|
|
Post by Jedediah-Hartford on Jun 30, 2019 19:01:19 GMT -5
With all the asking prices out, thought maybe a quick reminder of the RFA rule was in order. I know this process was questioned in previous years. According to the rule book, RFA I's only get the 25% discount if someone bids on them. If no bids are received, they get only the 10% discount. Is this decision on how these players will be calculated or are we sticking to the 25% discount of asking price or highest bid? From the rule book, "Tier I (Drafted Players ELC) ** Can be matched by owning team if cap permits by paying the player 75% of highest offer or the players asking price whichever is higher ** " Not seeing any mention of a bid being required to match at 75%. Read more: gtgfhl.proboards.com/thread/3370/rule-book#ixzz5sNZtL9i8 |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Jun 30, 2019 19:11:37 GMT -5
Once the last phase has completed, owners will need to review all of their RFAs who have not been bid upon and decide to keep them (at 90% of asking price) or release them without penalty at which point they will become unrestricted free agents. Read more: gtgfhl.proboards.com/thread/3370/rule-book#ixzz5sNcuz2cl |
|
|
|
Post by Jedediah-Hartford on Jun 30, 2019 19:27:49 GMT -5
Once the last phase has completed, owners will need to review all of their RFAs who have not been bid upon and decide to keep them (at 90% of asking price) or release them without penalty at which point they will become unrestricted free agents. Read more: gtgfhl.proboards.com/thread/3370/rule-book#ixzz5sNcuz2clIn which case the rule book needs updating to clarify, one way or the other. " Can be matched by owning team if cap permits by paying the player 75% of highest offer or the players asking price whichever is higher
" implies that the players asking price isn't necessarily the same as the highest offer. That can only be true if there is no bid, because the first bid would immediately become the highest one. Read more: gtgfhl.proboards.com/post/46669/quote/5308?page=3#ixzz5sNg5OPYY |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Jun 30, 2019 19:31:47 GMT -5
All bids have to at least match the asking price so it's simply 75% of highest bid. If no bids are recieved, the player can be retained at 90% of the asking price
|
|
|
|
Post by Jedediah-Hartford on Jun 30, 2019 19:45:13 GMT -5
If that's what the rule was supposed to be all this time that's fine by me, I'm just pointing out that different parts of that section in the rule book are written in ways that open it to different interpretations and therefore should be rewritten to avoid future confusion.
"75% of highest offer OR asking price" is in the rule book, and it does make it look like one can match 75% of the asking price, which can't occur without the lack of a bid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Jun 30, 2019 19:57:03 GMT -5
Correct, I agree. That's caused confusion in the past which is why I was posting to make an attempt to get this clear well before owners make decisions on these players.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Jun 30, 2019 21:28:38 GMT -5
What if no one bids on Cutourier at 11.2? What would happen then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Jul 1, 2019 4:39:51 GMT -5
Nothing, he's unrestricted. The 10.2 is what he's asking Cleveland for. If Cleveland doesn't sign him, he goes into the bidding pool, same as we've always done
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Jul 1, 2019 10:26:33 GMT -5
Boys,
I will need to do a little digging to see how we have been handling RFA asking prices in the past. It is quite possible that the rule book was never updated to reflect a change we decided upon. My bad if so. I think we will continue with the same process we have used the last couple of years and once knows (when I look at the code) I will update the rulebook accordingly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Jul 1, 2019 10:35:05 GMT -5
His card is incredible! Top forward on the market Plus he was the GHL leading scorer with 111 points and he's a 3 time Cup winner! Brings a lot to the locker room. Since we still have the insurance at our disposal (as well as the extend 1 guy per year by paying large FPs), another possible course of action would be for GMs that find themselves in these dire straights would be not to extend them with their asking price but use the insurance. In Coots case you could bid 6M and drop 3M of insurance on him. Now, this means that its is 99% likely that someone will have made a bid in the 6-9M range (if not higher) amd you would only be able to extend him ny a year if that was the case. The bonus would be that if he has a poor year, his asking price may be lower and more palatable next year at this time. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Jul 1, 2019 14:40:59 GMT -5
I was really hoping to get rid of the insurance with the new UFA rule, essentially, teams can keep multiple UFA's if we don't
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Jul 1, 2019 15:30:23 GMT -5
Goalies Fort and Stamina calculated. Goalie asking prices have been generated as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Jul 3, 2019 11:21:17 GMT -5
Just 3 left to test draft yet. Alaska, Milwaukee and Edmonton. I know Scotty plans on walking Jake through the process for Edmonton.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Jul 3, 2019 14:15:25 GMT -5
Edmonton will be done tonight and I'll text Milwaukee again
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane-Hamilton on Jul 3, 2019 14:52:43 GMT -5
Scott just informed me all RFAs not receiving a bid only get a 10% discount, but if someone bids they get a 25% discount is that correct?
2 things
1.) Not receiving a bid would indicate the asking price is too high no? Why give a larger discount to a player deemed worthy of his asking price.
2.) What stops a team from bidding on an RFA to get the larger discount, if that's truly the rule I would gladly give a 5th rounder for a team to bid on my guy for the extra 15% discount
|
|
