Rule Discussion: Retired/Moving Players

[Drew]

Basically I am hoping a reduced rate will be more appealing. Here are two proposals to the rule. Please vote on one of the following.

Option 1:

A) Retired Players Under Contract
If a player retires and they are still under contract, they still have to be compensated. They would be owed 25% of their remaining contract. Therefore is Nicklas Lidstrom retires and has a contract of $5.0m (2013-14, 2 more years), would then be owed $1.3m x 2 years. This could be paid out all in one year or up to the max of years remaining on the contract.
If a player retires in majors or minors they must be compensated under this rule. The player can not be left on roster, they must be paid their 25% compensation at time of retirement.

B) Players Moving Leagues
They follow the above rule as well except that the GM can choose to keep the player in case they decide to come back to the NHL.
These players may also be waived to the minors if in the last year of their contracts.

Option 2:

A) Retired Players Under Contract
If a player retires and they are still under contract, they still have to be compensated. They would be owed 50% of their contract for the year they retire and be tracked under the buyout part of the roster pages.
Therefore if a player who is making 4m (2011-12) retires they would be owed 2m for 2011-12. If the players contract is 4m (2012-13), they would still be owed 2m for the length of their contract ex. 2.0m (2012-13).
If in the last year of their contract, they can be waived to the minors at a reduced rate. 25% of their contract cap will apply to the major league roster and 75% to the minor league roster.
Therefore if a player retires with a $4.0m contract (in the last year) could be waived to the minors with $1.0m of their contract counting towards the major league cap and $3.0m to minor league cap. These players could also be bought out at 50% as above to count against the major league cap.

B) Players Moving Leagues
They follow the above rule as well except that the GM can choose to keep the player in case they decide to come back to the NHL.

[Jesse]

Option 1 gets my vote

[Tony]

I like option #1 but did not mind the 50% buyout for retired players. Teams should be responsible for the players they sign.

I just didn't really think that teams should be forced to keep a player on there main roster if they are playing overseas. They will have to keep them on the roster anyway unless they are in the last year of their contract. 

[abbyroad]

option #1

[Drew]

I like option #1 but did not mind the 50% buyout for retired players. Teams should be responsible for the players they sign.

I just didn't really think that teams should be forced to keep a player on there main roster if they are playing overseas. They will have to keep them on the roster anyway unless they are in the last year of their contract. 

Essentially I do have the final say so I may leave it to 50% because we have to be aware how close players are to retirement, signing Teemu to a 2 year deal this year is one of those risks we take sometimes.

I also have to add a section for death as well. Death voids the contract.

[favo_zomg]

I just didn't really think that teams should be forced to keep a player on there main roster if they are playing overseas. They will have to keep them on the roster anyway unless they are in the last year of their contract. 

I kind of agree here... I know teams do want to keep their top tier talent, but you never know sometimes with these foreign players.

Also, I like option one better.... Something about being cheaper always seems better.

[norrya66]

I'm liking option #1 as well.

[nelly85]

I like option 1 bc of rule b but not bc rule a like u said about temu still think retire player should be 50% so no one bids crazy on a guy for one year then gets a easy buy out

[cho34]

I like option #1 but did not mind the 50% buyout for retired players. Teams should be responsible for the players they sign.

I just didn't really think that teams should be forced to keep a player on there main roster if they are playing overseas. They will have to keep them on the roster anyway unless they are in the last year of their contract. 

option gets my vote with the 50%

[Drew]

Basically I am hoping a reduced rate will be more appealing. Here are two proposals to the rule. Please vote on one of the following.

Option 1:

A) Retired Players Under Contract
If a player retires and they are still under contract, they still have to be compensated. They would be owed 25% of their remaining contract. Therefore is Nicklas Lidstrom retires and has a contract of $5.0m (2013-14, 2 more years), would then be owed $1.3m x 2 years. This could be paid out all in one year or up to the max of years remaining on the contract.
If a player retires in majors or minors they must be compensated under this rule. The player can not be left on roster, they must be paid their 25% compensation at time of retirement.

B) Players Moving Leagues
They follow the above rule as well except that the GM can choose to keep the player in case they decide to come back to the NHL.
These players may also be waived to the minors if in the last year of their contracts.

Option 2:

A) Retired Players Under Contract
If a player retires and they are still under contract, they still have to be compensated. They would be owed 50% of their contract for the year they retire and be tracked under the buyout part of the roster pages.
Therefore if a player who is making 4m (2011-12) retires they would be owed 2m for 2011-12. If the players contract is 4m (2012-13), they would still be owed 2m for the length of their contract ex. 2.0m (2012-13).
If in the last year of their contract, they can be waived to the minors at a reduced rate. 25% of their contract cap will apply to the major league roster and 75% to the minor league roster.
Therefore if a player retires with a $4.0m contract (in the last year) could be waived to the minors with $1.0m of their contract counting towards the major league cap and $3.0m to minor league cap. These players could also be bought out at 50% as above to count against the major league cap.

B) Players Moving Leagues
They follow the above rule as well except that the GM can choose to keep the player in case they decide to come back to the NHL.

Seems relatively unanimous so we will go with option 1 with one modification. This rule will be effective at the start of week 5. I am also adding a death amendment to the rules as well.

NEW RULE:

Option 1:

A) Retired Players Under Contract
If a player retires and they are still under contract, they still have to be compensated. They would be owed 50% of their remaining contract. Therefore is Nicklas Lidstrom retires and has a contract of $5.0m (2013-14, 2 more years), would then be owed $2.5m x 2 years. This could be paid out all in one year or up to the max of years remaining on the contract.
If a player retires in majors or minors they must be compensated under this rule. The player can not be left on roster, they must be paid their 50% compensation at time of retirement.

B) Players Moving Leagues
They follow the above rule as well except that the GM can choose to keep the player in case they decide to come back to the NHL.
These players may also be waived to the minors if in the last year of their contracts.

C) Death
If a player dies while still under contract their contract becomes null and void. Therefore the player would be released off the team and no cost.