Post by Philadelphia Flyers on Mar 10, 2015 16:56:19 GMT -5
I'd just like to say that I had proposed this idea to the staff last summer in the staff board. It basically got stomped on and I begrudgingly moved forward from it. But with all this league discussion for league parity, equality and fairness. I felt that I could make this proposal public. Because it shouldn't be a staff discussion, it needs to be a league discussion if we are striving for league parity.
A major part of the excitement in the off-season is Unrestricted Free Agency.
I admire the agents hard work in progressing negotiations. However, I am seeing a yearly trend in which mostly every notable UFA gets resigned no matter how long negotiations go on for. Sure some negotiations are more difficult to find a level ground, but I feel at the rate of resigning players will deplete the crop of Unrestricted Free Agency. In a sim league, GMs don't really care about inflating contracts as long as they get the player signed. This alone can create some issues down the road, as our contracts could potentially become more inflated than contracts in the NHL.
Although it is unrealistic that every UFA walks, it is also unrealistic that every UFA resigns. In a sim league, it's very easy for agents and GMs to continue negotiations until a deal is made. It becomes more like a resigning period than unrestricted free agency. The reason there has been the odd big fish in previous classes is because those UFA's hit the market due to a GM not being as active in negotiations. You'll never see an active GM purposely lose the Sedins, or lose a player like Zach Parise for nothing.
In my personal opinion, I am never too excited for Unrestricted Free Agency in the summer because there just isn't a whole lot you can do in terms of significantly improving your roster. I'm not complaining or anything, my best interests is for the league itself, and I feel like this could potentially be a reflection of how other GMs will feel down the road. We don't want to build up the excitement of Unrestricted Free Agency and then it be a disappointment to those who are eager to add pieces to their rosters that will actually make a difference.
I have a proposal to start next off-season, that teams are only allowed 3 UFA resignings per off-season. Allowing only 3 UFA resignings will limit GMs to excersize their ability to manage their assets. To clarify, teams may sign up to 3 of their own pending UFA's automatically to fair market value, but this does not mean they cannot sign multiple UFA's during the Unrestricted Free Agency period.
This will increase activity, as teams will take part in the market more aggressively, as there will be more options available, and more positions on each team will need to be filled. More trades will happen during the draft as teams will try to fill positions, and not rely solely on free agency. Teams would actively try trading any pending unrestricted free agents that exceeds their 3 resigning limit to teams for other assets. This challenges each GM to properly construct their asset management each season.
Other reasons why this method will be effective, is because our cap floor is increasing by 6.9 million. Teams will be forced to add significant players on their teams to reach the cap floor. Eventually there will be forced parity in the league where teams will have to become more balanced in terms of talent. The teams with all-star rosters will be forced to lose a player to one of the bottom teams. Unfair? No. Realistic? Yes.
As for the staff, it saves a lot of time of negotiating prior to the off-season. Not that this was a problem, but if each team simply submitted what 3 UFA's they'd like the resign, we can just submit those resignings, and the rest of the UFA's go to the UFA pool.
I resigned Tobias Enstrom to fair market value, which is totally fine and dandy. But realistically, for example, a player like Enstrom, would he of resigned with a team that is in my current state? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the player. My point of the matter is, we don't have that factor in sim leagues where the PLAYER decides if he even wants to resign with your team. It's a GM vs Agent negotiation. There are no factors whether a player would prefer to 'wait' it out, or not negotiate until the off-season. Sometimes the player just flat out doesn't want to resign with your team. But we don't have that realism in our league. The current system we have in place is if the money = their fair market value, they automatically sign.
If we implement this system, all the players who weren't automatically resigned using the 3 player resign limit, they hit unrestricted free agency. Then in the off-season, multiple teams send offers on those UFA's, and us agents can then decide what is the best fit per team. We wouldn't just be looking at money, we'd be looking at best term, the best fit. Would Enstrom take a bit less money to sign with Minnesota over Carolina? Hell yeah he would. That is the only realistic thing to do. Would Kesler sign with New York for a bit less money over Columbus? Probably. Not because these teams are 'bigger markets' but because these teams are in positions to win right now.
So, teams who lose UFA's due to this new rule, would still have the upper edge in negotiations against other teams in the off-season anyway.
And it's not like teams will lose a bunch of players anyway. Each team averages 4-8 UFA's anyway. Some varying from stars, to just depth players. This proposed rule wouldn't significantly change an entire team inside out, this rule just adds the parity and realism along side the NHL that we all are striving for.
I hope all this made sense.
What do you guys think? I believe there would be nothing but positive effects that'll stem from this change. And it'll really test each GM to make the appropriate decisions for their team, and not carelessly be able to throw big numbers at all of their UFA's in the liklihood they'll all resign. Which right now, isn't a far fetched assumption.
A major part of the excitement in the off-season is Unrestricted Free Agency.
I admire the agents hard work in progressing negotiations. However, I am seeing a yearly trend in which mostly every notable UFA gets resigned no matter how long negotiations go on for. Sure some negotiations are more difficult to find a level ground, but I feel at the rate of resigning players will deplete the crop of Unrestricted Free Agency. In a sim league, GMs don't really care about inflating contracts as long as they get the player signed. This alone can create some issues down the road, as our contracts could potentially become more inflated than contracts in the NHL.
Although it is unrealistic that every UFA walks, it is also unrealistic that every UFA resigns. In a sim league, it's very easy for agents and GMs to continue negotiations until a deal is made. It becomes more like a resigning period than unrestricted free agency. The reason there has been the odd big fish in previous classes is because those UFA's hit the market due to a GM not being as active in negotiations. You'll never see an active GM purposely lose the Sedins, or lose a player like Zach Parise for nothing.
In my personal opinion, I am never too excited for Unrestricted Free Agency in the summer because there just isn't a whole lot you can do in terms of significantly improving your roster. I'm not complaining or anything, my best interests is for the league itself, and I feel like this could potentially be a reflection of how other GMs will feel down the road. We don't want to build up the excitement of Unrestricted Free Agency and then it be a disappointment to those who are eager to add pieces to their rosters that will actually make a difference.
I have a proposal to start next off-season, that teams are only allowed 3 UFA resignings per off-season. Allowing only 3 UFA resignings will limit GMs to excersize their ability to manage their assets. To clarify, teams may sign up to 3 of their own pending UFA's automatically to fair market value, but this does not mean they cannot sign multiple UFA's during the Unrestricted Free Agency period.
This will increase activity, as teams will take part in the market more aggressively, as there will be more options available, and more positions on each team will need to be filled. More trades will happen during the draft as teams will try to fill positions, and not rely solely on free agency. Teams would actively try trading any pending unrestricted free agents that exceeds their 3 resigning limit to teams for other assets. This challenges each GM to properly construct their asset management each season.
Other reasons why this method will be effective, is because our cap floor is increasing by 6.9 million. Teams will be forced to add significant players on their teams to reach the cap floor. Eventually there will be forced parity in the league where teams will have to become more balanced in terms of talent. The teams with all-star rosters will be forced to lose a player to one of the bottom teams. Unfair? No. Realistic? Yes.
As for the staff, it saves a lot of time of negotiating prior to the off-season. Not that this was a problem, but if each team simply submitted what 3 UFA's they'd like the resign, we can just submit those resignings, and the rest of the UFA's go to the UFA pool.
I resigned Tobias Enstrom to fair market value, which is totally fine and dandy. But realistically, for example, a player like Enstrom, would he of resigned with a team that is in my current state? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on the player. My point of the matter is, we don't have that factor in sim leagues where the PLAYER decides if he even wants to resign with your team. It's a GM vs Agent negotiation. There are no factors whether a player would prefer to 'wait' it out, or not negotiate until the off-season. Sometimes the player just flat out doesn't want to resign with your team. But we don't have that realism in our league. The current system we have in place is if the money = their fair market value, they automatically sign.
If we implement this system, all the players who weren't automatically resigned using the 3 player resign limit, they hit unrestricted free agency. Then in the off-season, multiple teams send offers on those UFA's, and us agents can then decide what is the best fit per team. We wouldn't just be looking at money, we'd be looking at best term, the best fit. Would Enstrom take a bit less money to sign with Minnesota over Carolina? Hell yeah he would. That is the only realistic thing to do. Would Kesler sign with New York for a bit less money over Columbus? Probably. Not because these teams are 'bigger markets' but because these teams are in positions to win right now.
So, teams who lose UFA's due to this new rule, would still have the upper edge in negotiations against other teams in the off-season anyway.
And it's not like teams will lose a bunch of players anyway. Each team averages 4-8 UFA's anyway. Some varying from stars, to just depth players. This proposed rule wouldn't significantly change an entire team inside out, this rule just adds the parity and realism along side the NHL that we all are striving for.
I hope all this made sense.
What do you guys think? I believe there would be nothing but positive effects that'll stem from this change. And it'll really test each GM to make the appropriate decisions for their team, and not carelessly be able to throw big numbers at all of their UFA's in the liklihood they'll all resign. Which right now, isn't a far fetched assumption.
