UFA New Method Proposal for 2016

[Jay Seo]

One issue I see with a three-player re-signing limit is that our five-year maximum on contract lengths doesn't give teams much leeway to stagger contracts, in which case that limit would arbitrarily prevent teams from re-signing players even if they had ample cap room.

In my team's case, I have 7 core players (Parise, Quick, Brodie, Faulk, RNH, the Sedins) whose contracts expire after 2017/18. I planned this a few seasons ago, and I should have cap room to re-sign all but one or two of those players if I choose to. 
  
If the three-player limit was enforced, I'd lose four of my core players because their contracts happened to expire the same year, which would destroy my team. 
 

[Buffalo Sabres]

I honestly think its just a down year for free agents. Some years teams will have cap space to resign guys and other years they wont.

[Corey Scott]

Personally I am not one to like limiting of signing free agents, but hey up to everyone else. It is a big change. If we were going to it would be implement it right away? Could screw over a lot of teams (for example I didn't need to resign anyone this year because of how I set up my team, this would clearly impact how many I have to sign over the next few years). Would imo need at least one year where it isn't there before then having it exist giving roughly 2 years for people to adjust their team as needed. Still don't like it though. I think staff here generally do a well enough job in getting a realistic dollar amount for the players. If that wasn't happening maybe I would agree.

[Jay Seo]

I don't know how others would feel about this, but I'd support a change where pending free agents were a little more likely to outright refuse to re-sign with a team with whom they lacked prior history (for example, a team they were traded to less than a season before hitting UFA status). That's a change that'd be both realistic and consistent with the NHL.

My Brassard extension is a good example. Right now, when I enter contract negotiations with the agents, I know that for the most part, if I can provide a reasonable argument as to why X player deserves Y salary, I have a good chance of keeping that player on my team.

In reality, if I was an NHL GM who acquired Brassard at the deadline and tried to negotiate a contract extension without severely overpaying him, his agent would tell me that he's going to explore free agency.

It should be riskier for teams to acquire players who have free agency looming on the horizon. 

[Edmonton Oilers]

Jun 16, 2016 7:01:34 GMT -5 Jay Seo said:

I don't know how others would feel about this, but I'd support a change where pending free agents were a little more likely to outright refuse to re-sign with a team with whom they lacked prior history (for example, a team they were traded to less than a season before hitting UFA status). That's a change that'd be both realistic and consistent with the NHL.

My Brassard extension is a good example. Right now, when I enter contract negotiations with the agents, I know that for the most part, if I can provide a reasonable argument as to why X player deserves Y salary, I have a good chance of keeping that player on my team.

In reality, if I was an NHL GM who acquired Brassard at the deadline and tried to negotiate a contract extension without severely overpaying him, his agent would tell me that he's going to explore free agency.

It should be riskier for teams to acquire players who have free agency looming on the horizon. 

We've actually been tougher on teams with a bad history of trading recently signed ufas or signing all their recently acquired players. Theres only one team really who shall remain nameless that was really taking advantage of this. Weve also made it a point for gms to make clear and consise arguments using stats, comparables etc rather than hypothetical statements. Atkinson and Brassard were the only real two players of note that were signed agter being acquired close to the deadline as the offers wre either well written or simply what the agents wanted

[Andre Deblois]

Jun 16, 2016 7:01:34 GMT -5 Jay Seo said:

I don't know how others would feel about this, but I'd support a change where pending free agents were a little more likely to outright refuse to re-sign with a team with whom they lacked prior history (for example, a team they were traded to less than a season before hitting UFA status). That's a change that'd be both realistic and consistent with the NHL.

My Brassard extension is a good example. Right now, when I enter contract negotiations with the agents, I know that for the most part, if I can provide a reasonable argument as to why X player deserves Y salary, I have a good chance of keeping that player on my team.

In reality, if I was an NHL GM who acquired Brassard at the deadline and tried to negotiate a contract extension without severely overpaying him, his agent would tell me that he's going to explore free agency.

It should be riskier for teams to acquire players who have free agency looming on the horizon. 

I'n not necessarily sure that the causation here is well represented. Does that happen more in the NHL because those types of players are acquired strictly as rentals where the team generally can't afford to re-sign the player and acquires him anyway, or do NHL players actually desire to push into free agency regardless of any offer presented? It's something I'd be open to exploring, but that would likely have a negative impact on the trade market for pending free agents in the months before the deadline...

[Jay Seo]

Jun 16, 2016 8:36:19 GMT -5 Andre Deblois said:

I'n not necessarily sure that the causation here is well represented. Does that happen more in the NHL because those types of players are acquired strictly as rentals where the team generally can't afford to re-sign the player and acquires him anyway, or do NHL players actually desire to push into free agency regardless of any offer presented? It's something I'd be open to exploring, but that would likely have a negative impact on the trade market for pending free agents in the months before the deadline...

It's not really an empirically proven argument, just my personal opinion. 

From what I've seen in the NHL, players who are that close to free agency prefer to explore free agency first instead of re-signing with the team they were traded to, even if the team in question has enough cap room to re-sign said player. No evidence to prove this at the moment, just what I think.

To be fair, there are other factors in the NHL that influence said desire, like location, family preferences, taxes, previous working relationships, etc. that don't exist in the VHL. 
 
But in my opinion, VHL contract negotiations are relatively straightforward as long as you make a reasonable offer along with supporting evidence. You may have to bend a bit on the numbers, but once a negotiation starts, it often ends with the player signing regardless of when they were acquired.

I think it'd be more interesting to have some players refuse to re-sign with teams in that scenario. It'd add an element of risk to the trade deadline and with acquiring pending UFAs for sure, but I think contenders and aggressive GMs would still take that gamble and it'd increase the quality of the UFA market.