Extension cost discussion

[GypsieDeathBringer]

Looking back at our league's champs no team has won because of their hometown draft picks.  The Ducks teams won because of their own great drafting and smart signings.  The Blues/Shooter won because he is awesome at everything and caught on before everyone else that prospect extensions were the best value.  The Coyotes/Slack will continue to be great because they must have some kind of sports almanac from the future that told them who the next NHL superstars were going to be.

There has been no one way to win.  You just gotta be a good GM and put it all together.

Having said that I am actually in support of removing the 3 home team keepers and expanding our draft.  But, I have a bridge idea that maybe lets us keep the hometown feel while getting at my hatred towards the 5 year prospect extension.

What if we:
1. Remove the 3 keeper picks. 
2. Expand our normal draft (drafting is the funnest part). 
3. Then reduce prospect extensions to 3 years, but if the prospect is on your NHL team you can sign them to 5.  That way it gives an incentive to keep players from your NHL team while also not making you beholden to the terrible choices of NHL GMs.
4. Could also do what Snug mentioned and give a discount on signing players on your NHL team.

[SlackJack]

One way to mitigate GM's unhappy with their keepers is to allow more franchise switching.

[SlackJack]

Call me a masochist, but, I still like the Keepers and wouldn't support changing the rules on that.

As Arizona it hasn't been super fun with their picks and forfiture either but I like that we are invested in our franchises for better or worse. That said would you be open to 2 Keepers instead of 3?

[Rob]

Call me a masochist, but, I still like the Keepers and wouldn't support changing the rules on that. 

[snugerud]

Someone mentioned home team draft. As the Ottawa Senators I think that has hurt my team in past seasons. They stink at drafting and now they will have to forfeit a future 1st because they failed to notify Vegas of Dadonov's no trade list.

I'm hoping the keep the first this year and then will consider finally changing franchises.

I get the principle of having a tie to the franchise, but it does create at least some minor disparity

I would be in favor of scrapping the team picks as well in favor of 1 or 2 additional picks in a rookie draft. 
If you want to keep a home town feel maybe look at a hometown discount on fielding roster players that play on the real life nhl team (10-15%) discount??

[jimw]

Someone mentioned home team draft. As the Ottawa Senators I think that has hurt my team in past seasons. They stink at drafting and now they will have to forfeit a future 1st because they failed to notify Vegas of Dadonov's no trade list.

I'm hoping the keep the first this year and then will consider finally changing franchises.

I get the principle of having a tie to the franchise, but it does create at least some minor disparity

[ldsjayhawk]

Wow! This discussion has really morphed.  It's always good to have a lively discussion.  I'll add my $.02 in to the discussion:

$25K per point extension: 
Personally, I like the ease of this calculation and I believe that it is pretty close to an accurate calculation.  I support keeping this.

Reduced contract length:
I have no objection to this.  I always like to see a healthy FA market.

Cash trading cap
I support a limit that prevents this too:

but I like the idea of forcing these rebuild trades around the league instead of just one or two front runners hosing  down the entire roster.

Disparity
I don't like tanking.  I support requiring teams field an active roster. 

I would pair this proposal with an initiative that all teams field an active roster of 90% regular NHL players.

Trading
I do have to say that increasing the options in FA, does decrease the amount of trading, however, that could be offset by having more NHL players on rosters.  I believe more parity would increase the trade market as more teams would be competitive and in the running.

If you ever wanted to reduce the dependence on the NHL draft and increase the dependence upon our own draft, I believe that would also benefit trading.

[SlackJack]

some of the things that makes the disparity in the league is allowing teams to sell everything and not being able to field a team for a few years and the fact that some teams are getting top prospects from their home team drafts while others home teams are trading there picks. rob how much does the home team draft hurt you?

Dude has a point.

[Rob]

rob how much does the home team draft hurt you?

LOL - don't get me started!

[jmtrops]

my point being be clear as to what are the problems we want to improve or fix for the benefit for the league or we just want to make changes to improve what is a problem for a few managers. for me we should look at what is the biggest thing happening in the league that is not good for the league and see what can be done about that.

some of the things that makes the disparity in the league is allowing teams to sell everything and not being able to field a team for a few years and the fact that some teams are getting top prospects from their home team drafts while others home teams are trading there picks. rob how much does the home team draft hurt you?

I was in a baseball league before that the rule was you could only have 6 guys on your roster at any given time that you resigned. once you had 6 guys you have resigned you could not resign anymore unless you dropped or traded 1 of those six. it looks like we are kind of heading in that dirrection where we only resign our top producers and the rest we get cheaper in FA. that will also help kill trade values for those guys because they are not worth extending. right now I can get half of my d men for 1m a year being around 2ppg but a dman around 2.5-3ppg is going to cost 6m + to resign. same for the 2-3 ppg forwards.