|
|
Post by Bryan Hull on Mar 10, 2015 18:43:47 GMT -5
carolina has good points i have always found with ufa you always got outbid by teams that throw around crazy money in my humble opinion beyond what they are worth. would it be possible to use a system where they get what the nhl team pays them. another question or idea would it be an i dea to do like the phl and teams would lose players depending on placement in the standings if it would work that might help creat parity. i don't suggest to drop free agency but to have both. just a thought on my part
|
|
|
|
Post by Bryan Hull on Mar 10, 2015 18:45:54 GMT -5
just want to add this is the best league going and if the parity could be resolved it would be that much better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Mar 10, 2015 18:50:41 GMT -5
My biggest concern right now is this: what will "fair market value" be defined as, and what is "market value", and what is "market"
|
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Mar 10, 2015 19:01:22 GMT -5
carolina has good points i have always found with ufa you always got outbid by teams that throw around crazy money in my humble opinion beyond what they are worth. would it be possible to use a system where they get what the nhl team pays them. another question or idea would it be an i dea to do like the phl and teams would lose players depending on placement in the standings if it would work that might help creat parity. i don't suggest to drop free agency but to have both. just a thought on my part the phl way wouldnt work simply because were a cap league. with contracts we cant just drop players. it wouldnt work. they were negotiated by both the team and players so therefore just dropping a player wouldnt be right to the player. the problem with nhl market is that salaries will always be higher here than there. there are always teams willing to overpay not only here but the NHL as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Bryan Hull on Mar 10, 2015 19:05:01 GMT -5
there is a site where you can go to find out what your player gets and for how many years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Maple Leafs on Mar 10, 2015 19:18:48 GMT -5
I'm in favor of it. 100%. It guarantees that you can lock up players that you can't live without, but also means you will lose impact players from time to time. I say we put the issue to a league wide vote!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nashville Predators on Mar 10, 2015 20:39:54 GMT -5
My biggest concern right now is this: what will "fair market value" be defined as, and what is "market value", and what is "market" I agree, I hate the idea of not actually negotiating the deal |
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Sabres on Mar 10, 2015 20:55:07 GMT -5
I don't want "guaranteed" ufa signings.
What i may be open to is say a set number of "offers or counteroffers"
So if your serious about signing your guy you only get so many shots.
Say you get ten offers......you have six ufa's.....you can use them all on one guy to get deal done or make six really good offers and land all six of your guys back.
I'm just spitballing here but something involving that system would be something I'm more open too
|
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Mar 10, 2015 21:00:36 GMT -5
I actually hate negotiations right now, every negotiation feels like being touched in your privates inappropriately.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Sabres on Mar 10, 2015 21:02:08 GMT -5
Hilarious
|
|
