Batch 1 Winners

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by Swayze11

1st IDEA - Just tossing ideas out there... what if we had a Draft Day 2.0 for UFA? Done in chat/forum like we do for the draft.

2nd IDEA - Also, what if we threw in a randomizer "Wants" list for each player using http://random.org

Having a list of like:
- Wants to play in West
- Wants to play in East
- Wants to play for a contender (team that made playoffs last year)
- Wants to play for rebuilding team
- Wants to sign a 1 year deal
- Wants to sign a 3 year deal
etc.

Those items are just off the top of my head but the list would have to be significantly bigger. Then we use the randomizer, take the top 2 and it then gets posted what each players "wants" are.

For transparency purposes we could stream it live (I could volunteer to do this).

I think these ideas would somewhat help what Dave is also suggesting because if your team does not fit a players "wants" then you wouldn't be giving them an offer.

Again, just a cool idea that I thought of... flame away.

Eh, then you get into judging and stuff, and from what I understand the previous Agent system was brutal.



A random idea I just had was to post the approximate high bids for each player the day before UFA closed. It would allow teams to up their bids if they think they have a chance and give teams the chance to bid on other players if they know they can't match a max bid or something.

Could be an anonymous list with a range of the bid.

Eg:
Chara 7-8M
Kuniz - 9-10M

etc



Obviously doesn't have to be discussed in great length now, but I would be willing to participate in a discussion regarding next year for sure.

[JiriHrdina]

My fear with that type of auction system is that it would be incredibly demotivating for some GMs to participate. If you are competing with a small sub-set of GMs with massive cap - why bother if you know they will just outbid you.

As I always do - I would ask what problem are we trying to solve here?

I have an idea to improve the process, that is less dramatic a change. I will share soon.

I fear though we (you and me DS) just don't have the same ideas around the purpose of free agency. So perhaps outline what you think its purpose is and that may help us bridge the gap here.

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

If you are competing with a small sub-set of GMs with massive cap - why bother if you know they will just outbid you.

This happens anyway, or at least it did for me. In past years, I've avoided UFA altogether because a small sub-set of GMs had massive cap and I wouldn't be able to get enough to compete - and even if I did, it was still a massive gamble.


The problem is that the more holes you have in UFA, the less likely you are to fill them - or so it seems. One hole? no problem! Bid all your cap and roll the dice. More than one hole? Your buying power is reduced significantly if you spread your cap over multiple offers.


It honestly feels like the only way to make any kind of progress in UFA season is to either a) get lucky or b) not participate in the bidding.


I think the largest contributor to my feelings regarding UFA bidding is that there's nothing predictable in regards to the dollar amounts or number of offers being made to UFAs. There are no market indicators. There is no way to react if you put all your dollars down on player A and guess wrong.

It feels like a lottery.


And I get it. It shouldn't necessarily be predictable. That's fine. I just think it's a flaw in the game. I think there is an opportunity to make it more interactive and competitive without eliminating all of the luck/randomness - should that be desired.

[TurdFerguson]

Originally Posted by dsavillian

This happens anyway, or at least it did for me. In past years, I've avoided UFA altogether because a small sub-set of GMs had massive cap and I wouldn't be able to get enough to compete - and even if I did, it was still a massive gamble.


The problem is that the more holes you have in UFA, the less likely you are to fill them - or so it seems. One hole? no problem! Bid all your cap and roll the dice. More than one hole? Your buying power is reduced significantly if you spread your cap over multiple offers.


It honestly feels like the only way to make any kind of progress in UFA season is to either a) get lucky or b) not participate in the bidding.


I think the largest contributor to my feelings regarding UFA bidding is that there's nothing predictable in regards to the dollar amounts or number of offers being made to UFAs. There are no market indicators. There is no way to react if you put all your dollars down on player A and guess wrong.

It feels like a lottery.


And I get it. It shouldn't necessarily be predictable. That's fine. I just think it's a flaw in the game. I think there is an opportunity to make it more interactive and competitive without eliminating all of the luck/randomness - should that be desired.

Rob Kerr, is that you?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by dsavillian

This happens anyway, or at least it did for me. In past years, I've avoided UFA altogether because a small sub-set of GMs had massive cap and I wouldn't be able to get enough to compete - and even if I did, it was still a massive gamble.


The problem is that the more holes you have in UFA, the less likely you are to fill them - or so it seems. One hole? no problem! Bid all your cap and roll the dice. More than one hole? Your buying power is reduced significantly if you spread your cap over multiple offers.


It honestly feels like the only way to make any kind of progress in UFA season is to either a) get lucky or b) not participate in the bidding.


I think the largest contributor to my feelings regarding UFA bidding is that there's nothing predictable in regards to the dollar amounts or number of offers being made to UFAs. There are no market indicators. There is no way to react if you put all your dollars down on player A and guess wrong.

It feels like a lottery.


And I get it. It shouldn't necessarily be predictable. That's fine. I just think it's a flaw in the game. I think there is an opportunity to make it more interactive and competitive without eliminating all of the luck/randomness - should that be desired.

Re. Why Bother. I think we had 29/30 teams bid in round 1. Might have been 28. Regardless, most GMs are engaged in this process.

Teams shouldn't rely on UFA to fill multiple holes. It has never been a mechanism for that. Trading is the primary way teams should fill holes.

There is a strategy to how you bid and we see that every year. Some teams choose to concentrate their dollars on the player they want most. Others spread multiple low ball offers across many player and try to land one. Both are valid and both have been successful tactics.

Would love to hear from other GMs on this. I think there are ways to improve but I'm not convinced we need to make a whole sale change.

To challenge you - you still haven't outlined what you think the purpose of free agency in the CPHL should be.
- Is it to promote distribution of talent
- Is it to allow teams with holes to easily fill them
- Is it to maximize what players get paid? If so why? The players are just assets, not participants in the game.

[Slava]

I like the UFA system as it is now. I don't think that I've ever been a huge player in that process, but every year I sign a player or two and hopefully don't overpay to do it. Its true that some GMs have war chests for free agency and they can bid on the "big" names. Those guys all have issues though; maybe its their last year, or their role is diminishing, or whatever the case.

The CPHL free agency is different than the NHL because we have no "player demands" or they have no say. For the most part the players hitting free agency here aren't worth grid deals, or at the very least its borderline. In the NHL you have some guys who are worth 4-5 year deals at good money because they just wanted to move. That doesn't happen here.

[KevanGuy]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Re. Why Bother. I think we had 29/30 teams bid in round 1. Might have been 28. Regardless, most GMs are engaged in this process.

And I'll add, just for clarity - I didn't submit any Batch 1 offers but it wasn't for lack of engagement, it was from lack of cap.

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

There is a strategy to how you bid and we see that every year. Some teams choose to concentrate their dollars on the player they want most. Others spread multiple low ball offers across many player and try to land one. Both are valid and both have been successful tactics.

There's very little strategic about sealed auctions with a limited budget.

To challenge you - you still haven't outlined what you think the purpose of free agency in the CPHL should be.
- Is it to promote distribution of talent
- Is it to allow teams with holes to easily fill them
- Is it to maximize what players get paid? If so why? The players are just assets, not participants in the game.

- Promote distribution of talent? Yes, absolutely yes. It's a way of slowly letting teams pick up "free" assets. UFA could be an equalizer.

- Allow teams to easily fill holes? No. Fill holes, yes - absolutely. Easily? Not necessarily.

- Maximize what players get paid? Not really. I don't care what the player records have as a number next to the name - I care that UFA bidding isn't based on a coin flip.



Maybe the biggest contributor to all of this is that cap has next to zero value unless you spend it. If I, for example, go into the start of next season with 6M in cap space, it's pretty much wasted. I have no ownership group breathing down my neck asking me to spend less so they can turn a better profit. I don't have season ticket holders that complain about the price of their seats. I don't have to be accountable if I spend every last penny - so that means there's no management strategy. I have one spot to fill, I spend the max and hope I guess the player right.

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by TurdFerguson

Rob Kerr, is that you?

You don't like Rob Kerr and I get that

[TurdFerguson]

Well I dont hate the current system, as long as ive been in the league I have always failed to comprehend the "strategy" angle. Contemplation between offering 9.08 and 9.12 simply doesn't cut it for me...wild ass guessing, based on a projected market, with zero indicators, is not strategy, its...wild ass guessing. some just do it better/worse then others. UFA has always been largely a crap shoot. There is no way a player should slip through the first round with 0 bids while other GMs are missing out by 50k on max contracts. I'd wager that if the process was a open bid process, the distribution of contract value wouldn't be nearly as large as it currently is, and i see that as a good thing.

I do think the purpose of UFA should be to get the "player" the most money. it should be an open bid process. those that have money...should be able to have players. those that dont, dont for a reason. let it play out that way.

with the recent rule changes that force teams to keep players on the CPHL roster prior to UFA, i really do think the stage is set for the asset poor teams to cash in on opportunity of "free assets". We've made a number of rules changes to specifically help level playing the field and i think this is another opportunity.

based on suggestions to-date, i like the idea of a UFA auction (maybe draft thread style) the best. set bid incraments, set timeframes...roll through it. Highest rated first.

[TurdFerguson]

Originally Posted by dsavillian

You don't like Rob Kerr and I get that

Now Dave, let me just play devils advocate here for a second, if I may...

[Hanna Sniper]

Originally Posted by TurdFerguson

based on suggestions to-date, i like the idea of a UFA auction (maybe draft thread style) the best. set bid incraments, set timeframes...roll through it. Highest rated first.

Sorry for shorting the quote, all your quote is being taken in

I fail to understand how this is better since we went from the open bidding process like mention above to what we have now.

Personally I don't think just bidding one dollar more then whatever the next person bids is more strategic. If we aim to improve, then the league will also be better for it but there was a reason why we ditched the open bidding process in the past and have yet to hear any positives

You've mentioned the lack of strategy before and also back then other voiced how they seen it as strategy. Just because you don't choose to view it as such doesn't mean it isn't. If you see it as no strategy and I do find a strategy within it... one of us doesn't have to be wrong

I could get better behind your movement (you've brought this issue up before) if I could be shown that it adds a positive addition that we don't have. At the moment I have yet to see anything different then what we changed from, so for me it is a step back.

Taking a step forwards or back is a good thing if end goal is worth pursuing

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by dsavillian

There's very little strategic about sealed auctions with a limited budget.

- Promote distribution of talent? Yes, absolutely yes. It's a way of slowly letting teams pick up "free" assets. UFA could be an equalizer.

- Allow teams to easily fill holes? No. Fill holes, yes - absolutely. Easily? Not necessarily.

- Maximize what players get paid? Not really. I don't care what the player records have as a number next to the name - I care that UFA bidding isn't based on a coin flip.



Maybe the biggest contributor to all of this is that cap has next to zero value unless you spend it. If I, for example, go into the start of next season with 6M in cap space, it's pretty much wasted. I have no ownership group breathing down my neck asking me to spend less so they can turn a better profit. I don't have season ticket holders that complain about the price of their seats. I don't have to be accountable if I spend every last penny - so that means there's no management strategy. I have one spot to fill, I spend the max and hope I guess the player right.

And yet many teams don't even submit offers that use all their cap space. So there is more to it then just that. Some teams choose to leave some to be able to add players via trade, others choose to leave 2M for sponsorships.

You are right - there is no motivation to spend less by end of season, but there are reasons not to use all your cap during the off-eason

I don't think UFA is a coin flip. I think you are over-stating that. Teams have to decide how many teams to bid on v. how much to bid on any one player. In a world where teams have limited cap - there are decisions there and those decisions do help to dictate who is successful.

It ain't just luck.

[simmer2]

This is my take.

What's the overall objective of the league?

The reason I'm here is because of trading.

Therefore, set up the UFA Process to encourage trading as much as possible.

Does an Open Auction system do that?

Or is our time better spent focusing elsewhere to see if there is a way to encourage trading? Or to streamline the software to make it easier for commishes to manage the league?

We also have to keep in mind the majority of us have Full Time Lives and the simpler the better. Just let me trade haha.

MY OPINION ON FA CURRENTLY

I don't think it takes much tweaking, but then again I was successful landing the main 2 targets for me. I purposely freed up cash this year so I could take a run at some bigger assets. I don't think it's luck, I had a lot of strategy. whether that strategy of the players I targetted works out remains to be seen. I gambled on both deals.

Maybe you guys that want to change it are just bitter you didn't win anything....

[Hanna Sniper]

I have a question as I don't want to appear I'm shooting down an idea from trying to statt

I was the 7th worst team in the league last year.
1st Batch I had the 5th least available cap to land a player (signed no one)
heading into the 2nd Batch I now have the 7th least available cap

Under an open bidding process how is it that my chances of improving my team when bidding against teams that have 20+ or 30M. Right now my goal is to try and land a lesser player while the high dollar teams are to busy chasing a bigger fish. If the 20+ power teams hold all the cards on who goes where then I really have no say who I can get it's just a matter if they let me have a player or not

Now I can get behind a system that works and just doesn't work for me. But if you can show me how an open bidding process helps a bottom feeding team with no cap have a chance of improving in a market with the big dollar bidders then I can dig deeper in finding more positives

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by simmer2

Maybe you guys that want to change it are just bitter you didn't win anything....

I'm just bitter that the correct decision is not to participate

[Moshpit]

The Habs like the way it is. Teams in the best position wouldn't even need to participate in ufa. Ufa is to fill a hole for two, and should never be the biggest offseason activity for a team- so a major overhaul is unnecessary IMO.

[EldrickOnIce]

I think the only thing that might be tweaked, and I'm sure this has been discussed in the past, is term versus dollar amounts.
A 31 year old free agent would certainly take 5.8M for 3 years over 6.0M for 1 year, virtually every time. I am not exactly sure how one could factor that in though.

The only other thing I could see might be that players could decide to not sign after the first round, for example, decided by an 'impartial' individual. The Hainsey contract is an example, and good on Philly for getting that kind of value, but the individual in charge of that could publish a media report saying Hainsey is still looking at offers, and the rumoured 1.65 per season as his best offer isn't enough to get him inked.

Or leave it. This league is complicated enough as is!

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by simmer2

I think at worst they become 1b goalies like Hiller/Ramo. We see so few straight up #1 goalies nowadays.

and I would move either guy.

Blues and Sharks could use a starter. I hear Anderson is close to be being moved, wonder which of these two teams gets their starter.

Correction: Jets need a starter too.

[droopydrew19]

I will wade in here… I came into free agency looking for one player. I treated it pretty much like a trade deadline one year rental. Identified a player I needed and got him.

That being said I likely would've done the same and batch 2 and taken a shot at the best available player to fill that position.

Overall I don't mind the process.

A couple of tweaks that I would like to offer.....

#1 Don't tier the batches. Having all the top players in the first batch doesn't leave an opportunity for teams to have second and third choices. You pretty much have to Target one or two players and overpay for them. If some of the top 10 players were still available in second or third batch a market could be set by seeing what other top players were getting for bids.

OR

#2 Instead of having two or three batches and then an open batch why not expand that to 10 batches or another round figure that would ensure the batches are smaller to drive the market and make it less necessary to hedge your bets. I don't think we really need to have a week to decide whether you want to bid on a free agent. If you did about every two days you could get through 10 batches in a couple of weeks

#3. A combination of both points one and two

Good discussion