RFA Rule Proposal & Discussion

[Drew]

Here is the RFA rule that makes the most sense, is close to the actual rules, and works the best I believe.

D) Restricted Free Agents
Definition
Restricted Free Agents (RFA) are limited to any player who is coming off of a 2 way contract; that being any player who was on a 2 way contract for the current season and are due for an extension for the next season.

A player becomes an RFA in the follow way:
- The GM decided to forego the extension and release the player to free agency, that player then becomes an RFA and can be signed during free agency by any of the 18 teams.

If one of the 17 teams other than the original owning team signs the RFA, the original team can either
1) Match the offer and take on the contract as signed
or
2) Accept compensation from the team who signed the RFA. The compensation is as follows:
Under $1.0m - No compensation
$1.1m - $1.6m - 4th round pick
$1.7m - $2.5m - 3rd round pick
$2.6m - $3.5m - 2nd round pick
$3.6m - $5.5m - 1st round pick
$5.6m - $6.5m - 1st & 3rd round picks
Over $6.6m - 1st, 2nd & 3rd round picks
This value is the per year amount, so if a player is signed to a two way contract it includes the two way fee for compensation.

[Eric]

i am curious to what you thought of my idea?

[SlackJack]

Compensation values seem pretty high for a property that is otherwise being released. It's not as if were dealing with offer sheets here. No problem with the rest of it.

 

[Drew]

i am curious to what you thought of my idea?

It was ok but this protects the prospect aspect of them as say a player with lots of potential but not a high scorer yet goes into the RFA process then they may get paid a lot of money but then would only get a small draft pick compensation.

[Drew]

Compensation values seem pretty high for a property that is otherwise being released. It's not as if were dealing with offer sheets here. No problem with the rest of it.

I don't see them being released and I do see it as more of an offer sheet as that is what RFAs are when being signed by another team. Values are high to try and allow original teams to maintain their players.
If a player like Nuge or Landy head to free agency I can't see how they wouldn't be paid between the 1st round pick region.

What would you recommend for values? I feel anymore lower and the compensation along with $ value would make most RFAs good as gone.

[SlackJack]

I hear what you are saying but an offer sheet is a hostile offer, hence the compensation.  All a team has to do to retain their RFA is sign an extension.

If they choose to let that player walk, that's their problem. Otherwise, if extension values are too high maybe they should be reduced.

To be honest I think what you have devised is a fair model without any compensation at all. Making a significant reduction to the compensatory draft picks is harmless.

[SlackJack]

If you really want an RFA rule that reflects offer sheets then:

D) Restricted Free Agents
Definition
Restricted Free Agents (RFA) are limited to any player who is coming off of a 2 way contract; that being any player who was on a 2 way contract for the current season and are due for an extension for the next season.

A player becomes an RFA in the follow way:
- The GM decided to forego the extension and release the player to free agency, that player then becomes an RFA and can be signed during free agency by any of the 18 teams.

If one of the 17 teams other than the original owning team signs the RFA, the original team can either (match or receive compensation).

In other words, don't give the original team exclusivity. Let players coming off 2-way contracts be bid on (by all teams) regardless of weather they have signed an extension or not. Then you will see hostile bids which if left unmatched would be compensated appropriately.

[Drew]

If you really want an RFA rule that reflects offer sheets then:

In other words, don't give the original team exclusivity. Let players coming off 2-way contracts be bid on (by all teams) regardless of weather they have signed an extension or not. Then you will see hostile bids which if left unmatched would be compensated appropriately.

I am a bit confused, the way I wrote the rule is how rfas are usually dealt with.
All teams can sign the player, then the original team has the option to match or receive compensation from the signing team.
Yes the teams can sign qualifying offers but I don't want to introduce arbitration so I feel this is the best way to do an rfa without getting to complicated.
It's easiest to just track who is released to be an rfa instead of having them all available.

[SlackJack]

I am a bit confused, the way I wrote the rule is how rfas are usually dealt with.
All teams can sign the player, then the original team has the option to match or receive compensation from the signing team.
Yes the teams can sign qualifying offers but I don't want to introduce arbitration so I feel this is the best way to do an rfa without getting to complicated.
It's easiest to just track who is released to be an rfa instead of having them all available.

I'm confused too. I don't know if we're saying the same thing in different ways or not. I'll try to clarify.

It is this clause that I have trouble with:

A player becomes an RFA in the follow way:
- The GM decided to forego the extension and release the player to free agency, that player then becomes an RFA and can be signed during free agency by any of the 18 teams.

To me, if you release a player to free agency you should not get any compensation. Period.

On the other hand, if you sign an extension and then are overbid you should receive compensation if you fail to match.

[Jesse]

It is this clause that I have trouble with:

To me, if you release a player to free agency you should not get any compensation. Period.

On the other hand, if you sign an extension and then are overbid you should receive compensation if you fail to match.

I have a problem with this otherwise it looks good. It makes no sense why someone should be allowed to bid on your players that you have signed