|
Post by Lawrence Bailey - Caps GM on Jul 20, 2007 14:21:40 GMT -5
I think RFAs should stay with their former clubs, simply because its rare for offer sheets to be signed and nearly non-existent that they aren't matched.
Basically I say resign all RFAs to one year deals at their salary from last season (to get them on the roster) and then if/when they resign in the NHL assign that contract to them.
My 2 cents...
|
|
sensgm
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by sensgm on Jul 20, 2007 16:59:22 GMT -5
I would agree, they should still belong to their current team, then assign them whatever salary they sign for when they do sign.
|
|
|
Post by allan16qb on Jul 21, 2007 11:07:35 GMT -5
I think we could have the same rules for RFA's as the NHL. They are property of the team that has them, an offer sheet can be signed with the right to match, or take compensation. That way, while the NHL may not have many offer sheets just yet, the NFHL just might.
I would say set a date that the rosters are complete. As late as possible, and then make all the rest UFA's. I believe there has to be a start date when NHL no longer impacts the teams. This way we won't have to constantly update or have two GM'S (Myself and Brian Burke adding players to the Duck roster).
|
|
|
Post by Detroit GM on Jul 21, 2007 12:35:06 GMT -5
I don't like the idea for offer sheets as it will jack up the price of players across the board. It's been my experience that many gm's don't know how to manage a team financially and it leaves teams destroyed, and the cost of players rising. Eventually a gm will leave the league because he spent too much on a single player and the next gm to take over gets shafted. Just my two cents.
|
|
sensgm
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by sensgm on Jul 21, 2007 16:08:59 GMT -5
Is this any different than Kevin Lowe offering Vanek a ridiculous contact? It happens in real life too.
|
|
|
Post by Commish - Boston on Jul 22, 2007 9:45:43 GMT -5
I think you'd see it happening a lot more in a sim league than it does in the NHL. I'd prefer to avoid contract inflation.
|
|