Toggle sidebar

New system needed for free agency due to draft lottery

FamilyGuy716

FamilyGuy716

Registered User
Jun 15, 2011
1,583
29
Amherst NY
I'm ok with a lottery for the draft as long as there is some kind of system put in for free agency. Teams like the Rangers, Minnesota will always have an advantage in free agency and that's not fair to small market teams that are only attractive when they have a chance to win the cup. No team will always be good and once a small market team is down, it's much harder for them to get better than a big market teams or teams with players who want to live near where they grew up.

Some kind of ranking (by salary?) needs to be put on free agents and then each team should be allotted so many points each year (equal amount) which should also be allowed to carried over. The points allows you to purchase free agents. I'm thinking of a system like how points are allotted for timeshares. Teams would also be allowed to trade the points.

Thoughts?
Click to read more...
 
Alexander Baigle

Alexander Baigle

Registered User
Jun 27, 2011
795
0
Great White North
You've got to remember that these players are in fact human beings with desires and preferences and obligations outside the sport of hockey, it's unethical for the NHL to dictate where exactly a player lives for 20 years of his life.

The free agency could become a little more fair if the salary cap took each markets tax rate into account. When Stamkos becomes a free agent he would need to sign for 10 Million in Toronto to take home what 8 million would get him in Tampa. (Probably not exact.) Not to mention the cost of living
 
dubey

dubey

$$$$$$$*NICE*$$$$$$$ 69 in 79 $$$$$$$*NICE*$$$$$$$
Oct 22, 2006
25,954
4,382
In your head
Players should only be allowed to sign in their home province/state (or next closest if no team)
 
AUAIOMRN

AUAIOMRN

Registered User
Aug 22, 2005
2,356
897
Edmonton
While this is a silly idea, it does serve to highlight how dumb some of the "fix the draft" proposals are.
 
SladeWilson23

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,735
3,220
New Jersey
I'd like the idea of draft compensation if the draft were deeper, but it's not.

One thing they can do is limit how many big contracts a team can sign in a certain number of years.
 
FamilyGuy716

FamilyGuy716

Registered User
Jun 15, 2011
1,583
29
Amherst NY
Alexander Baigle said:
You've got to remember that these players are in fact human beings with desires and preferences and obligations outside the sport of hockey, it's unethical for the NHL to dictate where exactly a player lives for 20 years of his life.

The free agency could become a little more fair if the salary cap took each markets tax rate into account. When Stamkos becomes a free agent he would need to sign for 10 Million in Toronto to take home what 8 million would get him in Tampa. (Probably not exact.) Not to mention the cost of living
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that a player has no choice. I'm saying that a team can't sign up the best free agents year after year. A team like Minnesota wouldn't have been able to get Suter and Parise in the same year under my system (unless they traded for more points). The player (free agent) would still be able to go to all other teams that qualify.
 
wintersej

wintersej

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2011
22,331
17,310
North Andover, MA
The problem with this is that the NHL WANTS the best teams to be in the biggest markets. The big markets are already being punished by the cap in the interest of fairness, why double punish them? If the biggest hockey markets where the only ones that were competitive, that would be one thing, but thats just not the case...the league is extremely level already.
 
Clamshells

Clamshells

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Aug 11, 2009
2,489
1,307
Mike203 said:
I'm not saying that a player has no choice. I'm saying that a team can't sign up the best free agents year after year. A team like Minnesota wouldn't have been able to get Suter and Parise in the same year under my system (unless they traded for more points). The player (free agent) would still be able to go to all other teams that qualify.
Click to expand...

Your view looks at players as commodities and not as human beings...

What if you were told you couldn't have your dream job because the government says only one person can move to that city per year, but don't worry theres 29 other jobs that are less desirable to you that you can have.
 
FamilyGuy716

FamilyGuy716

Registered User
Jun 15, 2011
1,583
29
Amherst NY
wintersej said:
The problem with this is that the NHL WANTS the best teams to be in the biggest markets. The big markets are already being punished by the cap in the interest of fairness, why double punish them? If the biggest hockey markets where the only ones that were competitive, that would be one thing, but thats just not the case...the league is extremely level already.
Click to expand...

If there is not a level playing field on free agency, then there should not be a draft lottery.
 
Skobel24

Skobel24

#Ignited
May 23, 2008
16,789
920
Winnipeg
Alexander Baigle said:
You've got to remember that these players are in fact human beings with desires and preferences and obligations outside the sport of hockey, it's unethical for the NHL to dictate where exactly a player lives for 20 years of his life.

The free agency could become a little more fair if the salary cap took each markets tax rate into account. When Stamkos becomes a free agent he would need to sign for 10 Million in Toronto to take home what 8 million would get him in Tampa. (Probably not exact.) Not to mention the cost of living
Click to expand...

You always see people making a comment, then putting /thread at the end of it. This is probably the only comment that has ever warranted doing that.
 
LeafsNation75

LeafsNation75

Registered User
Jan 15, 2010
37,975
12,506
Toronto, Ontario
Mike203 said:
I'm ok with a lottery for the draft as long as there is some kind of system put in for free agency. Teams like the Rangers, Minnesota will always have an advantage in free agency and that's not fair to small market teams that are only attractive when they have a chance to win the cup. No team will always be good and once a small market team is down, it's much harder for them to get better than a big market teams or teams with players who want to live near where they grew up.

Some kind of ranking (by salary?) needs to be put on free agents and then each team should be allotted so many points each year (equal amount) which should also be allowed to carried over. The points allows you to purchase free agents. I'm thinking of a system like how points are allotted for timeshares. Teams would also be allowed to trade the points.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Since when is Minnesota considered a major market where they have an advantage over other teams when it comes to free agents? I know that in the last few years they signed Parise, Suter, and Vanek, however they all had previous ties to Minnesota and I'm sure it's a major reason they signed there. So when was the last time they signed someone with a big name who didn't have any ties to Minnesota?
 

GerbeSonOfGloin

Registered User
May 27, 2011
1,105
0
A points system seems is needlessly complicated. The easiest fix is banning/limiting NTC's/NMC's. Something like, limit of three such clauses per team, and "limited" or conditional NTC's are banned. Full NTC or bust.
 
TOGuy14

TOGuy14

Registered User
Dec 30, 2010
12,064
3,573
Toronto
Mike203 said:
I'm ok with a lottery for the draft as long as there is some kind of system put in for free agency. Teams like the Rangers, Minnesota will always have an advantage in free agency and that's not fair to small market teams that are only attractive when they have a chance to win the cup. No team will always be good and once a small market team is down, it's much harder for them to get better than a big market teams or teams with players who want to live near where they grew up.

Some kind of ranking (by salary?) needs to be put on free agents and then each team should be allotted so many points each year (equal amount) which should also be allowed to carried over. The points allows you to purchase free agents. I'm thinking of a system like how points are allotted for timeshares. Teams would also be allowed to trade the points.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

How does this differ from the salary cap?

Right now whether you are big market or not you have a fixed amount of money you can spend and that's it. It doesn't matter if half the league wants to play in Toronto, New York and LA, those teams can only spend as much as the other ones in the league
 
SmellOfVictory

SmellOfVictory

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
10,959
653
Mike203 said:
I'm not saying that a player has no choice. I'm saying that a team can't sign up the best free agents year after year. A team like Minnesota wouldn't have been able to get Suter and Parise in the same year under my system (unless they traded for more points). The player (free agent) would still be able to go to all other teams that qualify.
Click to expand...

That's why the cap exists. UFAs are expensive, and the best ones tend to take up a large chunk of the cap. When Min signed Parise and Suter, they inherently removed their ability to sign more high profile UFAs because they'd just locked up 20% of their cap space in two players.
 
skeena1

skeena1

Registered User
May 15, 2006
1,244
160
Kind of takes the "free" out of free agency, doesn't it?

That time of year when supporters of bad teams with poor futures flood these boards with bad ideas.
 
Mc5RingsAndABeer

Mc5RingsAndABeer

5-14-6-1
May 25, 2011
20,184
1,385
100% agreed. People always complain about the Oilers getting top picks but nobody talks about free, developed talent in their primes like Parise/Suter/Kovalchuk/Hossa/Statsny/etc...propping up teams.

Players should always be free to go where they want. They should have compensatory picks or cap relief for teams that lose high level guys in FA (like the NFL).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom