Franchise Tag

[teddy369]

In the real NHL, some of the elite players are willing to take pay cuts to help the teams which they are loyal to. Since our contracts are already so much higher than NHL contracts, I think this will be a way to get it slightly closer to the real levels.

My proposal: Each team gets at most 2 'Franchise' designations for players. For a player to qualify, he must have had his contract extended for the past 5 years or entire NHL career (whichever is less). That is, this player must not have been signed as a Free Agent in the past 5 years (Trades are OK since players get traded to teams they like and give them discounts). Each of these 'Franchise' players gets a 10% discount on their extension salary i.e. 7 million becomes 6.3. A Franchise tag can only be applied at the time of a signing (and retroactively to signings this year).

What do you guys think?

[joeshmoe]

In the real NHL, some of the elite players are willing to take pay cuts to help the teams which they are loyal to. Since our contracts are already so much higher than NHL contracts, I think this will be a way to get it slightly closer to the real levels.

My proposal: Each team gets at most 2 'Franchise' designations for players. For a player to qualify, he must have had his contract extended for the past 5 years or entire NHL career (whichever is less). That is, this player must not have been signed as a Free Agent in the past 5 years (Trades are OK since players get traded to teams they like and give them discounts). Each of these 'Franchise' players gets a 10% discount on their extension salary i.e. 7 million becomes 6.3. A Franchise tag can only be applied at the time of a signing (and retroactively to signings this year).

What do you guys think?

Our salary cap is also higher...and our salaries were taken from the NHL to start the season...

I don't want to track player signing dates.  Thatd be far to tedious.  Franchise tags would ensure the market is pretty locked up.  We need a fluid market...I am against this proposal. 

Sorry ted.

[teddy369]

Our salary cap is also higher...and our salaries were taken from the NHL to start the season...

I don't want to track player signing dates.  Thatd be far to tedious.  Franchise tags would ensure the market is pretty locked up.  We need a fluid market...I am against this proposal. 

Sorry ted.

Maybe, but Stewart signed for 2.5 and 3.5 million and I have to pay him 6.9. Our salaries are gunna grow really fast. I like that the league will have a ton of FA turnover so maybe thats a good reason to not implement this, but on the topic of tedious I disagree (just add a tag to the end.. the salary can't change after he's signed)

[joeshmoe]

Maybe, but Stewart signed for 2.5 and 3.5 million and I have to pay him 6.9. Our salaries are gunna grow really fast. I like that the league will have a ton of FA turnover so maybe thats a good reason to not implement this, but on the topic of tedious I disagree (just add a tag to the end.. the salary can't change after he's signed)

I don't know if he was a free agent signing or what.  All contract values did come from a creditable source, cited in the rules.

FA turnover is more important to me.

[Drew]

  is this dismissed

[joeshmoe]

Upon re-examination of this discussion; I am still against a Franchise tag but for a different reason.  You know the value of the contract extension.  It isn't like there is a need for a franchise tag because players are negotiating bad contracts...there are no contract negotiations.  If you want to keep a guy the market is the same.  The franchise tag simply allows a team to circumvent the number of years determined by our contract limits already in place.

No change  by executive order