RFA and Prospsct rule change discussion

[Deleted]

Should have let Wolf post the thread. Everyone is just going to see your name and the words "rule change" and instantly think it's you trying to better the rules for yourself. I bet that everyone saying "let's keep it the same" didn't actually read past the first sentence.

It's sad but the rules will never change if you're the one that puts forward the idea.

[Tampa Bay Lightning]

If a team can’t fit all it’s prospects on the prospect list, make a trade or a drop.

I’ve never had a problem with any of the elc rules since I’ve been around, and everybody knows I have a problem with everything.

If you look at my farm, I burned through a lot of elc years last year to keep the pipeline going, and that’s just the cost of doing business

I will say I am for expanding the draft and prospect list, but that’s for another time

Edit: no opinion with changing ufa age, as long any rule change is grandfathered in
Edit2: I’m in another league where the ufa age is 27/28 and it runs fine as well.

[Dallas Stars]

I think alot of people missed my point or interpreted the whole thing as me trying to better myself which isn't what the point of this was at all. I was basically just bringing up a discussion that would involve a possible rule change, not stating that it should be changed. It was more of a "why" is the RFA age only 26, we did so many changes on one end I thought it would be a good idea to visit the other end which is the RFA age that I don't think most people thought about tinkering with the new rules.

As indicated in my previous post there are so many ways to keep your players as RFAs that the age difference of 26 - 27 really isn't impactful at all unless you take a look purely at college players and how it affects them. In my case I actually do not have any college players on my roster so this isn't "benefiting" my team versus another and obviously because I have such a young team (what else is new) that it may come off that way but it really wasn't my intention, as I said before all you do is just offer your players one less year than you normally would have in order to keep them RFA elibigle (brain surgery I know).

The whole point of my post is why is the RFA age 26 versus 27 like the NHL, I think that wasn't answered anywhere by anyone yet in this discussion. To my understanding the age was 26 to get players as UFAs a year earlier, but this was also back when the prospect rules were very different., which was basically the whole point of this post to start a discussion on the RFA age because at one point the RFA age here used to be 28 years old.

[Buffalo Sabres]

How were the prospect rules different Joe? I'm drawing a blank

[Andre Deblois]

We have to remember that the NHL rule is 27 years old or 7 seasons. When this rule was changed, we settled on 26 as a compromise because we were not going to start keeping track of how many seasons each individual player has played. Obviously, in this case, some players will become UFAs before they would in the NHL, but our choice is between having more, lower-impact players reaching UFA status early or having fewer, higher-impact players reaching UFA status late.

By implementing a blanket 27 year old rule, the following players would become UFAs one or two seasons AFTER they would in the NHL because they played in the NHL as teenagers:

Werenski, Aho, Matthews, Tkachuk, DeBrincat, McAvoy, Jost, Chychrun, Puljajarvi, Girard, Mete, Dubois, Keller, Sergachev, Patrick, Hischier

And those are just the players who started counting down their 7 years as teenagers from the last two seasons… you could add to that list the likes of Ekblad, Eichel, McDavid… etc.

I think we chose the lesser of two evils here.