Tom_Benjamin said:
Can you explain this theory further? If supply is limited, why is demand driven up? Usually when supply is limited relative to demand, price goes up. But for every player who becomes a free agent, a vacancy is created. If the supply of free agents goes up, so does the demand for free agents at precisely the same rate.
The equibrium price should be the same. If under a system that allows free agency at 31, and 60 players become free agents, then teams will be looking to fill 60 vacancies. If the system allows free agency at age 27, maybe 100 players will become free agents in a year and teams will also be looking to fill 100 vacancies.
Why will the price of free agents be affected? Instead of 60 bidding wars there will be 100 bidding wars. What's the difference?
Tom
I've heard the same theory before. If every player in the NHL was signed to one year contracts that expired every year and there were 700+ UFA's each year, it would be the best way for owners to keep salaries lower.
It would be total chaos, and too much roster turnover to ever be acceptable, but I do think it would help keep salaries down.
I understand your point in a theoretical basis, that 60 players for 60 spots should be the same as 700 players for 700 spots. Promblem is that not all spots are created equal.
#1. There would be no inflationers "arbitration, qualifying offers etc."
#2. While this year in free agency there is only one #1 defenseman available - Scott Niedermayer, there would be 8 teams they would need a #1 defenseman. 1 guy for 8 spots.
If all were free agents there would be Niedermayer, Lidstrom, Chara, Pronger etc. etc. It might be 9 defenseman for 17 spots.
Again it's all theoretical, but I tend to believe the theory.