I'll send it on the BOG group chat

Proposal - RE : non-NHL contracts

Teams can sign no more than 5 non-NHL players to contracts that do no currently have a contract from an NHL team or is not speculated or reported that a team has interest in signing a non-NHL player. A list will be created as to who is exempt from the contract limit, barring that list is still relevant if players that make up the list do not sign with a team.

1-0 in favor.

Sounds good. But why that part?

2-0 in favor

Where's this coming from and why? Those are my first 2 questions. Did I miss something?

This appears to wreak havoc on recent draft picks, free agent signings of players who don't yet have a contract IRL, anyone who has previously signed a player they own the rights to that does not actually have an NHL contract, etc. It's also going to prevent teams from pursuing players in UFA wave 2, some teams will already be over that limit, and we're restricting contracts which is a nightmare to track with the tools currently at our disposal.

Players like Will Butcher haven't signed yet, but there is high speculation that he will sign somewhere. He shouldn't count against the limit of a player non-NHL player that don't have NHL contracts

Rico, this is for players IRL that are FAs, not UDFAs in the GM Game.

How does it prevent teams from pursuing another wave of NHL FAs? (still need to see if people are interested in that, not assuming that they are)
It will be easy to track how many non-NHL contracts can be signed per team. An excel sheet can do that

I think I need a translation for that part.



I'm still not getting it, or the purpose/necessity behind it, which is my main concern.
Why would we need a limit of 5 non-NHL players imposed?

I think the reason was, if it's not affecting your cap, nothing stops someone from signing all of the players. I'm probably wrong but....

It made sense in my head, just didn't transition to the keyboard LOL.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind being able to sign as many non-NHL players that don't have contracts. I don't know why I said that in the BOG twitter chat. BTW Rico, you should make a twitter, even if it is just for this.

edit ; it was probably a thought that would compromise what was said. Turner summed it up

Okay. That's a logical reason for something.
How is a team going to get access to "all of the players"?, is my next question I guess.

They either already own and have signed a player, or they can get players via draft, free agency, or waivers.
The first round of free agency had an NHL budget to prevent this.
The second round of free agency, I've already included a maximum number of players you can apply for. (See UFA discussion thread if you haven't checked already.)

Are there other ways a team can pick up and sign a bunch of players that I'm not considering?

Philly. This is what I voted on (it was 4-0 before I got to it anyway) "supporting the GMs telling the BOG who they want to bid on for the NCAA/CHL/INT'L free agency".
I thought the other post was your opinion, not what we were voting on. I was voting to have GM's submit players for the list, not for them to be bound to it.
Sorry for any confusion. Was I the only one that misinterpreted that?

Anyway, that complicates things. Now instead of building an anonymous list and having everyone work together to ensure it is complete, we're going to end up with multiple GM's, submitting multiple players, multiple times. I'll have to think it over if that's the way we are going, but for the record I'm against the "subterfuge" on principle. As I explained in the UFA thread, it's delusional to believe every NHL team's scouting staff isn't aware of all of these players. It's how you evaluate them that makes the difference.

I'll figure out a way to make it work if I can. I was thinking along different lines, so I'll have to look at it from this perspective and make adjustments.

The whole point of the private submission is that teams are not able to cherry pick off of other teams when it comes time to sign non-NHL FAs. If you want to change your vote, go ahead, but the majority would still rule in favor of being bound to the privately submitted list.

I can assure you that over 75% of the GMs here either don't care enough about these non-NHL FAs or are delusional and do not know about these FAs. I can organize teams submitting their list to me, and I can track in a spreadsheet who teams can and can't bid on.

I disagree, but will proceed according to the majority, of course. I just have to change what I was doing to accommodate it.
I'll go back over everything tomorrow.

Okay. So if we aren't going to be working together to build one comprehensive list, these are the issues:

1. Teams submitting players that belong to other teams already.
There's no easy way to figure out which players are actually available in game versus real life, without having GM's bring ALL of their players up and having GM's search through ALL 31 teams to make sure the players they want to submit don't appear on any team's roster.

2. Submitted names will have to be consistent.
Some people tend not to follow formatting very well and typos and such will make sorting difficult.

3. Numbers of submissions.
With a lot of repeated submissions and being locked into the players you do submit, is the plan to restrict how many players you can submit, or only how many you can sign?

4. I'm going to have to run an anonymous Master sheet again.
I'll have to import everyone's choices to one location in order to sort/organize/filter them. It would be similar to UFA bidding in principal, but I'd only be importing the names submitted in order to check them against the Master list and sort out which teams are involved with each player. Teams will not know who else is after the same player or which players they are the only one with interest in.

Solutions? Feedback?

Weekend's over so did anyone have any suggestions that I'm not thinking of to deal with these?

1.) They will provide the list to us, via Twitter or maybe creating a BOG email, and lets say if they have 25% of their players for the NCAA/CHL/INT'L on the list that are not actually FAs, then they are disqualified from bidding all together. If they have a question on who is an FA, they can contact the BOG via twitter or some other media outlet.

2.) If the names are submitted via offline, the format isn't a concern. all they would have to do is list the names of players that they want to bid on, keeping in mind the proposed 25% rule above.

3.) I'm not quite sure if I like restricting players that you can sign, but I don't want teams listing like 50 FAs. We can impose a rule that you cannot sign more than "x%" of the entire list and you must bid on every player that you list. For example, let's say you cannot control more than 51% of the FAs available, unless you are the only one who listed them. Let's say there are 14 non-NHL players on the list. You cannot sign more than 7 FAs since.

4.) I don't think we need to start running anything until we even determine if teams are even interested in this. If only like 6 teams submit lists, then we can do it in a thread. if more than 10 do, then we can decide from there. I have it worked out in my mind for the thread, but articulating it at this time will do more harm then good.

Yeah I more than likely won't be submitting a list. I just have no interest in these free agents.

We should make sure before hand that people don't have college FAs on their rosters that they shouldn't have. I had about 5 or 6 players on my roster from the previous GM who were signed after the game began, I had to pay compensation for trading one of them (Neal Pionk) and have dropped all the others. I'm not sure on the exact starting date of the game, but I believe that guys like Michael Vecchione and Griffen Molino should not be on teams rosters and should be FAs.

Also, I for one have 4 or 5 guys that I would definitely like to sign.

Mike Vecchione was ruled by in the previous BOG that they did not have conclusive evidence to overturn his Free Agency. The game was formed on March 23rd, but rosters were being made at the earliest on April 1st, the same day Vecchione signed with Philadelphia.

If he wasn't traded, I would be inclined to give Philadelphia a compensation pick in the 2018 draft, but since he was, the point is moot.

Considering Molino was signed on March 28th he should be on a teams roster

Ok, I was just unsure about the games start date. I asked the old BOG about it and was told that it was the end of March.

So do I get to keep Molino?