HEADS UP Goalie Extensions Increase 2016-17

[PigsRule]

  That is because you never changed Goalies as far as Entry Level Draft contracts are concerned.

Entry levek deals are meant to be favourable.

[PigsRule]

PPG what is ETA on the new top tier goalie extensions?

[PsychoticPondGoons]

PPG what is ETA on the new top tier goalie extensions?

On it for October season start.
Got sick and almost died so catching up. LOL

[snugerud]

On it for October season start.
Got sick and almost died so catching up. LOL

I have been doing some thinking on this.  do you think going up on goalie extensions even further is the best idea.. A top goalie would be eating up almost an 1/4 of a persons total cap space.. I think what you will see happen is Goalies will still continue to get their extensions no matter what and you are going to see an absolute crap ton of players/skaters going to FA.   

Upping their extension cost is basically just trying reduce their value.  This can be done by slightly decreasing their stats collection over a period of time.  We currently award 0.25 pts for every save.  What if you just reduced it by 0.01pts , for the next 5 seasons?  you end up at 0.20 pts per save.

The average goalie in the league makes 1500 saves.  1500x .25 = 375ftps.    1500x.24= 360ftps.   1500x.20 = 300 ftps.

so next season the average goalie loses about 15ftps on the entire season but that would affect all teams equally. 

The problem I have with doing large increases to the extensions is it will create large disparities between teams that have to extend goalies at the new rates and ones who have goalies at the old extension costs.  It may take teams 5 years to get back to parity on goalie costs. 
The other issue I see with raising costs is again creating huge price gaps between minor league developed goalies to when they have to be extended.

I dont want to throw a wrench in the plans, but just throwing this out for thought before we go escalating goalie prices that could in turn cause other issues down the road. 

I really think we are at a good spot happy medium between extension costs and available cap to teams. bringing the goalie costs higher could tip that scale.  We havent even seen the full effect of the last goalie extension costs on all teams. 

By a very slow reduction in stats it will affect all teams equally but not adversely over a 5year period of time vs. extension cost increase that will affect all teams but at very different times over a 5 year period.
 

[Burkes Boys]

I got to think the cost of extensions going up for the top tier goalies is going to force teams to make more choices. Resign, release, trade or other.

League's where the rules remain intact lead to stagnant activity IMO.

If I had to guess the increase is going to force teams to make moves versus sit back and hold a top goalie forever. Then the domino effect will do it's thing and there will be transactions of one sort or another. Holding an expensive top goalie means cutting cap elsewhere with reserve goalies or skaters.

Cap will only go up over time. It isn't going backwards at least not until the next collective bargaining agreement is needed in September 2022.

[Burkes Boys]

Otherwise it's just PPG's way of raising hell around here. HA HA

[snugerud]

League's where the rules remain intact lead to stagnant activity IMO.

I categorically disagree with you on that one.  The ebbs and flows of a league should come with the unpredictability of real-life, players performances and team needs not forced through rule changes. This isnt "big brother 16" expect the unexpected. 

That aside,  I am not complaining about the idea of making goalie decisions harder.  I am just suggesting an alternative way to do it.  If a company wants to make more profit on their candy bars they can A. charge more money OR B. Make the candy bar smaller but charge the same amount. 

I am just suggesting the B option in this case because there is less chance of causing an imbalance elsewhere that will require a rule change, its probably a more fair approach as it affects all GMS at the same time (I wont say equally since a team with 2 starting goalies will be affected greater than a team with none, but the increased extensions is probably even less equal) and can be staged in a slower rate than 1 sweeping change to the extensions.

Thats not even bringing in the increased benefit to home grown goalies through the minors.  All I will say there is I will trade anyone of my skaters in my minors for anyones goalie prospects.  Send your offers please. 

[Burkes Boys]

I am totally against making anything smaller. I told my GF and I'm saying it here. HA HA

Seriously. I think the commish is stirring it with the Top Tier Goalies getting the big bump up. That is real world. Look at Weber, PK and Lundqvist's contract. front loaded and big numbers. Craziness.

[PigsRule]

I believe the intent is to make the most value position in this league the most expensive and the one where you cannot hoard top goalies.

By making the orice adjustment, teams have to decide whether they can afford to have a second #1 goalie sitting on he bench at a cost of roughly 8-15 million annually or unlock the cap and buy skaters.

By doing so we hope to move towards the elimination of teams without a top goalie or a top backup goalie in a 50/50 timeshare role.

I am against adjusting scoring of any type because there is no real issue there and it doesnt solve the issue of limited goalie transactions in FNHL.

I have been doing some thinking on this.  do you think going up on goalie extensions even further is the best idea.. A top goalie would be eating up almost an 1/4 of a persons total cap space.. I think what you will see happen is Goalies will still continue to get their extensions no matter what and you are going to see an absolute crap ton of players/skaters going to FA.   

Upping their extension cost is basically just trying reduce their value.  This can be done by slightly decreasing their stats collection over a period of time.  We currently award 0.25 pts for every save.  What if you just reduced it by 0.01pts , for the next 5 seasons?  you end up at 0.20 pts per save.

The average goalie in the league makes 1500 saves.  1500x .25 = 375ftps.    1500x.24= 360ftps.   1500x.20 = 300 ftps.

so next season the average goalie loses about 15ftps on the entire season but that would affect all teams equally. 

The problem I have with doing large increases to the extensions is it will create large disparities between teams that have to extend goalies at the new rates and ones who have goalies at the old extension costs.  It may take teams 5 years to get back to parity on goalie costs. 
The other issue I see with raising costs is again creating huge price gaps between minor league developed goalies to when they have to be extended.

I dont want to throw a wrench in the plans, but just throwing this out for thought before we go escalating goalie prices that could in turn cause other issues down the road. 

I really think we are at a good spot happy medium between extension costs and available cap to teams. bringing the goalie costs higher could tip that scale.  We havent even seen the full effect of the last goalie extension costs on all teams. 

By a very slow reduction in stats it will affect all teams equally but not adversely over a 5year period of time vs. extension cost increase that will affect all teams but at very different times over a 5 year period.
 

[snugerud]

I believe the intent is to make the most value position in this league the most expensive and the one where you cannot hoard top goalies.

By making the orice adjustment, teams have to decide whether they can afford to have a second #1 goalie sitting on he bench at a cost of roughly 8-15 million annually or unlock the cap and buy skaters.

By doing so we hope to move towards the elimination of teams without a top goalie or a top backup goalie in a 50/50 timeshare role.

I am against adjusting scoring of any type because there is no real issue there and it doesnt solve the issue of limited goalie transactions in FNHL.

Fair enough.  It is 6 or one half dozen the other both accomplish the same thing in my book which is limits the usefulness of carrying two goalies where your 2nd goalie may only be getting a 1/4 of the starts.