~~ 2012 HFNHL Free Agency ~~

SPG

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,018
12
Utica, NY
Visit site
We're not talking about the NHL FA process, we're talking about he HFNHL FA process. They're vastly different.

Any time theres confusion in tr rules, we take a 'GM's should have done their own research better' approach. These RFA's were listed as such on the website in more than one place.

It seems to me that if they have received offers more than their NHL contracts and acceptable to sign, they should sign like any other FA would in round 1.

I see your point of view, but at the same time we've seen many RFAs wait until beyond the first round without signing because they didnt get an offer thrown their way worth putting their signature on. Seems like this would be the case here, wouldn't it? Unless they somehow re-sign with their current team in the meantime?
 

Dempsey

Mark it zero
Mar 1, 2002
3,298
1,701
Ladner, BC
I see your point of view, but at the same time we've seen many RFAs wait until beyond the first round without signing because they didnt get an offer thrown their way worth putting their signature on.

Thank you. And that would be fair. But I personally put forward two very good offers on my two RFAs. If no other team put in an offer close to mine, I would hope they re-sign fairly like any RFA would at this time of year.

Unless they somehow re-sign with their current team in the meantime?

I guess we'll just wait and see...I just would like to see my RFA's dealt with on an even and fair playing field with the other RFA's.

I know for a fact that offers have been made on them that are easily good enough to have them sign for round 1, and so they should.

Historically, many RFA's wait until round 2 for a better offer, but that should not be the case here because very good offers have been made. If other teams didn't notice that these players were RFA's, that's unfortunate for them, but it is up to the GM to research the players they bid on. To have a bunch of teams jump on this "new batch" of RFA's with offers that would be much different than their original round 1 offers would have been, would not be fair.
 

Dr.Sens(e)

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,014
1
Ottawa
Visit site
Thank you. And that would be fair. But I personally put forward two very good offers on my two RFAs. If no other team put in an offer close to mine, I would hope they re-sign fairly like any RFA would at this time of year.

I guess we'll just wait and see...I just would like to see my RFA's dealt with on an even and fair playing field with the other RFA's.

I know for a fact that offers have been made on them that are easily good enough to have them sign for round 1, and so they should.

Historically, many RFA's wait until round 2 for a better offer, but that should not be the case here because very good offers have been made. If other teams didn't notice that these players were RFA's, that's unfortunate for them, but it is up to the GM to research the players they bid on. To have a bunch of teams jump on this "new batch" of RFA's with offers that would be much different than their original round 1 offers would have been, would not be fair.

I'm not actually sure what transpired in tersm of the communications that went out, but the agents basically have to use their judgement sometimes in situations like this, to ensure the player gets the best offer possible. If for some reason, certain players weren't referenced in the same way as other RFA's, seems to make sense to keep it on an even keel and let all teams get a clear understanding of who is available. And if a better offer comes in round 2, we'll know they made the right choice, because there were teams out there willing to pay more. If there isn't a better offer, you're no worse off. In fact, if the player misses out on the first round offer because the initial offering team looked else where, you might be in a better situation.

But basically, when guys hit the RFA market, you have to know they are going to get a long look and you have to resign yourself to to be satisfied regardless of the outcome. You must have looked at the compensation chart and figured what threshold you'd match, and other wise, be happy to take the higher comp if a team went beyond that threshold, which just means you get better draft picks back.
 

kasper11

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,674
13
New York
Visit site
Thank you. And that would be fair. But I personally put forward two very good offers on my two RFAs. If no other team put in an offer close to mine, I would hope they re-sign fairly like any RFA would at this time of year.



I guess we'll just wait and see...I just would like to see my RFA's dealt with on an even and fair playing field with the other RFA's.

I know for a fact that offers have been made on them that are easily good enough to have them sign for round 1, and so they should.

Historically, many RFA's wait until round 2 for a better offer, but that should not be the case here because very good offers have been made. If other teams didn't notice that these players were RFA's, that's unfortunate for them, but it is up to the GM to research the players they bid on. To have a bunch of teams jump on this "new batch" of RFA's with offers that would be much different than their original round 1 offers would have been, would not be fair.

What research? The league put out an official list of available players. That was the most up to date information. How were we supposed to know that there were other players available? Were we supposed to ask the agents about every player?

You knew about them because they were your players. It wasn't research. I research players before I bid on them, I don't research every player in the league in case the agents forgot to add some. Don't make it out like you did something special and deserve credit or that somebody else failed to do the necessary work. You had information that nobody else did...you knew you didn't sign the players. We had no way of knowing that. For all we knew, the players were signed, hence the reason they were not on the official free agent list.
 

Dempsey

Mark it zero
Mar 1, 2002
3,298
1,701
Ladner, BC
I'm not actually sure what transpired in tersm of the communications that went out, but the agents basically have to use their judgement sometimes in situations like this, to ensure the player gets the best offer possible. If for some reason, certain players weren't referenced in the same way as other RFA's, seems to make sense to keep it on an even keel and let all teams get a clear understanding of who is available. And if a better offer comes in round 2, we'll know they made the right choice, because there were teams out there willing to pay more. If there isn't a better offer, you're no worse off. In fact, if the player misses out on the first round offer because the initial offering team looked else where, you might be in a better situation.

But basically, when guys hit the RFA market, you have to know they are going to get a long look and you have to resign yourself to to be satisfied regardless of the outcome. You must have looked at the compensation chart and figured what threshold you'd match, and other wise, be happy to take the higher comp if a team went beyond that threshold, which just means you get better draft picks back.

A reasonable enough argument. I know I'm grasping at straws here, but I have a point. Releasing a fresh new batch of RFA's to the league for round 2 is not what I would call "even keel" with the rest of the RFA's.

But, I'm not going to win, and the arguments made against my points have been respectful and well thought out up to this point, so I'll withdraw my argument and move on. Thanks.
 

Dempsey

Mark it zero
Mar 1, 2002
3,298
1,701
Ladner, BC
What research? The league put out an official list of available players. That was the most up to date information. How were we supposed to know that there were other players available? Were we supposed to ask the agents about every player?

You knew about them because they were your players. It wasn't research. I research players before I bid on them, I don't research every player in the league in case the agents forgot to add some. Don't make it out like you did something special and deserve credit or that somebody else failed to do the necessary work. You had information that nobody else did...you knew you didn't sign the players. We had no way of knowing that. For all we knew, the players were signed, hence the reason they were not on the official free agent list.

The moment my RFA's were left off the list, this was not going to be a fair situation, either for me or for the rest of you guys. I'm just stating my side. Yes, there are two sides and I had a right to be heard. It was discussed and I'm going to let it go.
 

Brent Burns Beard

Powered by Vasiliev Podsloven
Feb 27, 2002
5,575
570
I'm curious as to why...

You've got a threshold where you're comfortable signing the guy, ad beyond which you'd prefer the compensation. Pretty easy, really. If it feels too risky, sign the guy before July 1st. :dunno:


because it is poaching and not only rarely works, it drives up player costs because GM's think they are being smart and working the system.


and just because i dont want to sign a guy at a particular rate, doesnt mean i prefer the compensation.


if you want someone else's player, make a trade offer. if the GM refuses to negotiate then I would agree with the RFA route as a leverage strategy to make a deal.


without a prior attempt at a trade offer, i find RFA offers to be hostile with no other motivation other than to aggravate because unless its an outrageous offer, it will be matched.
 

Dryden

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,920
14
Toronto
hardest thing I've said in about a decade. I pretty much agree with him. rarely happens in NHL now
 

MatthewFlames

Registered User
Jul 21, 2003
4,678
812
'Murica
because it is poaching and not only rarely works, it drives up player costs because GM's think they are being smart and working the system.


and just because i dont want to sign a guy at a particular rate, doesnt mean i prefer the compensation.


if you want someone else's player, make a trade offer. if the GM refuses to negotiate then I would agree with the RFA route as a leverage strategy to make a deal.


without a prior attempt at a trade offer, i find RFA offers to be hostile with no other motivation other than to aggravate because unless its an outrageous offer, it will be matched.

Well, blame the CBA. Its da rules. If you don't sign a player I get a shot at him :D
 

Ohio Jones

Game on...
Feb 28, 2002
8,257
201
Great White North
Enough of this playful banter! I, who submitted zero bids likely to win, want to know the results! :P. ;)

Kidding of course, guys - take all the time you need. It is summer, after all, and you are allowe to have lives.

But really, isn't it all about me? :innocent:
 

MatthewFlames

Registered User
Jul 21, 2003
4,678
812
'Murica
Enough of this playful banter! I, who submitted zero bids likely to win, want to know the results! :P. ;)

Kidding of course, guys - take all the time you need. It is summer, after all, and you are allowe to have lives.

But really, isn't it all about me? :innocent:

Jon has, as usual, done his amazing job getting through the first round. I however said I would do the UDFA etc. and post and I apologize that I haven't got to it yet. :p:
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->