailed above to try and retain him).
Scenario 1:
Team A Bids 5M and doesn't add any FP to the bid
Possible results:
1)Team A wins or loses the bid based solely on the amount they bid. Winning team signs the player for as long as they want pursuant to the max 6 year GHL contract length.
Scenario 2:
Team A Bids 5M and adds 20FP (effective 6M bid)
Possible results:
1)No other team bids on Player X. Team A team signs the player for as long as they want pursuant to the max 6 year GHL contract length.
2)Team B bids 4.9M. Because this was under the base Team A bid (5M) Team A signs the player for as long as they want pursuant to the max 6 year GHL contract length.
3)Team B bids 5.1M. Because this bid was over Team A's base bid (5M) but less than their effective bid (6M),Team A team signs the player but can only sign him to a 1 year deal at 5.1M.
4)Team B bids 6.1M and wins the bid. Team B team signs the player for as long as they want pursuant to the max 6 year GHL contract length.
I hope this clears up the process. Post any questions or constructive criticisms below.
