RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
Makes a lot of sense, but until July 1, I think we should just have the team be able to sign him. Unless it's clearly an unreasonable deal. For example, WSH signs Oshie for 7x6. Even if someone would be willing to give more, there's nothing they can do. If they say 7x3, then we all call them out and nix the deal. On July 1 though, it's a highest bidder sort of thing though. That's just my opinion.
RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
So what happens if that certain player gets auctioned off to let's say Toronto as an example, but he signs with like Detroit?
RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
For example if you had a legitimate story that a players top priority was staying with the same team. Really even if its just a link to a rumor I'd accept it, but if we let everyone sign all their free agents and let them pick the price then theres really only going to be 4th liners to bid on for the UFA phase of the game. I mean washington could just be like "we sign Oshie, Alzner and Shattenkirk to 7year 4million dollars a year deals" then sign their RFA's to 4Million dollar deals guys like Orlov and Kuznetsov. Without even moving someone they have like 74M spent needing 2 forwards and a goalie. They can sign ufa guys for under 800k.
RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
Makes a lot of sense, but until July 1, I think we should just have the team be able to sign him. Unless it's clearly an unreasonable deal. For example, WSH signs Oshie for 7x6. Even if someone would be willing to give more, there's nothing they can do. If they say 7x3, then we all call them out and nix the deal. On July 1 though, it's a highest bidder sort of thing though. That's just my opinion.
I guess, but that could cause us to get arguing. Not everyone will agree all the time. What if they say they sign Oshie to 7x4 or 7x5? Is that acceptable? You really have to get more specific because if it's just ballpark everyone will offer less, then just increase the offer slightly more and more every time someone calls them on it.
RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
Okay, you're right. I agree. What does everyone else think?
RangersandIslesfan I think we should have a vote or something about signing team ufa's. I feel like everyones just going to sign there guys and sign them less than other teams would be willing to pay. Doesn't really make sense to me. I like auctioning players to the highest bidder and think that a player resigning should only be done when theres proof that a guy just wants to stay where he is.
For example if you had a legitimate story that a players top priority was staying with the same team. Really even if its just a link to a rumor I'd accept it, but if we let everyone sign all their free agents and let them pick the price then theres really only going to be 4th liners to bid on for the UFA phase of the game. I mean washington could just be like "we sign Oshie, Alzner and Shattenkirk to 7year 4million dollars a year deals" then sign their RFA's to 4Million dollar deals guys like Orlov and Kuznetsov. Without even moving someone they have like 74M spent needing 2 forwards and a goalie. They can sign ufa guys for under 800k.
Well i think we should be able to re-sign RFAs, just maybe not UFAs unless more GMs agree that it makes sense.
Makes a lot of sense, but until July 1, I think we should just have the team be able to sign him. Unless it's clearly an unreasonable deal. For example, WSH signs Oshie for 7x6. Even if someone would be willing to give more, there's nothing they can do. If they say 7x3, then we all call them out and nix the deal. On July 1 though, it's a highest bidder sort of thing though. That's just my opinion.
I guess, but that could cause us to get arguing. Not everyone will agree all the time. What if they say they sign Oshie to 7x4 or 7x5? Is that acceptable? You really have to get more specific because if it's just ballpark everyone will offer less, then just increase the offer slightly more and more every time someone calls them on it.
You're completely right; there isn't a perfect way. The best thing might be to just wait for July 1 to do anything with UFAs.
For example if you had a legitimate story that a players top priority was staying with the same team. Really even if its just a link to a rumor I'd accept it, but if we let everyone sign all their free agents and let them pick the price then theres really only going to be 4th liners to bid on for the UFA phase of the game. I mean washington could just be like "we sign Oshie, Alzner and Shattenkirk to 7year 4million dollars a year deals" then sign their RFA's to 4Million dollar deals guys like Orlov and Kuznetsov. Without even moving someone they have like 74M spent needing 2 forwards and a goalie. They can sign ufa guys for under 800k.
Well i think we should be able to re-sign RFAs, just maybe not UFAs unless more GMs agree that it makes sense.
I agree that we should sign RFA's but we have to come up with a system of it. Things may get out of hand if you don't make some kind of guidelines to resigning RFA's. By that I mean grading system, like grading if they offered enough or not. People have different views, so we can't just say we'll all know and think the same things on wether a signing is fair or not.
I guess, but that could cause us to get arguing. Not everyone will agree all the time. What if they say they sign Oshie to 7x4 or 7x5? Is that acceptable? You really have to get more specific because if it's just ballpark everyone will offer less, then just increase the offer slightly more and more every time someone calls them on it.
You're completely right; there isn't a perfect way. The best thing might be to just wait for July 1 to do anything with UFAs.
I think we auction off UFA's. But we need some kinda system to "grade" if an RFA signing is fair or not. I'm just spitballing here, but what if we say an RFA signing is legit as long as it gets less than 5 complaints from the other GM's in the league. That way if only a couple people think it's unfair we don't change it, but if a lot of people think it's unfair then we give them one more chance to make a more legit offer. Not sure if that works, just an idea.
You're completely right; there isn't a perfect way. The best thing might be to just wait for July 1 to do anything with UFAs.
I think we auction off UFA's. But we need some kinda system to "grade" if an RFA signing is fair or not. I'm just spitballing here, but what if we say an RFA signing is legit as long as it gets less than 5 complaints from the other GM's in the league. That way if only a couple people think it's unfair we don't change it, but if a lot of people think it's unfair then we give them one more chance to make a more legit offer. Not sure if that works, just an idea.
Yeah, maybe we should just wait for UFA day before signing any UFAs, but maybe if the GM wants to, they could re-sign someone IF we pretty much know they're going to re-sign. Maybe FLA could re-sign Jagr for example (once we get a GM for FLA), even though he may not re-sign, as if he signs anywhere, it's probably with Florida.
You're completely right; there isn't a perfect way. The best thing might be to just wait for July 1 to do anything with UFAs.
I think we auction off UFA's. But we need some kinda system to "grade" if an RFA signing is fair or not. I'm just spitballing here, but what if we say an RFA signing is legit as long as it gets less than 5 complaints from the other GM's in the league. That way if only a couple people think it's unfair we don't change it, but if a lot of people think it's unfair then we give them one more chance to make a more legit offer. Not sure if that works, just an idea.
I agree with you, but we also have to make sure nobody complains for the sake of sabotaging other teams. Not sure how we'd do that, but I also don't think anyone would.
I think we auction off UFA's. But we need some kinda system to "grade" if an RFA signing is fair or not. I'm just spitballing here, but what if we say an RFA signing is legit as long as it gets less than 5 complaints from the other GM's in the league. That way if only a couple people think it's unfair we don't change it, but if a lot of people think it's unfair then we give them one more chance to make a more legit offer. Not sure if that works, just an idea.
I agree with you, but we also have to make sure nobody complains for the sake of sabotaging other teams. Not sure how we'd do that, but I also don't think anyone would.
Another thing is: What if a GM trades contract rights? Then i think it's fair for the new team to maybe be allowed to re-sign the player.
I think we auction off UFA's. But we need some kinda system to "grade" if an RFA signing is fair or not. I'm just spitballing here, but what if we say an RFA signing is legit as long as it gets less than 5 complaints from the other GM's in the league. That way if only a couple people think it's unfair we don't change it, but if a lot of people think it's unfair then we give them one more chance to make a more legit offer. Not sure if that works, just an idea.
I agree with you, but we also have to make sure nobody complains for the sake of sabotaging other teams. Not sure how we'd do that, but I also don't think anyone would.
At the end of the day RangersandIslesfan will have to have the final call. But if someone just goes around saying everyones signings are unfair just to say it and sabotage, then I think they should be removed from the game without warning. I think if we have 5 legit complaints, then the person who made the signing gets to make a case for why its legit and if they can't persuade us then they just up the offer for their second and final chance.
I agree with you, but we also have to make sure nobody complains for the sake of sabotaging other teams. Not sure how we'd do that, but I also don't think anyone would.
Another thing is: What if a GM trades contract rights? Then i think it's fair for the new team to maybe be allowed to re-sign the player.
Yes if a team acquires an RFA they also have to pay legit value. I think we should all of the minimum you think they would sign for when judging peoples signings. So if someone signs a guy who is in the ballpark of 3 to 5 million and they offer 3.5 million it's a legit deal even though its on the low end. We should do it this way so everyone isn't cap burdened to the limit because if that happens then we'll have less teams to trade with. We should stay fair and realistic, but go to the lower end so it gives the game more flexibility.
I agree with you, but we also have to make sure nobody complains for the sake of sabotaging other teams. Not sure how we'd do that, but I also don't think anyone would.
At the end of the day RangersandIslesfan will have to have the final call. But if someone just goes around saying everyones signings are unfair just to say it and sabotage, then I think they should be removed from the game without warning. I think if we have 5 legit complaints, then the person who made the signing gets to make a case for why its legit and if they can't persuade us then they just up the offer for their second and final chance.
So maybe we should play where if a GM wants to re-sign a player before UFA day, the salary has to be at least a certain amount higher than the current salary. I don't know though. That's just an idea. What do you guys think?
Another thing is: What if a GM trades contract rights? Then i think it's fair for the new team to maybe be allowed to re-sign the player.
Yes if a team acquires an RFA they also have to pay legit value. I think we should all of the minimum you think they would sign for when judging peoples signings. So if someone signs a guy who is in the ballpark of 3 to 5 million and they offer 3.5 million it's a legit deal even though its on the low end. We should do it this way so everyone isn't cap burdened to the limit because if that happens then we'll have less teams to trade with. We should stay fair and realistic, but go to the lower end so it gives the game more flexibility.
Another thing is: What if a GM trades contract rights? Then i think it's fair for the new team to maybe be allowed to re-sign the player.
Yes if a team acquires an RFA they also have to pay legit value. I think we should all of the minimum you think they would sign for when judging peoples signings. So if someone signs a guy who is in the ballpark of 3 to 5 million and they offer 3.5 million it's a legit deal even though its on the low end. We should do it this way so everyone isn't cap burdened to the limit because if that happens then we'll have less teams to trade with. We should stay fair and realistic, but go to the lower end so it gives the game more flexibility.
An example of this type of thing would be if Washington's GM was like " We sign Kuznetsov to a 7year 5.5 Million Dollar Deal" I see Kuznetsov as a 6+ Million guy, but I wouldn't complain because it's close and a good GM could perhaps talk the player down half a million dollars. If Washington's GM was like "we sign Kuznetsov to a 7year 4.5 Million dollar deal" I'd be like "come on now" and complain because it's blatantly low.
Just a quick note that i am shopping Nikolay Kulemin, and whoever gives me the best offer will win Nikolay Kulemin (though they'd have to give up something). I would prefer draft picks, but if you don't want to do that, you could offer a player. You don't even need to make an offer, but i really don't think he's fitting in with the islanders, so i am definitely willing to trade(/shopping) him. I will likely go with a pick/picks. This is partly for salary cap reasons, but even if there was no salary cap, i would be looking to move Nikolay Kulemin.
No guarantee i trade him, but if i get some offers, chances are i move him. Maybe a team with lots of cap space could be interested. But i'm not making a move where i give up something to get rid of his salary. I'm not doing that with any player. So any offer starting with a 4th could be good enough. Also, i am willing to trade him for another high contract. So once again, i will keep thinking about it, but i think in the end of the day, i trade him. Anyone is allowed to make an offer, though they don't need to.
Yes if a team acquires an RFA they also have to pay legit value. I think we should all of the minimum you think they would sign for when judging peoples signings. So if someone signs a guy who is in the ballpark of 3 to 5 million and they offer 3.5 million it's a legit deal even though its on the low end. We should do it this way so everyone isn't cap burdened to the limit because if that happens then we'll have less teams to trade with. We should stay fair and realistic, but go to the lower end so it gives the game more flexibility.
I was talking about UFA signing rights.
At that point I think it's gonna have to be scrutinized by you, the Moderator of this. I'm fine with someone trading for UFA rights and signing if they offer a fair amount. Example: If someone trades for Oshie and offers him 6.5 or more per year for 7 or 8 years i think its fair, but if someone trades for Oshies rights they don't automatically get to sign him to a lowball offer or that will ruin the game.
CapFriendly
CapFriendly