|
Post by Chris-Boston on Dec 8, 2017 11:49:33 GMT -5
Hear that? We've hit the quiet time of the GHL season on the forum. While things tend to slow down a bit, we are now given an opportunity to open the door towards discussing new ideas and thoughts surrounding league rules and processes. Doing so during the season will afford us the chance to hammer out any proposals before the craziness of next offseason begins.
With all that in mind, I wanted to gauge the interest in amending a component in UFA retention. As it currently stands, in order to have the option of using franchise points on an expiring contract on your team, that player must be on your roster prior to the beginning of the season and remain there for its entirety.
How about we switch that date to the trade deadline? Doing so would potentially increase the number of moves made, with the caveat being that a UFA may not just be a rental for a team looking to make a run at the Cup and could be someone who can be resigned at the end of the season. On the flip side, teams with a manageable cap situation may be more inclined to acquire a player that is putting up better numbers in the NHL compared to their current card, knowing that they will see an uptick in performance for next year.
What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Dec 8, 2017 11:58:21 GMT -5
Like the trade deadline... Don't like how it is an one year deal or that we have to bid on a guy that we have FP rights to...
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Dec 8, 2017 18:03:28 GMT -5
Yes, definitely trade deadline, I would agree that I'd like to see a way to wrap up a UFA longer term but I'm not sure how to accomplish that in a way that would improve upon the system we have now and remain fair market value
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Dec 8, 2017 21:29:42 GMT -5
Does hitting the open market the only way we get fair market value? Players don't always do it in the NHL. We can spend FPs to say the player wants to stay with a team and not hit the market. Glenn's asking price generator can take over at that point for fair market value.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 9, 2017 10:06:42 GMT -5
For the health of the league any changes that we would decide to make would have to be viewed through the filter of "does this proposed change make the richer teams richer?". If the answer is yes, then I don't think its in the best interest of the league. I have not thought deeply about this particular case but it is something that needs to be considered whenever we are thinking about changing a rule.
|
|
|
Post by Matt-Colorado on Dec 9, 2017 12:09:03 GMT -5
Valid points. Changing the policy would certainly increase value for rental players.
In reply to New Jersey’s post: I’ve had the same idea NJ has with the RFA asking price process being applied to UFAs. No hometown discount. Retaining long term should cost significant additional dollars, if it’s done right, the cellar dwellers with limited numbers of good players will be able to afford this while the whales wouldn’t be able to extend all their top guys and they go to UFA...maybe?
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Dec 9, 2017 17:26:25 GMT -5
One rich get richer issue is the teams that have a shit ton of FP....
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 10, 2017 10:16:53 GMT -5
Some GMs spend FPs like drunk sailors on shore leave. Others are a little tighter with their purse strings.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Dec 10, 2017 22:57:05 GMT -5
But if we are going to start a new rule should we be all on the same playing field to start...
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 11, 2017 10:56:32 GMT -5
But if we are going to start a new rule should we be all on the same playing field to start... Lol. That's like the sailor coming back to the ship after a night of whoring and boozing and saying to his mates that stayed on the ship, "Hey, why do you guys have money to buy things from the commissary. I Don't have any so you shouldn't have any either."
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Dec 14, 2017 14:11:22 GMT -5
No thoughts on this?
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 15, 2017 13:06:26 GMT -5
Thoughts on what? Taking away peoples FPs so everyone is on the same level playing field? If that's the thought then I think you can tell from my response above that I don't think that's a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Dec 15, 2017 14:02:59 GMT -5
I also don't know if it would be a good idea to make this change, if we decide to make a change, now in the middle of the year. I would say that if it is decided that a change makes sense, it would take effect after this years business has completed.
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Dec 15, 2017 14:13:36 GMT -5
I was not talking about FP I was talking about the topic of the thread... is it something we want to do if so how we do it...
|
|
|
Post by Mike - Montreal on Dec 15, 2017 14:21:37 GMT -5
I agree, if we are going to change the UFA retention rule to the be the trade deadline and not the start of the season, the change should only apply starting next year.
|
|