|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 14, 2020 17:43:29 GMT -5
Yes, of course the NHL allows it, their UFA's are assets and are traded as late as the draft in some cases, which is days before free agency starts. In the G, however, we can only trade one UFA through the sign and trade scenario so since we don't have rights to our UFA's in the way the NHL does, I was wondering how that was going to work for both the expansion team and the rest of the clubs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe-Adirondack on Aug 14, 2020 18:19:30 GMT -5
Well the rule has been set that was agreed on that a UFA to be must start year on your team in order to use fp’s to resign him so how will that work for expansion team ..... does that owner pick Only one UFA from team A and that’s his choice of pick from that team and use there own fantasy points if given to them to resign him
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 14, 2020 18:50:52 GMT -5
I'm assuming that IF the expansion team is allowed to select an UFA from a team that yes, that will obviously be the pick from said team. Whether that will be allowed and how the team will be able to sign said selection was my original question.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris-Suffolk on Aug 14, 2020 19:54:32 GMT -5
Like I said, it's nice to see you guys all chatting about subject matters...but, it doesn't really matter, not until Glenn speaks on the subject matter. Sorry, but that's the process fella's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 15, 2020 7:29:20 GMT -5
Sorry boys, had a busy day yesterday so I am just trying to catch up on this thread now.
I am still a little confused as to how a UFA could be selected by an expansion team. Looking at it at a high level I would think that we would operate the expansion draft prior to team resigning their chosen UFA or make the UFAs exempt if for timing reasons we had to do so prior. Since the general concensus is that we were unable to retain UFAs when we had our prior draft (I think that is the case as well but memory doesn't always serve as well as it should) this would most closely follow how we conducted our prior expansion draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian-Cleveland on Aug 15, 2020 7:44:20 GMT -5
Sorry boys, had a busy day yesterday so I am just trying to catch up on this thread now. I am still a little confused as to how a UFA could be selected by an expansion team. Looking at it at a high level I would think that we would operate the expansion draft prior to team resigning their chosen UFA or make the UFAs exempt if for timing reasons we had to do so prior. Since the general concensus is that we were unable to retain UFAs when we had our prior draft (I think that is the case as well but memory doesn't always serve as well as it should) this would most closely follow how we conducted our prior expansion draft. The problem with that is a team will be able to protect an extra player that the expansion team couldn’t pick. In your scenario they could protect 7 forwards, 3D, a goalie, and would them be able to retain a UFA after the expansion draft that wouldn’t be draft eligible. If we do the UFA retention before the expansion draft then teams wouldn’t have that loophole and would be forced to protect, or expose, that UFA. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 15, 2020 7:58:10 GMT -5
Sorry boys, had a busy day yesterday so I am just trying to catch up on this thread now. I am still a little confused as to how a UFA could be selected by an expansion team. Looking at it at a high level I would think that we would operate the expansion draft prior to team resigning their chosen UFA or make the UFAs exempt if for timing reasons we had to do so prior. Since the general concensus is that we were unable to retain UFAs when we had our prior draft (I think that is the case as well but memory doesn't always serve as well as it should) this would most closely follow how we conducted our prior expansion draft. The problem with that is a team will be able to protect an extra player that the expansion team couldn’t pick. In your scenario they could protect 7 forwards, 3D, a goalie, and would them be able to retain a UFA after the expansion draft that wouldn’t be draft eligible. If we do the UFA retention before the expansion draft then teams wouldn’t have that loophole and would be forced to protect, or expose, that UFA. But when compared to the last expansion draft the players that the expansion team can draft is the same as it was last time. If a guy was a UFA they couldn't have drafted him anyways. These players would have to have been bid upon by the expansion team and everyone else to retain their services. That being said I am inclined to proceed as stated above unless there is some additional points that are made that brings up some points that I am not seeing right now. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 15, 2020 8:16:09 GMT -5
So by this, I'm gathering that UFA's will be automatically protected and ineligible for the expansion draft. As Brian pointed out, that basically gives 31 teams the option of one extra protected player.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 15, 2020 9:07:32 GMT -5
It really depends on how you view this. As this is an expansion draft and involves the expansion team selecting players, when viewed from the expansion team's perspective there is no change from last time so teams are not protecting an additional player.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian-Cleveland on Aug 15, 2020 9:17:57 GMT -5
It really depends on how you view this. As this is an expansion draft and involves the expansion team selecting players, when viewed from the expansion team's perspective there is no change from last time so teams are not protecting an additional player. But teams didn’t have the option to retain a UFA either. So that eliminates a chunk of talent from the UFA pool. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 15, 2020 9:50:17 GMT -5
Also, while on this topic, should we reserve an owner from our group to guide the expansion team absent of an actual owner for the new club?
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Mar 7, 2021 14:37:55 GMT -5
So I dug up the discussion/rules from our previous expansion draft thread and here is what we settled on:
Each team can protect
7 Forwards, 3 Defensemen, 1 Goalie
OR
8 Skaters and 1 Goalie
Automatically Protected
Any drafted player RFA (non bridged) 2018 2022 or later
Next years players will have a notation of being except as they had in prior years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Mar 8, 2021 4:12:56 GMT -5
Why drafted it was not that way last time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Mar 8, 2021 6:45:08 GMT -5
^^^I believe he's correct, it was any player on their initial GHL deal (ELC). Glenn, I will give you an example of this when we talk this week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Mar 10, 2021 17:05:11 GMT -5
OK, I think they are pretty interchangeable (drafted/player on ELC) although I guess there always are the Palats that need to be considered as well.
|
|
