BRHL2 Future (Important)

BryceBruins · BRHL2 Co-Commish

RE: BRHL2 Future (Important)

San Jose · Senior Member

Here is a COPY/PASTE of how Free Agency works in another league I am in....its amazing.

Rule 6-1
Just like in the NHL, Player Age will be a factor in determining Free Agency. This is an important strategic feature of the KHL.

To keep things simple, ALL Players will age by 1 year after rosters are set and the NHL season has begun (in October).

The BOD will keep track of ages and will tell GMs at the very beginning of the season if their player will be Restricted or Unrestricted in the offseason.

TSN.ca will be the source used for player age.

Rule 6-2
Restricted Free Agents are age 27 and less.
(On average, teams will have about 5 RFAs per year, so it will not be a lot of work to go through the process outlined below)

Rule 6-2-1
Teams will be given a deadline day (April) to advise the BOD if they would like to make qualifying offers to their RFAs or not.

Rule 6-2-2
How to make a qualifying offer:
To retain the rights to your RFAs, a 15% pay raise will be required (rounded-UP to the nearest 100k increment).
These calculations will be done by the BOD. All GMs will have to do is either accept or decline the qualifying offer (Once again, there is almost no work that needs to be done by GMs)

Example:
To qualify Tomas Plekanec, I would have to offer him 15% more than he already makes. His current cap hit is 2.75M. A 15% increase will give him 3.16M. Then I have to round it up to $3.2M.

Rule 6-2-3
Once a qualifying offer is made, all KHL teams will then have a very short window of opportunity to send in Offer Sheets via SILENT AUCTION (silent auction simply means that GMs will have a 1 time opportunity to send in an offer via email (see 6-3-1)

Rule 6-2-4
If offer sheet is made, GM will have the option to match or receive compensation (explained in 6-2-7).

Rule 6-2-5
If not offer sheets are made, the RFA will sign for the qualifying offer.

Rule 6-2-6
If no qualifying offer is made, the player goes from RFA to UFA (see 6-3)

Rule 6-2-7
Compensation for RFAs:

Between $7.1M and $10M: 1st + 2nd + 3rd Round Picks + Team making offer sheet will need to expose 8 players and Team receiving compensation will have the option to poach 3 players.

Between $6M and $7M: 1st + 2nd Round Picks + Team making offer sheet will need to expose 5 players and Team receiving compensation will have the option to poach up to 2 players.

Between $4.5M and $5.9M: 1st + 3rd Round Picks + Team making offer sheet will need to expose 3 players and Team receiving compensation will have the option to poach 1 player.

Between $3M and $4.4M: 2nd Round Pick

Between $1.1M and $2.9M: 3rd Round Pick

$1M or less: No Compensation.

Rule 6-3
Unrestricted Free Agents are age 28 and higher.

Rule 6-3-1
In September, Silent Auction will be held for UFAs.

What are Silent Auctions?
This simply means that offers for free agents are to be sent in to the BOD via email. This will allow GMs to make ONLY 1 offer for Free Agents. This will speed up the process tremendously. Using public auctions for Free Agency will result in a very lengthy bidding war between GMs.

GMs will make a 1-time offer (silent auction) for players they are interested in. These offers will need to include contract length (1, 2 or 3 years)

Rule 6-3-2
Players will simply sign with the team that gives them the highest annual salary.

Rule 6-3-3
In the even of a tie, the player will sign for the contract with the longuest duration.
Example:
Johnny offers Brian Gionta $4M cap hit for 3 years
James offers Brian Gionta $4M cap hit for 2 years
Nick offers Brian Gionta $4 cap hit for 1 year
GIONTA WILL SIGN WITH JOHNNY.

Rule 6-3-4
In the event that GMs make identical offers in the silent auction, the player will sign with the team that finished lower in the regular season standings. Playoff success will not be a factor.
12th Seed Johnny offers Brian Gionta $4 cap hit for 2 years
7th Seed James offers Brian Gionta $4 cap hit for 2 years
GIONTA WILL SIGN WITH JOHNNY

Sabres_Luke · Guru

Interesting point Johnny- sounds like a variation from a few suggestions.

I feel a bit torn in regards to the salary floor:

Pros to having a floor:
-Replicates the NHL
-Gives the illusion that we are making teams be competitive
-Tries to make it easier for teams to want to be competitive

Cons:
-Inflates UFA dramatically. Without it, it allows the medium teams with a bit more cap space to actually make an impact.
-Teams who want to be bottom 5 will be in how they submit their lines which is not regulated. What is the difference if Team A has Lidstrom at 10 million, if he plays 3rd line D pairing? What is this accomplishing other than mirroring the NHL in appearance?

I guess the big question is do we want to mirror the NHL exactly? If so, then I think we should consider making an amendment to our stance on people's lines, because that is as far from mirroring the NHL as possible. However, you can get rid of that whole issue if you don't make a league floor.

Rumpy · Senior Member

Still opposed to getting rid of the floor.....yes it inflates prices but if teams want to be competative they can look...... what Anahiem did in free agency last yr?

- I am all for the randomly assigned contract lengths for UFA's.

- I also like the secret bidding thing where the top 3 teams are notified and get to rebid.

If the contract length thing doesn't happen or work:

- I also like the wave thing where UFA's are grouped by stats (or OV Bryce :) ) and teams can only bid on 3 guys from that group during that period. It would inflate the higher priced guys but it also may lead to some very good deals for GM's who try add depth instead of star power?

CanucksGM · Member

I agree with the Sens, there shouldn't be predetermined contract lengths. Players in real life may have an ideal length but they only get what teams offer them. Plus if they could get $8 mil over 4 years or $6 mil over 2 I would think they would take the latter.

Anaheim GM · Guru

Sens wrote:

BryceBruins wrote:

OK, I've seen 2 ideas that I think could legitimately work

1. Having set terms that each UFA will sign for, break it down beforehand than player X wants a 2 year deal, Player Y a 4 year deal etc... To be randomly assigned, or even determined by a designated person.

2. Creating groupings (number of groupings to be determined). Where you submit one bid, and one bid only. It's a good idea, one we've tossed around before, and I am not opposed to. It would allow us to determine each teams cap level prior to that days bidding, and GMs could not exceed that level.

I'm interested to hear some more feedback.

I think option 1 hurts rebuilding teams, it is obvious I will have to sign a bunch of crap goons to stay above the floor which is fine by me I decided to take my team in this direction, BUT I don't want to be commited to those crap goons for a 4 yr deal! I could see it working for the high end to middle of the road talent but really does anyone want to commit 4yrs to Jason Strudwick (or which ever goon/boardline NHL player you want to list)

If it was a "X's min is $N / year" I think that you'd be ok with it though, no?

Panthers · Senior Member

CanucksGM wrote:

I agree with the Sens, there shouldn't be predetermined contract lengths. Players in real life may have an ideal length but they only get what teams offer them. Plus if they could get $8 mil over 4 years or $6 mil over 2 I would think they would take the latter.

I agree with this...how about just giving a boost to longer term deals? Say an extra 5% for every additional year offered.

That way a team offering 10M for 1 year can be trumped by a team willing to offer the same for a multi-year deal, or even a little less on a 4 or 5 year deal, but a team willing to overpay on a short term deal can still do so.