Retirees and counting against the cap

VanIslander · Guru

RE: Retirees and counting against the cap

CBJackets · Guru

I think this is a less important issue wrapped in a very important one.

As Hawks mentioned, things get confusing and often escalate into a bad situation when the rules are not properly defined. With this being a cash league, it is doubly important that everyone is aware of the rules on each issue and always has access to a copy of the complete rulebook in order to check any discrepancies. If the rules are available and clearly defined, no one can say that it wasn't in the rulebook, the only thing one could say is that they didn't read it, which would be one's own fault.

I don't know if we need the whole CBA somewhere on the site, although it would be easy to copy and paste into a Frontpage document, but we do need some clarification on how closely we are going to follow the NHL CBA and where the league stands on certain issues such as this. I know Bryce and Eric have a lot on their plates right now, so on rules like this maybe GMs looking to draft older Europeans will just have to take the risk that they get signed to 4 year deals.

Isles you can look at it a different way as well. Say Nummelin comes over and has a fabulous season, his intial deal will likely be for a small amount of $, and if he's signed for 4 years, I may have a huge bargain on my hands (I STOLE PETTERI!).

I think Hawks was trying to clarify the rule because he may draft some older europeans...

Hawks_G · Guru

And just again to clarify...I am not that guy that waits until the rule is broken to say...AHA!!!.

I am the guy that wants everything defined so everyone is dealing equally, fully knowing the rules on the outset.

I have no motives other than fair for everyone VanI.

NHLCBA is here NHL CBA

-- Edited by Hawks_G at 16:41, 2006-08-15

VanIslander · Guru

Hawks_G wrote:

NHLCBA is here NHL CBA

Great. Now direct me to where in the NHLCBA states, like in BRHL2, that veterans are automatically signed to four year deals and to the Tags for veterans.

Because I get the distinct impression that our explicit rules regarding veterans is quite different than theirs.

Hawks_G · Guru

You are missing the point.

A. We are running the BRHL2 as close to the NHL CBA as possible.

B. In the BRHL2 rules it states that players 30 years and older that will be first year BRHL2 players have automatic 4 year contracts.

C. In the NHL CBA it states that players 35 years and older count against the cap regardless of status if they sign their deal at the age of 35.

In this one instance, we could have a 35 year old player signed to the auto 4 year contract. If we do, and we abide by the NHL CBA, he will count against the cap for all four years regardless of future NHL status.

We need to confirm whether or not this is what we want to do, or intend to do, and if we are going to enforce it.

I have no idea what you are arguing, why you are arguing, especially because you won't have an entry level 35 year old on your team. If you decide to sign your 35 year old guys long term, that is up to you. In the NHL CBA, that is penalzied. If Bryce and Eric believe that they don't want to have this part of the NHLCBA, that is up to them.

The point of the whole discussion, which you are missing, is that if there are rules in the BRHL2 that are not clearly defined in their relation to the NHLCBA, this being one, they should be. This is even a different situation. It is a BRHL2 rule that is affected by the NHL CBA. Which, I thought as a service to the other GMs, that I would bring up so they would know about it, and react to it.

Rather than complain about the rules, the NHL CBA, and the fact that I brought it up.....

-- Edited by Hawks_G at 17:03, 2006-08-15

VanIslander · Guru

Hawks_G wrote:

It is a BRHL2 rule that is affected by the NHL CBA. Which, I thought as a service to the other GMs, that I would bring up so they would know about it

if that's the case, then my posts are clearly providing the service of arguing one side of the issue. Should it apply or shouldn't it? you ask. I provide several reasons why it shouldn't.

We have provided a valuable service to the commishes. Now they can do with it what they may.