Rule Assessment #1/Activity Check-in

[JetsGM (Jacob)]

Hope everyone is enjoying the league so far! Instead of doing a boring old check-in, figured I'd see what the leagues opinion is on some new rule implementations. Please answer on each of the below. If you have no opinion on the below, can write a simple "Hi, still active, no further comment" or something similarly cheeky, I don't mind. A response in some form is mandatory though.

1 - Handling of players with less than 10 GP
With the way the league is currently structured, all players with less than 10 GP have their contracts slide. To counteract a contract constantly sliding, I wrote the rule to state that any player with less than 10 GP can be dropped without penalty (during one of the buyout periods), this allows teams to manage their 75 roster spots (since they will start filling up once we get through a couple of amateur drafts and FA periods I feel).

I'm rethinking this rule now, and do not think that signed (in FA) contracts should slide in any form, makes it a bit too easy to get out of contracts.

My proposal involves grandfathering in a rule concerning signing prospects and adding a few RFA categories to help distinguish among them (would require some effort from the league and Mod team initially, but would be sorted out quickly):

1) All players with less than 10 GP who were inherited (chosen among 15) or signed as FA during the inaugural offseason would receive RFA Category A [written as RFA(A) on Google Sheets] distinction. Category A would define any player that can be dropped/terminated without penalty during the buyout/drop periods and whose contracts slide until they play 10 GP.

2) All players with less than 10 GP who are signed in Free Agency once the rule is imposed would receive RFA Category B [written as RFA (B) on Google Sheets] distinction. These players do not have their contracts slide regardless of GP status and are subject to regular buyout if the team wishes to drop them.

3) All players with less than 10 GP who are drafted in an amateur draft will receive RFA Category C [written as RFA(C) on Google Sheets] distinction. These players will have their contracts slide for up to 3 seasons, and can be dropped without penalty during one of the buyout/drop periods.

2 - RFA period offer sheet restrictions

Currently, after we go through the re-sign period where teams can re-sign up to 3 UFA or RFA players of their choice, we will have an RFA period where teams can bid on non-signed RFAs. There's no limit to the number of players a team can offer sheet, so it could get a bit crazy. Nashville pointed out an interesting scenario where teams may bid 2,000,001 on a solid prospect that could be re-signed cheap just to force a team to have to live with the cap hit (or take a 3rd round pick). Instead of it being "wild wild west" during this period, I was thinking we would limit the # of offer sheets teams can place on RFAs.

After re-sign period, but before RFA period begins each team must submit a public list (will create a thread) where they list the 3-5 (official number TBD) that they are interested in offer sheeting during the RFA period. This way, it limits

Alternate solution can be that teams do not have to publicly declare the offer sheets they will place, but are limited to only 3 players once the period is open. Any bid over the limit would be invalidated, just causes us (Mod team) to keep a closer eye on who's bidding. Will likely still be accomplished that once we see a team bid, we will have a thread where we list the player a team has offer sheeted and count it as an attempt.

3 - Promotion/Demotion Limits per week

This is one that will be implemented and it's just finding the consensus approach. I understand that with how waivers works you can call up and demote a player pretty much every night to get the most GP (and there's no negative to it unless the guy is a terrible C). Going to put a limit on it so there is a couple of approaches:

1) Promotion/Demotion limit per week: A set # (3-5) call ups are allowed per week
2) Waivers do not actually process for 24 hours.

4 - Free agency bidding

Another one that will likely see some tweaking going into our 2nd offseason. Something I admit I did overlook with the nature of the rule is players being immediately sent down, and thus never counting against the cap. That was against the nature of the rule. Teams are supposed to have cap or need to clear a different player to stay under the cap in an FA bid, really wanted to avoid teams just copy/pasting the same cap space since the player was going over. Also, allows pretty much unlimited bidding, which coupled with no promotion/demotion limits, allows for an unlimited minor pool to choose from.

Best proposal I've seen (from Chris/Buffalo) is that you must have the cap space at the time of the bid (removing the "will waive X to have cap space"), which I've seen discussed and supported by other GMs in the Whatsapp chat. You don't have the room? Can't bid on the player, make a move first to open up room. I tend to like this one, but am open to hearing other ideas.

5 - Special exemption demotions

Another interesting idea brought up by the Mod team is having a few special exemption demotion cases for players at or over 41GP, such as when a player is demoted to the minors by his NHL squad. Rather like the idea, and does allow teams to manage their roster a bit easier and not have to stress that our waiver exempt period is much lower than the NHLs. Might be a few more cases we could add as well, open to suggestions.


Let's hear your thoughts on the above, or any other rules you think should be implemented! Or just drop in to say hi

Cheers,
Jacob

[San Jose Sharks (Alex/Taco)]

1 - is alot to read right now, will re-read

2 - I like the idea of having a RFA list where you put who you are interested in signing maybe, but instead of making it public, make it private and send the list to which ever mod is incharge of each division to keep track. That way you don't have someone adding a player to their list to throw someone off how they're going to bid, instead of what players would benefit their team.

3 - Yes, this right here. I think there should be the 24 hours before they're actually in the big times and maybe they cannot be recalled until the new week. If you are sending a player down it means they shouldn't be on your team, not until the play the next game the next day. There should be a limit on the number of players sent up and down, and I feel like it should be 3, unless it is to cover an injury.

4 - 100% agreed, makes free agency more buying players for a need for now, instead of filling your minors.

5 - For this one I agree with, and I would also say that this should also free up 2,000,000 in cap space, if the player is over 2,000,000 for that year. Example, Ondrej Pavelec makes 3,900,000 this year, the team IRL sends him down to the minors. Winnepeg should have the option of sending him down to the minors without waivers, and if he chooses to do so, he would count as 1,900,000 towards the cap, instead of the full 3,900,000 (sorry Jacob, it was the easiest example)

[chris - Hartford Whalers]

1) would it be easier to just let people purge during Jan buy out period and then start fresh and consistent going forward? My thoughts would be FA contracts slide regardless of games played and players acquired in the draft don't age creating 2 classes of guys. I think there should be a difference between guys your team drafted and guys you offered a contract to.

2) how about teams must have roster spots and available cap space for all outstanding bids? I personally don't think this will be a huge issue as personally i won't bother offer-sheeting someone that will get matched for free when i can bid on him with no compensation a week later.

3) we should do a hard limit of 5 call-ups a week regardless of IR implications. If you use all 5 the first day you roll the dice you won't need an injury replacement later that week. I do agree the current system is flawed and needs changing asap.

4) I think for a bid to be valid you need the cap space and a roster spot for the player on your team prior to making the bid. If you want to bid for 2 players you need to have 2 available roster spots and cap space available for both bids combined. The current demote one guy and bid on 20 players at the same time is flawed.

5) tough luck imo. would have to be a special player for someone to waiver claim someone going to the minors that wont be playing in the immediate future since if you send a claimed player down to the minors within 30 days the previous team can reclaim him without penalty.

[Deleted]

yo

[Jim Rutherford/Pens GM]

1) Not entirely sure on how to proceed. Maybe the 75 limit should be increased?
2) Keep it anonymous. Max of 3 bids, no public list.
3)A total of 4
4)Agree with the suggestion
5)I agree with that

[Deleted]

1 - No Clue What Was Said Here, so i'll sustain from voting on this one

just hope that RFA players if not tendered a qualifying offer become UFAs exactly like in the NHL (that's what I was hoping for when I signed certain RFAs to 1 yr deals)

the rest... probably won't matter to me


2 - A limit sounds good, anything that will stop people from doing the 2,000,001 just like how people signed UFAs @ 1.9m which was a pretty cheap move. And hoping the 1.9m signings gets adressed as well somehow


3 - I'm not a fan on a limit unless the limit is something like 7 per week (like in other leagues i was in). The thing with this is, the system as is, rewards people who are active and those that constructed a team beyond the original roster. Because it is mostly the players that we signed that we're calling up and down. If not for that, i feel it will be heavily based on how well your real team does. Meaning, that a team like Montreal, all you need to do, if you've plugged your players on game days properly in advance, you could just disappear the entire year as a GM and come back at the end and see that your team is still on top of the league. Would it not?


4 - Free agency bidding; i think there's definitely something wrong with this rule, but the bidding in of itself was ok

in the real NHL, theams don't need to make room when they sign a player during FA, it becomes increasingly difficult to sign players if you are close to the cap making teams that have a lot of room sign whatever players they want while teams close to the cap won't be active at all

unless we are allowed to send players down during the summer (without waivers) then yeah it's fine (but then again it becomes like the old rule again).

Maybe set a maximum of cap/salary allowed down in the minors? this way everyone will have access to free agency cap or no cap

anyways, if we do adjust this rule, it practically bars me from participating in next year's free agency that's for sure

The most pressing issue is the $1.9m rule, making $1.9m players very valuable and making $2.1m players worth less (not worthless). Also, it makes $1.9m players almost guaranteed to be sign by the team that offered that contract, especially if no capspace!

5 - Doesn't matter to me

[Devils GM(Colin)]

1 - After reading this many times I think I get it. Basically its a rule to make teams that signed a million prospects in FA accountable and not able to drop them willy nilly? If so I'm for the rule.

2 - I like the rule about a limit on RFA bidding, but when we say 3 bids, do we mean 3 total bids? Like say you really want Pavel Jagr, so you bid once, then someone outbids you and then you bid again. Does this count as 2 bids or just 1 cause it's the same player?

Also I don't think the 2,000,001 thing will be a huge problem because if the players is good enough the team will match easily, but if he's not than that bidder takes the risk of adding a permanent cap hit to his team on a player that is not good enough to warrant that.

3 - A call up limit does hurt the teams with a lot of pre-41 GP guys, but if that's your strategy to stay young and you plan on being very active, then I'm ok with that. I agree with Kings that it should be around 7 (one per day) to keep things sane, but not too limiting.

4 - Rather than having the roster space open as a hard rule, I think there should be a limit of players in your minors that have played more than 41 GP or maybe a different number. I think it's important to have a few call up options and it hurts the teams that didn't take advantage of the first off season.

5 - It is such a rare time when a quality player is sent down in real life, but it happens. Draisaitl two years ago, Virtanen was sent down the other day. If you have a player with high potential that just can't seem to crack your lineup, you shouldn't have to send him through waivers if he's not on the actual roster. I also think it should apply to RFA holdouts in real life. It's a rule that will only increase competition and isn't really possible to be abused. I also feel that suspensions should be applicable for the IR, but that's a whole other topic.

[Deleted]

for #2 it is a huge problem when you're up against the cap

like a avg to good RFA should be signed to less than $2m but when you're up against the cap then a team can come in and plug in his 2.01m and that's it for my RFA, he's gone

[Deleted]

League is great even though my team isn't scoring. No opinion on the above league business.

[Deleted]

#2. I don't like the limit on offer sheets. I feel like RFA's police themselves. A team can only submit an offer sheet for an RFA if they have the matching required compensation in the following draft. So, for example, if someone wants to submit 3, $2,000,001 offer sheets, wouldn't they need 3 third round picks in the next draft? And if a team wants to offer 5 different offer sheets and risk losing all of their picks in the next draft, so be it.

[chris - Hartford Whalers]

Nov 13, 2016 20:14:32 GMT -5 @mmorrison06 said:

#2. I don't like the limit on offer sheets. I feel like RFA's police themselves. A team can only submit an offer sheet for an RFA if they have the matching required compensation in the following draft. So, for example, if someone wants to submit 3, $2,000,001 offer sheets, wouldn't they need 3 third round picks in the next draft? And if a team wants to offer 5 different offer sheets and risk losing all of their picks in the next draft, so be it.

This is a really good point i didn't even think about.   people cannot make a bid if they lack the required compensation

[chris - Hartford Whalers]

Nov 11, 2016 15:13:39 GMT -5 Devils GM(Colin) said:

5 - It is such a rare time when a quality player is sent down in real life, but it happens. Draisaitl two years ago, Virtanen was sent down the other day. If you have a player with high potential that just can't seem to crack your lineup, you shouldn't have to send him through waivers if he's not on the actual roster. I also think it should apply to RFA holdouts in real life. It's a rule that will only increase competition and isn't really possible to be abused. I also feel that suspensions should be applicable for the IR, but that's a whole other topic.

I think they should be unusable for the remainder of the year though.

[JetsGM (Jacob)]

Nov 11, 2016 14:21:13 GMT -5 @tehrangelesshahs said:

1 - No Clue What Was Said Here, so i'll sustain from voting on this one

just hope that RFA players if not tendered a qualifying offer become UFAs exactly like in the NHL (that's what I was hoping for when I signed certain RFAs to 1 yr deals)

the rest... probably won't matter to me


2 - A limit sounds good, anything that will stop people from doing the 2,000,001 just like how people signed UFAs @ 1.9m which was a pretty cheap move. And hoping the 1.9m signings gets adressed as well somehow


3 - I'm not a fan on a limit unless the limit is something like 7 per week (like in other leagues i was in). The thing with this is, the system as is, rewards people who are active and those that constructed a team beyond the original roster. Because it is mostly the players that we signed that we're calling up and down. If not for that, i feel it will be heavily based on how well your real team does. Meaning, that a team like Montreal, all you need to do, if you've plugged your players on game days properly in advance, you could just disappear the entire year as a GM and come back at the end and see that your team is still on top of the league. Would it not?


4 - Free agency bidding; i think there's definitely something wrong with this rule, but the bidding in of itself was ok

in the real NHL, theams don't need to make room when they sign a player during FA, it becomes increasingly difficult to sign players if you are close to the cap making teams that have a lot of room sign whatever players they want while teams close to the cap won't be active at all

unless we are allowed to send players down during the summer (without waivers) then yeah it's fine (but then again it becomes like the old rule again).

Maybe set a maximum of cap/salary allowed down in the minors? this way everyone will have access to free agency cap or no cap

anyways, if we do adjust this rule, it practically bars me from participating in next year's free agency that's for sure

The most pressing issue is the $1.9m rule, making $1.9m players very valuable and making $2.1m players worth less (not worthless). Also, it makes $1.9m players almost guaranteed to be sign by the team that offered that contract, especially if no capspace!

5 - Doesn't matter to me

Great points, couple of quick responses:
1) As the rule stands currently, players with under 10GP do not have their contracts age (they continually slide). To counteract this, you have the choice to be able to drop them during the league's two buyout periods during the year without penalty. That's basically what the rule #1 is touching on, is to change from that method to something that makes teams more accountable for their prospect free agency signings

4) In the NHL, teams still have to honour the contract limit (50 NHL contracts) and can only go 10% over the cap and must be under by the end of training camp (few teams this year relied on LTIR to accomplish this). Managing cap is a big responsibility and challenge in this league and while we have discussed raising the cap as contracts expire and are adjusted to league production values, teams who go crazy in FA should not be given advantages. Need a balance of high-priced players (top performers) and budgets guys to build a complete team.

I agree though, during the off season it would be difficult to manage signing free agents/prospects if you have a full roster. Can't completely eliminate waivers as then teams would just send their entire team down and bid on whoever they please, but can be lenient (during the off season only) that the roster space does not need to be open if the player is to be sent down immediately.

As for the 1.9M rule, only way around it IMO would be to change the minors cap from counting completely once over 2 million, to only counting what is over 2 million. (2.1 million player would count as 100K against the cap). Is doable and have seen a few teams suggest it.

[JetsGM (Jacob)]

Nov 11, 2016 15:13:39 GMT -5 Devils GM(Colin) said:

1 - After reading this many times I think I get it. Basically its a rule to make teams that signed a million prospects in FA accountable and not able to drop them willy nilly? If so I'm for the rule.

2 - I like the rule about a limit on RFA bidding, but when we say 3 bids, do we mean 3 total bids? Like say you really want Pavel Jagr, so you bid once, then someone outbids you and then you bid again. Does this count as 2 bids or just 1 cause it's the same player?

Also I don't think the 2,000,001 thing will be a huge problem because if the players is good enough the team will match easily, but if he's not than that bidder takes the risk of adding a permanent cap hit to his team on a player that is not good enough to warrant that.

3 - A call up limit does hurt the teams with a lot of pre-41 GP guys, but if that's your strategy to stay young and you plan on being very active, then I'm ok with that. I agree with Kings that it should be around 7 (one per day) to keep things sane, but not too limiting.

4 - Rather than having the roster space open as a hard rule, I think there should be a limit of players in your minors that have played more than 41 GP or maybe a different number. I think it's important to have a few call up options and it hurts the teams that didn't take advantage of the first off season.

5 - It is such a rare time when a quality player is sent down in real life, but it happens. Draisaitl two years ago, Virtanen was sent down the other day. If you have a player with high potential that just can't seem to crack your lineup, you shouldn't have to send him through waivers if he's not on the actual roster. I also think it should apply to RFA holdouts in real life. It's a rule that will only increase competition and isn't really possible to be abused. I also feel that suspensions should be applicable for the IR, but that's a whole other topic.

To answer your question for #2, no it would be # of players that can be bid on, unlimited # of bids until player is won. As Philly pointed out, compensation would be required (especially in the case of a 2,000,001 bid).