UFA "value" idea

[devo22]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Just a few people posting so far would love to hear from others

well for starters I don't think it's the perfect time to discuss the issue, with UFA bidding already under way ... should have happened either earlier or after free agency.

I'm not opposed to the proposal of a minimum offer, but I also enjoy the current system. It's a gamble and there's nothing wrong with that in my opinion ... yes, some contracts will be significantly different in comparison to the NHL, but that goes in both directions (someone gave Andy McDonald over 9m last year, IIRC) - why "punish" those who get away with a bargain?

[Daradon]

Yeah, poor timing for the conversation, but I don't think any changes will be implemented anyway, even if there is agreement. I don't think we are talking about changing anything this year.

[Swayze11]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Anticipate what players will be most popular and bid accordingly

That's another guess. The top rated player is rarely the one that gets the most bids.

[Flickered Flame]

Personally, I don't have an issue with the current system, is it perfect, probably not but when I submit offers, I try to do what Jiri has suggested and anticipate what a player is going to be offered. Sometimes I am close to what the winning bid was, other times I have been way off, usually because I have never really had cap room to go all in on some players.

When we had agents, it was one of the worst free agency cycles that I have experienced. I believe agents, right or wrong, seemed to take less from GMs who they connected with or were more friendly with. I was actually quite successful during this period but I know my offers were considerably lower than some other offers but the agents and I had a decent relationship from our times as GMs together.

[RT14]

After reading through the thread, I came to an idea based on one of Turd's earlier posts.

What if we just started a thread for each player available, leave it open for a few days and let teams throw their bids down until the time limit has expired? Highest bid combined with best term takes the player. It would be far closer to reality as players would go for their true market value and would give all teams a chance to see what the market value actually is for players.

I don't know, just an idea, but otherwise I really don't mind the way it is now either.

[dsavillian]

How did the agent system work?

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by Slava

In this batch I think we all know Kari Ramo is a hot commodity, so teams that want him have to bid more. I think my offer was a three year one way at $8M, so that means Anaheim will have at least $8.01M of his $9.46 available ponied up to land him. Do we need him finding out early that Ramo could be signed for $2.2M? I'm not sure that's a benefit to other teams?

I think an auction system would still allow for serious competition for players, but every player's value would be driven up by demand instead of speculation.

[The Swedish Flame]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Just a few people posting so far would love to hear from others

Hi, I'm new around here.

I actually have a suggestion, which is based on my fairly limited knowledge of how this stuff actually works. So take it for what it's worth.

It seems that one point here is that GMs should be able to receive some input from the players on what they expect to get paid. In real life the player's agent probably would participate in a discussion with the club, a back-and-forth etc.

Obviously that's not happening here so there should be a different way for GMs to find out what UFAs are currently being offered.

My suggestion would be that the UFA bidding process remains largely the same and that each batch of UFAs is available for bids for a certain number of days. However, each day (or every 24h or so) the league updates the list of available UFAs with their current highest bid for all to see.

That way everyone can see what a player currently is being offered (the specific team that is offering that amount doesn't have to be revealed) and they can then make a counter-offer to the player if they believe that he's worth it.

Anyway, I might be totally off-base with this so ignore me at will.

Edit: Just saw RT14's post above which seems fairly similar.

[3thirty]

I never dealt with the agent system and would be interested in hearing how that worked, but in my one year here I thought the free agent process as is was fair and fun. Everyone has the same chance, and can overpay to guarantee the player as we saw with some guys last year, or take a chance and get value, but risk losing the player.

While it may not be in line with the NHL (which goes against the CPHL in a way) I think it is a unique to have a blind bidding system in place. You can take calculated risks by seeing who has cap and what they may be after, pay a lot to guarantee your choice target, or could wait until later batches once everyone has hopefully used their cap and find value.

[JiriHrdina]

As someone who has looked at countless ufa emails in the last few years I can tell you there are different strategies executed. Some prioritize one guy and pay big bucks. Others low ball tons of players hunting for bargains while others do a mix. So there is strategy at play. It isn't just luck

[TurdFerguson]

I guess my point is that every player in UFA should go to the team willing and able to pay the most. Grant you siad the league didnt necissarily want that and i'd like to know what the thinking there is. unless some other determining ufa factor emerges, money (aside from tire breaks) should be the sole determining factor, in my mind. Currently, this is not the case and I have not seen a clear reason as to why a player should go to a team when someone else would pay more, if they knew they had to.

I'm intereted in flushing out the ideal without worrying about how it would implemented.

[JiriHrdina]

Because there should be more to it then just having the most cap. Again ufa is a game within a game not a system to reward teams with the most cap

[mbeauchamp76]

I think the free agency process is a fun part of this league but at the same time I don't think it is fair that a player that would be clearly worth say 5 MIL sneak on to a team for 1 MIL because no one else made a bid. With that said I would be in favour of a minimum salary at a set percentage of the grid. The NHL process is usually about a player going to the highest bidder while the CPHL process is about trying to guess what is the lowest amount you could offer a player and still win the contract (that is the fun aspect or the gamble). Having a minimum contract amount would take some of the lottery aspect out, though it could make things slightly more realistic or fair.

[Hanna Sniper]

The thing I hate about the idea being brought up is the idea a team can go down a list of players till eventually they land a player

Player A past my price range, move on to next
Player B past my price range, move on to next
Player C past my price range, move on to next
Player D past my price range, move on to next
Player E past my price range, move on to next
Player F past my price range, move on to next
GM finally lands Player G

It's a safety net to have a system to allow that you can ensure you land a player because you now have X cap - And I understand hows this is appealing to some

What I like about the way it is, is that those that don't have a solid plan can be left quickly with nothing.... A team with 15M can land zero players and now panicking as to what to do now.

I've been on all sides of the process, some times frustrating other times joyish...but it's the whole fun factor that makes this exciting just like NHL free agency day on TSN.

[Hanna Sniper]

One thing about the realism

GM's don't know the current asking price on all the UFA's on the market. I'm positive like our league, there are many GM's after a player signs a lower contract think damn, I would have offered him more... but didn't bother making an offer in the first place

[Caged Great]

The thing is that in it's entirety, the whole contract pricing thing is out of whack, both in terms of re-signing guys to grids (both UFA and RFA) and the contracts that the ufa's are signed to during the free agency period. So random variations like bargain UFA contracts don't really bother me much as having a few cheap contracts makes sense in the scheme of things, like Burrows last contract in the NHL (2 mil per) or Glencross' current one at 2.5. It's not entirely fair for every team, but it doesn't really make that much of a difference either.

[dsavillian]

Originally Posted by Hanna Sniper

One thing about the realism

GM's don't know the current asking price on all the UFA's on the market. I'm positive like our league, there are many GM's after a player signs a lower contract think damn, I would have offered him more... but didn't bother making an offer in the first place

No, but GMs are in constant contact with agents and would have some idea of what the player is looking for during UFA. Also, in the NHL if a team loses out on one player they are chasing - there still could be time to get in on the bidding for another player of the same caliber (if they aren't already in talks from the start)

In our system, there is zero feedback until the bidding is closed. I think that makes for an uninteresting, boring, less strategic and lottery-esque UFA system.

[TurdFerguson]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Because there should be more to it then just having the most cap. Again ufa is a game within a game not a system to reward teams with the most cap

Disagree. Ufa is about cap. Those with it should have advantages and control the market to the extent they can. Again, teams make decisions to set themselves up to be a ufa player or not.

I dont see the game In a game part, clearly others do though. To me is very roughly informed broad stokes but when it comes to the details and pennies, which often matter, I don't see how it's anything more then a guessing game. I prefer something competative that allows teams to beat offers, but I understand that's not for everyone.

If I'm in the minority on this, that's fine. The current system isn't broken I just think it could be better.

[Da_Chief]

Only read the very first post and I don't agree with this at all.

The cost to re-sign RFAs and UFAs is already high enough and you want to increase more salaries? Pretty soon the league will have no money left.

Steals are not unrealistic, look at a guy like Grabovski recently, $3 mill for him is a steal playing behind Backstrom. They happen in the NHL.

A BIG NO from me. Leave it as is.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by dsavillian

No, but GMs are in constant contact with agents and would have some idea of what the player is looking for during UFA. Also, in the NHL if a team loses out on one player they are chasing - there still could be time to get in on the bidding for another player of the same caliber (if they aren't already in talks from the start)

Not entirely true. Most of the quality free agents sign on the first day. So just like in the CPHL teams prioritize who they most want to sign