To clarify a few things. and this will show in teh rulebook when I get home tonight to update it.
1)Compensation for signing a RFA is as follows;
a.$475,000 to $699,999 = no compensation
b.$700,000 to $799,999 = 5th Round Draft Pick
c.$800,000 to $999,999 = 4th Round Draft Pick
d.$1,000,000 to $1,999,999 = 3rd Round Draft Pick
e.$2,000,000 to $2,999,999 = 2nd Round Draft Pick
f.$3,000,000 to $3,999,999 = 1st Round Draft Pick
g.$4,000,000 to $4,999,999 = 1st & 2nd Round Draft Picks
h.$5,000,000 + = Three 1st Round Draft Picks
2)You must have the proper compensation before bidding on a RFA. If you have multiple picks that qualify. The team losing the player would have their choice amongst your available picks.
3)When bidding on RFAs they are for 1 year deals, and can not include signing bonuses, the amount of years will be open from 1-5 if a player is only 1 year away from UFA. RFAs can be tagged if necessary, when signed to 1 year deals before UFA. (Only players who are 28 may be signed to anything longer than a 1 year deal)
4)When bidding for RFAs your bid must be at least 200k higher than the prior bid.
5)Any teams found colluding and bidding on each others players with the intent of matching the contract at a lower value will be fined draft picks at the commishs discretion, and also risk losing that player as an immediate UFA.
6)If an RFA does not sign any offer sheets by the time RFA has closed, he may go back to negotiating with the commish office outside of the RFA signing sheet. (Since the reason they are RFA is they are more than likely way overpriced. Should the market not dictate a contract value for them, we will negotiate on a case by case basis).
''5) Any teams found colluding and bidding on each others players with the intent of matching the contract at a lower value will be fined draft picks at the commishs discretion, and also risk losing that player as an immediate UFA''
is offering your rfa's rights after he recieved an offer that left u in a tight spot included in this #5?
I did nothing illegal Kirk quit being a loser and mind your own business......
Incase anybody else is wondering I have a deal worked out with Vancouver (if his bid stands) that would have me accept compensation and then deal his pick back to him for other assets. Much like the Bruins and Leafs did with the Kessel - Seguin Knight Hamilton deal.
I did not in any way offer another GM compensation for bidding on my player to get a better contract. I simply floated his name around to other GM's to get more for what I feel is a good asset in Clowe.
All other GM's feel free to bid on him and I still have the option of matching or accepting compensation. I just worked to get more for Clowe than a 2nd rounder ........
-- Edited by Rumpy on Wednesday 12th of October 2011 11:27:54 PM
-- Edited by Rumpy on Wednesday 12th of October 2011 11:42:26 PM
2) You must have the proper compensation before bidding on a RFA. If you have multiple picks that qualify. The team losing the player would have their choice amongst your available picks.
if vancouvers 1st is being offered for clowe, how can the same pick be used to make an offer on roy?? vancouver only has one first round pick..
It has been stated MANY times I have a deal worked out for Clowe this deal DOES NOT involve my first round pick, my first round pick will not be traded for Clowe in any way shape or form, and there for is available to try and get Roy, why does have to be repeated so many times?? The Kings can confirm all this although if you check the boards where this has been covered MANY TIMES you will see that. I'm not sure why GM's get such pleasure trying to stir the pot!!
Can I suggest a rule gets put into place next year for RFA's... I realize GM's are trying to get a smokin deal on their what seems overpriced RFA's... But in the same light the player would not accept an offer in real life that is lowballed either... What I suggest and to make the commishes in the league life's easy as well as that they set minimum bid on each of these RFA's next season at 75% of their current demand (to the nearest 100000) on a 1yr contract.
If at the end of RFA if no team has put a bid in, the team then has the option to resign that player at the minimum bid for only one year, if they choose not to then the player is automatically moved to UFA, and the team that let him go cannot bid on the player. Right now there can be too many backdoor deals where GM's can lowball an offer for multiple year, then the team match for extra favours in the future, that really the commishes can't monitor very well... Lets close the loophole here and make it easier and fair for everyone...
And the levels of contracts which a guy should qualify at are exactly what the market is bearing thus far: 4.8 mil for top players ; 3.8 mil for 1st line NHLers that arent elite ; 2.8 mil for 2nd line NHLers ; 1.8 mil for 2nd/3rd liners ; 800k and under for career 3rd liners/PK guys (Moen, Grier, RJones, etc.)
Would make this RFA easier on guys new to the league, as well as many other benefits.
Just echoing Minny's excellent message that something needs done for next year
__________________
Get ahold of me soon, or my players will already be dealt!
-This is a sim league, although meant to reflect exactly as it is in real life, it doesn't.
A) We have a waiver draft, NHL does not
B) We have quite a few players making around 15 million, NHL does not (there's a couple cases that are exceptions but it isn't yearly that 5 players make 15 mil)
C) I know Minny is relating to Booth when posting that, or at least that's what brought it to his attention today, but not only does every GM do the exact same thing (basically a bunch of trades made via RFA), but some GMs have over-paid players (such as Booth) and don't want to suffer for the same mistake the NHL GM makes. What they're being offered in RFA is pretty much what they're worth in this league in most cases.
So basically if we were going to get real with this (although I wasn't in the league at the time), we should have done it to begin with. Not something that can be changed and maintain fairness at the same time.
No, the comment was not directed to any specific player just stating that a number of these players could potentially be signed for less that market value. There could be potential a lot of manipilation from GM's to work together to drive down salaries on guys and sign long term. Not saying that this is happening but the intent of the process is to make the salaries as realistic as possible, by putting a 75% min offer you will only get the GM's that are really interested in the player to bid, as well force GM's to sign their players when they are suppost to within the true signing period. RFA is suppost to be risky this process there is really no risk at all... Moreover, if the GM feels the salary is too much then the UFA open market will determine his price, which is probably going to be more in most cases. IMO too many GM's are taking advantage of the rules and it would be nice to close the RFA loophole for next year. No biggee if it isn't it is just an observation as I have been in FHL leagues for over ten years now in three different leagues so I have seen a lot and these rules are pretty loose so i thought I would put out a suggestion...
agree with Minnesota on this,, was trying in the past week since Clowe, Michalek, Pominville, Cammalerri, Gaborik, Roy, etc etc all got longggg term deals that take away almost strictly their "prime" nhl "earning" years 27-31 by signing cheap RFA deals where they got bent over because of a loose rule book regarding RFA's.. Having trouble coming up with an idea to fix it I love the suggestion from Minny of a 75% of NHL salary type situation but would suggest even higher say a 80% Minnimum bid.. (we base all our RFA off their real NHL salary through a calculator.. if u dont like the exact amount from the calculator based 100% off his NHL salary... take him to RFA and hope someone offers him 80-90% of the contract you would have had to have given him with via our RFA Calculator..
-- Edited by HOTLANTA on Tuesday 25th of October 2011 11:00:39 AM
