Request For the Next CBA: Free Agent Franchise/Draft Pick/Sign and Trade Compensation

[mucker*]

I think it is ashamed that the NHL is the only sport where free agency is basically a loot with no protection.

In the NFL, you can franchise a player, meaning you can match any offer OR receive 2 first round draft picks.
Or you can transition a player, and have the right to match any offer.
Or you can let a player go, and receive sandwich pick compensation.

In baseball, you offer arbitration, if the player signs with another team, you get their first pick AND a sandwich pick.

In basketball, you can do a sign and trade. As the team with the player, you can offer the largest deal, bigger than any other club.


In the NHL, UFAs get nothing. You sign and keep or lose them for nothing.
I think this unfair, given how teams can lose a star after just a few seasons, in their prime.

I don't get why the NHL is the only sport that does this, and I would like to see the new CBA give the team with the player some compensation, be it franchise tags, transition, sign and trade, or draft pick or an extra compensation pick later.

1) Would you?
2) Odd this happens?
3) How come nobody else, no other team, has made a stink about it?

Click to read more...

 

[LadyStanley]

Was in the old (1995) CBA.

Teams often traded a pending UFA players right just to get the compensation draft picks (which were based on the $$s signed in new deal).

The current (2005) CBA cut out the last two rounds of the draft (8 & 9), and got rid of all the compensation pick stuff except not signing 1st round pick.

Adds a lot of complications. Have to wonder how much the league is willing to do.

 

[cheswick]

I think it is ashamed that the NHL is the only sport where free agency is basically a loot with no protection.

In the NFL, you can franchise a player, meaning you can match any offer OR receive 2 first round draft picks.
Or you can transition a player, and have the right to match any offer.
Or you can let a player go, and receive sandwich pick compensation.

In baseball, you offer arbitration, if the player signs with another team, you get their first pick AND a sandwich pick.

In basketball, you can do a sign and trade. As the team with the player, you can offer the largest deal, bigger than any other club.


In the NHL, UFAs get nothing. You sign and keep or lose them for nothing.
I think this unfair, given how teams can lose a star after just a few seasons, in their prime.

I don't get why the NHL is the only sport that does this, and I would like to see the new CBA give the team with the player some compensation, be it franchise tags, transition, sign and trade, or draft pick or an extra compensation pick later.

1) Would you?
2) Odd this happens?
3) How come nobody else, no other team, has made a stink about it?

The current system gives teams 7 years of restricted free agency status. That is far more than "just a few seasons".

You don't get why the NHL has unrestricted free agency? It's cause it was negotiated into the CBA by the players union in negotiations with the league. Simple as that. The owners got a salary cap, the players got unrestricted free agency at 7 years in the league.

 

[squidz*]

I wouldn't mind some sort of adjusted compensatory picks come back. Maybe they shouldn't be in the exact same form, but it is painful to see a team like Dallas get nothing for Richards. Maybe give picks for players lost, but only if that player had been part of the team that loses him for X number of years? That way Dallas gets compensation for Richards, but Boston doesn't get anything for Kaberle.