Quote:
Originally Posted by RT14
I'm not sure if this is what Doug meant, but what he said got me thinking...
|
More of what I was thinking just so I'm clear, I'm talking more second contract guys, guys that are not elite players making close to cap limits regardless.
For example lets use Brandon Sutter who is a 24yr 71ov 3rd line player.. He is set to make between 4M to 5M depending on your choosing one year to three. Under this system stopping a 29yr old (71ov) from testing the free agency in the prime of his career would cost a 3yr year 4.5M contract max. It's actually more expensive to sign a RFA not yet hitting his prime then a resigning a 29yr UFA in his prime and blocking him from hitting the open market.
Under the old system Sutter would have been a 66ov player with the same grid option of 4-5M deal... but resigning his UFA counterpart would have a cap hit of 3yr @ 6M.
So a RFA with
1yr was 2M less
3yr was 1M less
right now a RFA at one season is only 500k less than resigning a UFA for 3yrs. We've reversed system
This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it will change the game. But as it stands right now a resigning your 29yr UFA player and preventing him from hitting the open market is less of a cap hit then resigning your RFA kids that will be hitting their prime after the 3yr deal.
This isn't a bad thing, just not sure if this was the intention of the league to lower the UFA grids because the end result will have an effect on the league (positive and negative depending on what one values)
Just to note, not bringing this up as picking it apart, right away I can advantages from this as well. I just wasn't sure if this was an intended change to the system or just an oversight and wanted to bring notice to it
