|
|
Post by Jay Seo on Feb 28, 2015 0:13:26 GMT -5
The one counter-argument I have against capping UFA re-signings is that the league's max contract length of 4/5 years makes staggering contracts really difficult.
Not many players deserve a 4-5 year contract, and not many teams want to re-sign deserving players to 1-year deals, so there's naturally a glut of players who are on 2-3 year contracts. If you cap the number of UFA re-signings, you could unintentionally penalize a team for having re-signed its players to the best possible contracts, but who happen to have their contracts expire the same year because of the logistics involving the 5-year maximum length.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2015 8:35:08 GMT -5
The UFA market isn't that bad (Sedin twins, Parise, etc last year) and I don't think capping UFA signings would make it that much better, as teams will just trade excess pending UFA's to teams with fewer UFA's.
Also, maybe signing UFA's isn't the best rebuilding strategy.
What about a minimum number of prospects? Force inactive GMs to at least provide the franchise with quantity of assets.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Sabres on Feb 28, 2015 13:28:45 GMT -5
I really think the lower cap this year will add to the free agent market. I know I'm in a real bind and having to let some real talent go.
With many teams up against the cap Teams are gonna have to make real sure what they are signing
|
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Mar 5, 2015 12:15:00 GMT -5
When I took over the Hurricanes, I had a total of 21 players between my pro roster and farm roster, and had only 9 prospects on my list, prospects I hadn't even heard of. This made it EXTREMELY difficult to rebuild and I am still suffering through the horrendous roster I initially began with a few years ago because the GM before me neglected the team, while the active teams continued to get richer. When I got my team, I had to clear out I think 10 prospects + a bunch of farm guys on my list because they were all OUT OF HOCKEY, and IIRC when I got my team i had exactly 4 NHL players under the age of 30. FOUR. The prospect list needs to be expanded, simply due to the fact that there's an obvious "lag time" for prospects to be ready to come off that list, whether they fail/make it, and some take longer than others. Some teams just have a lot of draft picks, and they make trades for prospects. In the 2 drafts I've been in i've made 12 selections, and have obviously traded for many prospects. I have another 6 picks this upcoming draft. There should be a limit, because there is one in real life (in the form of total rights held). It prevents prospects that have moved on from hockey from staying on the list and clogging up the system, and on the surface 20 seems a lot for a league with a 3 round draft, but teams claim prospects (and I think it's quite rewarding, although nobody i've claimed has worked out so far), and for rebuilding teams who need to draft a lot of players and have prospects, 20 handicaps them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2015 15:17:50 GMT -5
I agree with TB about the prospect limit. I think the best thing to do is put the limit to 25-30-35, add 4th rounders and remove the right to claim prospect : if a prospect is not drafted but he is still draft eligible then you can't claim him and he will be in the current year draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Mar 5, 2015 15:43:45 GMT -5
I agree with TB about the prospect limit. I think the best thing to do is put the limit to 25-30-35, add 4th rounders and remove the right to claim prospect : if a prospect is not drafted but he is still draft eligible then you can't claim him and he will be in the current year draft. no thanks on the last part. teams shouild be aloud to claim prospects if they are elligible. |
|
|
|
Post by Philadelphia Flyers on Mar 5, 2015 15:55:07 GMT -5
I wouldn't be opposed to upping the prospect limit and adding 4th rounders. But I agree that any unclaimed prospect should be eligible to be picked up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2015 16:09:41 GMT -5
I think we have a rule that prospects who are STILL DRAFT ELIGIBLE in the NHL can't be claimed, although some have slipped through the cracks.
But I agree that prospects who are NO LONGER DRAFT ELIGIBLE in the NHL should be free to be claimed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aaron Brown on Mar 10, 2015 14:30:10 GMT -5
Upping the prospect limit will make the problem worse. The more good GM's can hoard talent, the worse the parity will be.
Forcing roster turnover is the only way to allow for quick rebuilds. You have to force active GM's with good teams to part with their assets. Otherwise there is no incentive for them to move talent to weaker teams.
The NHL has a 50 person contract limit and real financial constraints. In our artificial world, without these constraints, players just sit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Sabres on Mar 10, 2015 14:54:17 GMT -5
Yah wonder if we should implement 50 contracts here.
Teams running full systems now in vhl are probably around 60 or more
|
|
