|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Mar 11, 2015 10:47:46 GMT -5
what did I win, im the flying frenchman from quebec here Sean Avery's sloppy seconds |
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Maple Leafs on Mar 11, 2015 10:53:36 GMT -5
I like it. When I was in the BRHL it was one of the few things they had going over there that worked well and I actually enjoyed. I fully support this idea along with the max 2-3 UFA per year retention signing. This is also more fair to the staff Louis I still have no idea why you wouldn't be on board with this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Mar 11, 2015 10:55:27 GMT -5
The UFA Cap idea I'm not a huge fan of, I would vote against it, but I would not vehemently oppose it, throw a hissy fit and sue TSN and some random kid on twitter if it happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edmonton Oilers on Mar 11, 2015 10:58:39 GMT -5
what did I win, im the flying frenchman from quebec here Sean Avery's sloppy seconds ill take it, shes super hot |
|
|
|
Post by Aaron Brown on Mar 11, 2015 11:28:13 GMT -5
I like this idea. Some thoughts:
1. We'd have to stagger the release of players into the auction or else it would be too unwieldly. I think we would have to post a schedule before FA opens that says when what UFA's hit the block when. This would create some work but minor compared to the process now.
2. Definitely have to monitor people posting bids who cannot afford the contract.
3. Bidding period should be finite as someone said. Like 120 hours max (5 days) with the possibility to extend if bidding heats up.
The one thing we would have to be careful of in which order we release the players. Going "best" to "worst" seems like it could work but there might be unitended consequences like crippling contracts for mediocre players.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aaron Brown on Mar 11, 2015 11:29:57 GMT -5
I think the activity would be cool. If everyone knows it is coming then they should be prepared.
It also removes the pain in the ass staff restrictions. Every year people bitch that staff have the advantage and every year I feel I get screwed because I'm staff. This ends this god awful debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Corey Scott on Mar 11, 2015 11:40:12 GMT -5
3. Bidding period should be finite as someone said. Like 120 hours max (5 days) with the possibility to extend if bidding heats up. This imo, would be the worst thing you could do. Do not put a finite time for bidding beyond something like one month. Finite bidding times will just lead towards someone waiting until the last possible second to bid so that they cannot be outbid. This is a much better idea with the signed once nobody has outbid in x amount of time. |
|
|
|
Post by Aaron Brown on Mar 11, 2015 11:54:07 GMT -5
I think you need both.
Let's say there are three centres on the market: Datsyuk, Ribeiro & Boyd Gordon
I can't afford Datsyuk and am not keen on Ribeiro but Gordon is a perfect fit so I'm aggressive and bid.
On one hand I don't think I should have to wait for a month to see if I get a 4th line centre because everyone else is bidding on Datsyuk and Ribeiro. On the other hand, if I'm the first bid, it shouldn't expire after 48 if no one else bids because he might be a lot of Ribeiro bidder's plan B.
You need to have a system flexible enough to handle all scenarios.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tampa Bay Lightning on Mar 11, 2015 11:56:31 GMT -5
that's exactly the way it works, if you make an aggressive bid for Boyd Gordon, and nobody else makes a higher bid within a finite amount of time, you get him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andre Deblois on Mar 11, 2015 12:07:07 GMT -5
The only to make this work would be by creating "waves" in which the bidding on players will occur, with the majority of the better players in the first wave. This will maximize the teams in on each player and will ensure that teams that lose out on their top guy have the opportunity to get their plan B or C. It also maximizes the earning potential for every player.
In an ideal world, the staff announce who will be in which wave at the beginning of free agency, each wave will last say 4 days and at the end of the clock, whomever has the highest bid, gets the player.
Yes this could lead to someone "sniping in" a better bid at the last minute, but that's how these things work. It'll incentivize GMs to put in their top bid and not try to get a bargain.
|
|
