ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Archive => Backyard NHL => Archive => Backyard NHL: Archives => Topic started by: Drew on March 29, 2015, 04:28:55 AM
-
I got an idea on how we can make trading rights work in our league - we just the same system we have set up for extensions and contract lengths and apply a value to the player. For example, let's say a player that is eligible for a 4 year contract worth 7.7m per season is potentially on his way out. If we assign a value of a your own 2nd round pick to this player, then any team can request a trade for said players rights for the 2nd round pick.
Now, this does not mean you have to sign the player for the full 4 year 7.7m. But the return for his rights will always be worth a 2nd round pick. I'm thinking values could go like this:
Eligible for a 4 year contract: 2nd round pick
Eligible for a 3 year contract: 3rd round pick
Eligible for a 2 year contract worth more then 1m per season: 4th round pick
Eligible for a 2 year contract worth equal or less then 1m per season: 5th round pick
Thoughts?
My thoughts on this have changed to become more in line with favo's. Where if we decide to do this, there should be a benchmark for what needs to be moved so that to players are not traded for peanuts because their GM just wants something for them.
I think that if we simply go by the extension value that makes it easy for us to track. I would say that these standards would be the minimum so a GM could ask for more but this is the minimum needed so that the trade could pass.
Another thing is that the trading would only be open for pending free agents. So therefore other trades involving rostered players would not be able to take place. I would allow only picks, prospects and two way players to be traded this time but the trade must include a pending free agent.
Here are the standards, I think would be best fit. Player example in brackets.
$6.5m and above - 1st round pick (Ovechkin)
$5.0m-$6.4m - 2nd round pick (Couture)
$4.0m-$4.9m - 3rd round pick (Kesler)
$2.1m-$3.9m - 4th round pick (Staal)
$2.0m and under - 5th round pick (Bozak)
-
My thoughts have changed on this as well - I have seen the trading of pending UFAs work with no set value and the league is still running. If we extend the length of when a team can extend their pending UFAs and resolve any remaining transactions for the 14-15 season, then I do not see this being bad for the backyard.
The point of trading pending UFAs is to get something for nothing.
-
This is a win-win for teams. This eases a tough decision that needs to made on a player for one team and gives some compensation. For the other, it fills a need at a price that isn't exorbitant. We have all seen bidding on players in different leagues. GM’s are paying bad contracts on players. This keeps contracts reasonable.
This is a benefit for the league.
-
What will be the possible effect on free agency? Will it reduce the competitive talent that heads to free agency and therefore make our free agency a joke if there is no limits.
-
What will be the possible effect on free agency? Will it reduce the competitive talent that heads to free agency and therefore make our free agency a joke if there is no limits.
There might not be as much top talent entering free agency, but it should have no real consequences as the extensions are still aggressive.
-
I believe that this discussion is out of context and is only highlighting one part of the original. Please link to the thread that this conversation started in so we can revisit the whole topic in it's entirety.
-
I believe that this discussion is out of context and is only highlighting one part of the original. Please link to the thread that this conversation started in so we can revisit the whole topic in it's entirety.
There was a little more conversation but I believe I was the only to directly reply to this one.
I'm also not exactly sure where the conversation came from
-
There was a little more conversation but I believe I was the only to directly reply to this one.
I'm also not exactly sure where the conversation came from
Maybe I'm remembering a different conversation, it just seemed like we were jumping into this mid-way. Anyhow, I am not opposed to what is being put forward here.
-
As a refresher, here are 4 pages of RFA discussions http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=97148.0 and another 2 pages on the resulting Offer Sheet proposal http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=97416.0.
To be honest I don't see the need for any new rule on RFA's at all. If a GM gets some small compensation for an asset he was allowing to walk then so be it. The GM that traded for that players rights is still bound by the extension values so any new contract will be fair.
-
Oh I see where you were coming from Slack. This discussion isn't necessarily about RFAs (those being young players). This is for any player who is extendable at the end of the season. I see what your saying though in relation.
-
My thoughts have changed on this as well - I have seen the trading of pending UFAs work with no set value and the league is still running. If we extend the length of when a team can extend their pending UFAs and resolve any remaining transactions for the 14-15 season, then I do not see this being bad for the backyard.
The point of trading pending UFAs is to get something for nothing.
:iatp:
-
I'll simply put this up to vote. Please respond asap in the corresponding thread.