|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Aug 1, 2016 20:22:52 GMT -5
Wholly F'n crap fellas.....LOL....Please refer to my previous post...... IM ALL GOOD WITH WHATEVER THE PROCESS IS AM I not allowed to disagree with something? I just replied to your post G, I didnt ask you to go over anything more!!! Im good with it! You decided to go thru all that for no reason. FFS!!!! FFFS!!! For the record....I think it sucks that an ELC guy with only 1 GHL season goes from 900k salary to a full blown 7 mil salary!!! Whoa is meeee, call the cops!!!! Calm the F down. Also, for the record....The masses have spoken, and I have listened, and I am good. I MISUNDERTOOD!!!!!! I misunderstood, that the price was being derived from the players NHL prognosis and that his GHL lifetime was not being used. My bad. All is good. Next order of business. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 1, 2016 20:24:38 GMT -5
Wholly F'n crap fellas.....LOL....Please refer to my previous post...... IM ALL GOOD WITH WHATEVER THE PROCESS IS AM I not allowed to disagree with something? I just replied to your post G, I didnt ask you to go over anything more!!! Im good with it! You decided to go thru all that for no reason. FFS!!!! FFFS!!! For the record....I think it sucks that an ELC guy with only 1 GHL season goes from 900k salary to a full blown 7 mil salary!!! Whoa is meeee, call the cops!!!! Calm the F down. Also, for the record....The masses have spoken, and I have listened, and I am good. I MISUNDERTOOD!!!!!! I misunderstood, that the price was being derived from the players NHL prognosis and that his GHL lifetime was not being used. My bad. All is good. Next order of business. LMFAO |
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 1, 2016 20:34:36 GMT -5
I love the FHL/GHL reunion!
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 1, 2016 20:41:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Aug 1, 2016 22:50:32 GMT -5
Can't we just leave the cost of draft picks alone. We have way to much other shit with bridge deals and expansion draft. If you can't manager your cap to fucking bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 2, 2016 10:06:36 GMT -5
I will probably have to move this conversation to the salary cap thread where it belongs but I don't understand the thought process behind lowering draft picks cap hit. Yes, I understand that AHL players don't count toward the NHL cap, however for our purposes, these are also the players we use to fill in our rosters for injuries in some cases, some teams use them as 3rd & 4th liners if they are rebuilding, etc. I assume we wouldn't be able to use these players if we are paying then half price or even lower salaries. I am of the same mindset as posted above, and I believe I posted somewhere a long time ago that the teams filling their rosters with ELC players were going to get themselves in serious cap trouble down the road, and for some, we are down the road. Teams must balance cap and it's their individual responsibility to do so. At the same time, I also agree with the arguement that it is going to be difficult to pay NHL contracts in the GHL because of the budget structure. With this in mind, I'm sure a solution will be found but I recommend maybe a slight increase in cap to ease the burden of higher asking prices. Current cap is $73M (+$2.5M), maybe add another $2.5M to make our formula NHL cap + $5M and just go with the simplicity of that to avoid owners getting in cap trouble as players hit the books at double or more of what they showed the previous year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 2, 2016 11:11:01 GMT -5
I will probably have to move this conversation to the salary cap thread where it belongs but I don't understand the thought process behind lowering draft picks cap hit. Yes, I understand that AHL players don't count toward the NHL cap, however for our purposes, these are also the players we use to fill in our rosters for injuries in some cases, some teams use them as 3rd & 4th liners if they are rebuilding, etc. I assume we wouldn't be able to use these players if we are paying then half price or even lower salaries. I am of the same mindset as posted above, and I believe I posted somewhere a long time ago that the teams filling their rosters with ELC players were going to get themselves in serious cap trouble down the road, and for some, we are down the road. Teams must balance cap and it's their individual responsibility to do so. At the same time, I also agree with the arguement that it is going to be difficult to pay NHL contracts in the GHL because of the budget structure. With this in mind, I'm sure a solution will be found but I recommend maybe a slight increase in cap to ease the burden of higher asking prices. Current cap is $73M (+$2.5M), maybe add another $2.5M to make our formula NHL cap + $5M and just go with the simplicity of that to avoid owners getting in cap trouble as players hit the books at double or more of what they showed the previous year. The thought is only to lower them if their card was derived from AHL stats not lower them across the board. That would mean for this year; McDavid not lowered: ghl.greytowergames.com/PlayerCards2.aspx?PlayerID=9630McIntyre lowered: ghl.greytowergames.com/PlayerCardsNew.aspx?PlayerID=A5996They could still fill in as needed on teams without penalty as we have no waiver wire This approach targets exactly where the issue is and that is the current flat fee approach for a player given his draft position and not whether he is playing and contributing in the NHL or AHL (2 way contracts) Because this targets the known area of deficiency, it seems like this would be a better solution than just raising the cap 2.5M and giving GMs more leverage to squirrel away NHL talent in the minors (not realistic) Please point out to me where I am wrong here. |
|
|
|
Post by Ian-Halifax on Aug 2, 2016 11:36:12 GMT -5
I will probably have to move this conversation to the salary cap thread where it belongs but I don't understand the thought process behind lowering draft picks cap hit. Yes, I understand that AHL players don't count toward the NHL cap, however for our purposes, these are also the players we use to fill in our rosters for injuries in some cases, some teams use them as 3rd & 4th liners if they are rebuilding, etc. I assume we wouldn't be able to use these players if we are paying then half price or even lower salaries. I am of the same mindset as posted above, and I believe I posted somewhere a long time ago that the teams filling their rosters with ELC players were going to get themselves in serious cap trouble down the road, and for some, we are down the road. Teams must balance cap and it's their individual responsibility to do so. At the same time, I also agree with the arguement that it is going to be difficult to pay NHL contracts in the GHL because of the budget structure. With this in mind, I'm sure a solution will be found but I recommend maybe a slight increase in cap to ease the burden of higher asking prices. Current cap is $73M (+$2.5M), maybe add another $2.5M to make our formula NHL cap + $5M and just go with the simplicity of that to avoid owners getting in cap trouble as players hit the books at double or more of what they showed the previous year. The thought is only to lower them if their card was derived from AHL stats not lower them across the board. That would mean for this year; McDavid not lowered: ghl.greytowergames.com/PlayerCards2.aspx?PlayerID=9630McIntyre lowered: ghl.greytowergames.com/PlayerCardsNew.aspx?PlayerID=A5996They could still fill in as needed on teams without penalty as we have no waiver wire This approach targets exactly where the issue is and that is the current flat fee approach for a player given his draft position and not whether he is playing and contributing in the NHL or AHL (2 way contracts) Because this targets the known area of deficiency, it seems like this would be a better solution than just raising the cap 2.5M and giving GMs more leverage to squirrel away NHL talent in the minors (not realistic) Please point out to me where I am wrong here. The problem with this is there are plenty of guys that have terrible cards and are still going to be paid like they would on an NHL roster. Like I said yesterday there are a number of guys with NHL cards who only played 10-15 games which doesn't translate to anything usable in our league. So basically we're encouraging picking guys who don't play in the NHL at all when they're drafted and lowering the value of guys who do. Minor leaguers are more valuable because they can be kept at a low salary until you choose to pay them unlike drafted players. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 2, 2016 11:44:12 GMT -5
Just to be clear, I am fine leaving things as they are. I do think that "plenty of guys" needs to be quantified. My viewpoint is this did a better job of handling 90% of what these drafted players salaries should be closer to then it's a no-brainer. Would you say the same? If yes, then you must be thinking that this wouldn't address 90%. Again if this is the case, what would your guess be as to the number of players compensated more closely to what they should be?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian-Halifax on Aug 2, 2016 13:37:19 GMT -5
I went through the first round, I don't have time to go through all 5. These are the following guys who have NHL cards after playing majority of the season in AHL. Obviously there will be more per round as we get lower since those guys will have been called up even less.
Bjorkstrand - 12 NHL, 51 AHL
Hyman - 16 NHL, 59 AHL
Petan - 26 NHL, 47 AHL
These 3 guys all have Pro cards, and you're saying we're going to have to pay them full price. So not only is each guy's card nerfed and unusbale for playing most of the season in the AHL, they're still considered pro somehow and have to be paid more. It's a lose/lose.
McCarron - 20 NHL, 58 AHL
He played more NHL than 2 of the 3 guys I mentioned and is considered a minor league card. And it sounds like it's this way because his AHL stats produce a better card than his pro stats. But as you can see with my examples, the card is useless whether AHL or NHL stats are used. The 3 first guys just get screwed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian-Halifax on Aug 2, 2016 13:43:23 GMT -5
This is also why non-drafted guys are now more valuable than a drafted guy who pans out the same. I can get a 25% discount to re-sign my drafted guy and only 10% on my non-drafted. But, I can keep my non-drafted guy in the minors for 4 years, if he pans out before 4 years I can use him for a year on a minor league deal, then give him a 3 year bridge contract for 855k, and then he becomes an RFA. I might not have to worry about that extra 15% discount for 7 years, and he could play 4 of them on my team for under $1 mil a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 2, 2016 13:55:34 GMT -5
Ian. Puttin' in the time. Coming up with logics!
Excellent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 2, 2016 14:17:38 GMT -5
I went through the first round, I don't have time to go through all 5. These are the following guys who have NHL cards after playing majority of the season in AHL. Obviously there will be more per round as we get lower since those guys will have been called up even less. Bjorkstrand - 12 NHL, 51 AHL Hyman - 16 NHL, 59 AHL Petan - 26 NHL, 47 AHL These 3 guys all have Pro cards, and you're saying we're going to have to pay them full price. So not only is each guy's card nerfed and unusbale for playing most of the season in the AHL, they're still considered pro somehow and have to be paid more. It's a lose/lose. McCarron - 20 NHL, 58 AHL He played more NHL than 2 of the 3 guys I mentioned and is considered a minor league card. And it sounds like it's this way because his AHL stats produce a better card than his pro stats. But as you can see with my examples, the card is useless whether AHL or NHL stats are used. The 3 first guys just get screwed. So if I understand you right, 3 guys out of the 1st round (30 total) have NHL cards and wouldn't get the benefit of the lowered salary? That is 10%. So 90% of the guys would be handled handled correctly then (either good usable cards or AHL cards that are eligible for the discount). As you go deeper in the draft more guys would be on AHL contracts and therefore be better handled as well. I would say the percentage would climb to as high at 97-98% of guys would be better handled. I agree with you that the current minor league guys have a higher value then they should because of the difference in structures. Would not better addressing 97-98% of the drafted guys be about 47 steps in a positive direction? |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 2, 2016 14:17:46 GMT -5
Ian. Puttin' in the time. Coming up with logics! Excellent. Of course he is, he built his team by collecting guys on ELC's and now sees that it's coming time to pay all of those players and won't be able to and if he can't work trades for them, they'll walk away for nothing. The above contracts have been paid the same way since we started the amateur draft 5 years ago, why are these contracts suddenly unfair? |
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 2, 2016 14:28:10 GMT -5
Scott. Putting in the refuting work. Countering the argument.
Also excellent!
|
|
