|
Ideas
Aug 5, 2008 22:28:20 GMT -5
Post by james on Aug 5, 2008 22:28:20 GMT -5
I've been thinking about a couple ideas. Just throwing them out there...
1. Draft pick rule- Teams may not trade away a 1st round draft pick unless it is in the upcoming draft class.
2. Staggering Drafts- Not sure how this would be implemented, but it would keep things flowing. The rule would essentially create an "Odds & Evens" draft format.
This means that after the NHL draft, the odd number drafted players would be available for selection. After the first of two half-year seasons of IHL, the even numbered players would be drafted. 3. "Franchise Player" tags. This would allow for longer deals. Each GM is able to designate one player as their "Franchise Player". He is able to be signed for about 25% less than market value and for a longer term. The catch is he has a 'no trade' clause.
Just some things I thought of. Cheers all.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 10:40:22 GMT -5
Post by darren on Aug 6, 2008 10:40:22 GMT -5
The first idea I don't mind, although I would say that only draft picks in the next two years can be traded. So right now we could only deal 2009 and 2010 picks.
Don't see the point of the second idea and I don't like anyone having a franchise player tag, not every team has a Crosby or Ovechkin that they never want to deal.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 12:06:22 GMT -5
Post by jets on Aug 6, 2008 12:06:22 GMT -5
Seeing as we play 2 seasons for every 1 NHL season I don't see the need to do two separate drafts. Plus the way the seasons will end the NHL draft won't have happened so people will be having to do all their own scouting and such. Makes it alot tougher.
I don't like the franchise tag either. It's not like it's hard to keep FAs as the system is now. This would just allow the deep teams to keep even more talent which I don't think would be a good thing.
As for the trading 1sts rule, I don't care for that either. For some teams, especially expansion teams and bottom feeders, in alot of cases those 1st rounders are the best assets you have. Just look at me this year. I was able to deal my 1st in 09 for some great talent that will help me now. I don't think teams should be limited like that.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 12:26:16 GMT -5
Post by jonmilley on Aug 6, 2008 12:26:16 GMT -5
Some of these are alright. The staggered draft idea is a good one - do the evens in the summertime when the nhl draft happens, and the odds at the christmas break. The the most fun part of the season is the draft (for those with more than one 2nd round pick, anyway <cough>), why not do it twice?
The not trading away draft picks past the current season is probably a good idea. Sure, Winnipeg might have had some success with it - but look at Vancouver. That team doesn't pick in the first round again until 2013 and we need to find a GM for it? Right. Two teams have 15 of a possible 20 picks in the first round of '09, and 7 teams have already dealt away their '10 picks. You could definitely argue that GM's need to be protected from themselves.
Franchise players...the longer contracts I'm okay with, the lower salaries...not so much.
Anyway, decent ideas. Nice to see somebody new making a contribution, anyway.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 12:38:24 GMT -5
Post by nathan on Aug 6, 2008 12:38:24 GMT -5
I like the idea of only being able to deal picks in the next 2 drafts. Restricting it to only 1 year might get a little annoying when people are running low on trading assets or need a pick to add to get a deal done. Something has to change at this point because there are a handful of teams with next to no future after dealing multiple 1sts to Helsinki, most likely for some scrub who's probably left as a UFA at this point. Most likely those will end up being the teams with revolving GMs.
Not a big fan of the other ideas though.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 17:11:45 GMT -5
Post by habslive on Aug 6, 2008 17:11:45 GMT -5
The first idea I don't mind, although I would say that only draft picks in the next two years can be traded. So right now we could only deal 2009 and 2010 picks. Don't see the point of the second idea and I don't like anyone having a franchise player tag, not every team has a Crosby or Ovechkin that they never want to deal. Maybe there could be some kind of reward for not using a Franchise Tag... Maybe all the teams who don't use one can get supplementary draft picks (since there are always way more prospects than we draft). I do kind of like that idea. Adds strategy to running a team.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 18:13:44 GMT -5
Post by darren on Aug 6, 2008 18:13:44 GMT -5
I don't want things to get super complicated, let's try to keep everything as simple as possible. As for supplementary draft picks, I don't think we'll do that - many of the undrafted rookies who started to come out in our league were guys from years where we had 16 teams and only 5 rounds. Now that we have 20 teams and 7 rounds, that covers 60 more picks.
The restriction on trading picks beyond 2 years looks like it will go through. That's enough for now I think.
|
|
|
Ideas
Aug 6, 2008 18:15:38 GMT -5
Post by darren on Aug 6, 2008 18:15:38 GMT -5
Also, our entry draft works fine as is. We have the time frame set where we start right after the real draft and sure it takes a while to get it done, but that's fine. We need to take up all the time we can, our summer offseason is long. The winter offseason is much shorter, like 3-4 weeks.
|
|