TRADE TEMPLATE
NEW TEAM:
PLAYER > CONTRACT/REWORKED > RFA/UFA STATUS
IF Prior Team paying part of player Contract post as follows
PRIOR TEAM
PLAYER > CONTRACT PAYMENT
IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
+2
ericdm70
Xezus
6 posters
Page 1 of 1
Rule Change?
IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Current rule reads as follows:
Cap Exception for Injured Reserve: If a player has a long-term injury and is out for the remaining of the season, his cap hit is still counted; however, the team is permitted to replace him with one player whose salary is equal to or less than that of the injured player.
The proposed change would be to keep the exception/exemption but allow the team to do whatever they want with the extra cash, thus making the longterm IR guy essentially unpaid for the remainder of the year.
Vote it up!
and once again post that you voted. (we got 12 votes last time so i am glad everyone is active and ready to start next season!)
Cap Exception for Injured Reserve: If a player has a long-term injury and is out for the remaining of the season, his cap hit is still counted; however, the team is permitted to replace him with one player whose salary is equal to or less than that of the injured player.
The proposed change would be to keep the exception/exemption but allow the team to do whatever they want with the extra cash, thus making the longterm IR guy essentially unpaid for the remainder of the year.
Vote it up!
and once again post that you voted. (we got 12 votes last time so i am glad everyone is active and ready to start next season!)
Xezus- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
I'm undecided on this rule.
If someone feels strongly about why we need to change the rule, i'd love to hear it so i don't vote prematurely
If someone feels strongly about why we need to change the rule, i'd love to hear it so i don't vote prematurely
_________________
DmanofGod1- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Voted.
Changing this rule on it's own amounts to a mulligan - the player and his cap hit are completely erased (since the long-term IR is only available if a player is out for the season). By allowing multiple signings to fill the void, it's as though the IR player doesn't exist for that year. That's too broad an application in my opinion - there should be some downside to having a player get injured. You lost one player, he should be replaced with one player. No, you won't necessarily find that one replacement in FA - neither do NHL teams. I don't think we should have the flexibility to sign 5 FAs either...
Here's an example...
St. Louis' Drew Doughty ($7M) suffers a long-term injury in game 1, as does Akron's Jordan Eberle ($2M). Both players are out for the year. Neither player can be 'replaced' by a single player available on FA/waivers but St. Louis can now sign $5M more in FAs than Akron? That's actually a pretty solid advantage based on the rule change.
Changing this rule on it's own amounts to a mulligan - the player and his cap hit are completely erased (since the long-term IR is only available if a player is out for the season). By allowing multiple signings to fill the void, it's as though the IR player doesn't exist for that year. That's too broad an application in my opinion - there should be some downside to having a player get injured. You lost one player, he should be replaced with one player. No, you won't necessarily find that one replacement in FA - neither do NHL teams. I don't think we should have the flexibility to sign 5 FAs either...
Here's an example...
St. Louis' Drew Doughty ($7M) suffers a long-term injury in game 1, as does Akron's Jordan Eberle ($2M). Both players are out for the year. Neither player can be 'replaced' by a single player available on FA/waivers but St. Louis can now sign $5M more in FAs than Akron? That's actually a pretty solid advantage based on the rule change.
Guest- Guest
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
point well made
I'll wait to see if anyone else makes a rebuttal within 24 hours but he makes a very valid point
I'll wait to see if anyone else makes a rebuttal within 24 hours but he makes a very valid point
_________________
DmanofGod1- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Is there some middle ground where we can allow for more freedom of cash while still maintaining a restriction? I just didn't want to make it too complicated. Something like for every 2.5 mil on the injured contract you can sign an extra FA or something but trading would still be allowed. I also just thought I don't want to new 10 mil in relief used to purchase future picks and such. Its supposed to help recover your team while you lost an important player
Xezus- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
I don't think you should be able to do anything with the money except sign Free Agents. If Crosby breaks his arm with a month left, I should not get $10 to quickly go and buy a bunch of picks/prospects.
ericdm70- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
On a small aside, which kind of relates to this poll in terms of cap relief, are we/can we implement the 2 period pay system in place for the other sports?
_________________
nostratimus- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
ericdm70 wrote:I don't think you should be able to do anything with the money except sign Free Agents. If Crosby breaks his arm with a month left, I should not get $10 to quickly go and buy a bunch of picks/prospects.
trading for prospects/picks = NO
FA = yes
trading for another player to upgrade your team = ? Makes sense I guess if you're using the cap relief to replace the injured player. What could get complicated is if picks/prospects are added to the return. Another thing to consider is if your return is a player on a multi-year deal...technically, you're using more than the 1-year cap relief than its intention. So, I guess it's easier to just keep it to FA signing.
_________________
nostratimus- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
I think it's difficult to determine 'how' the money is used at this point and suggesting it's 'only' for FA signings is going to be more work than it's worth. It's a 'clunky' rule given the roster flexibility we already have...
If I have 23 roster spots used and say $3M in cap room when a long-term injury occurs to a $5M player, how can someone know if I'm signing a FA for $0.5M to replace the injured player or fill one of my 7 openings? The expectation is almost that the owner is honest, as they were last year, and points out that the cap space allowed multiple signings.
I don't think the rule should limit the ability of an owner to find an equal player through a trade.
If I have 23 roster spots used and say $3M in cap room when a long-term injury occurs to a $5M player, how can someone know if I'm signing a FA for $0.5M to replace the injured player or fill one of my 7 openings? The expectation is almost that the owner is honest, as they were last year, and points out that the cap space allowed multiple signings.
I don't think the rule should limit the ability of an owner to find an equal player through a trade.
Guest- Guest
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
There is a point why to vote to this rule, this change of the rule is the same what is in real nhl, i thought that we want the most possible simulation of real nhl, definitelly i dont agree with point with doughty and eberle above, like in real nhl you can assume that more expensive player is more valueble to a team, thats how it bigger for a team, realize crosby or dorsett? I think tht pitsbourgh when crosby is injured sends all rookies down and buy the most veterans that they are able to get by freed money to compete, but if dorsett is injured nyr just call someone from mirror
Guest- Guest
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
goro wrote:There is a point why to vote to this rule, this change of the rule is the same what is in real nhl, i thought that we want the most possible simulation of real nhl, definitelly i dont agree with point with doughty and eberle above, like in real nhl you can assume that more expensive player is more valueble to a team, thats how it bigger for a team, realize crosby or dorsett? I think tht pitsbourgh when crosby is injured sends all rookies down and buy the most veterans that they are able to get by freed money to compete, but if dorsett is injured nyr just call someone from mirror
But if Crosby is hurt, they will sign 1-2 players Max, not have the ability to sign 5-7 cheap free agents and buy a bunch of picks.
ericdm70- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Here also you dont buy 5-7 players you dont have roster space
Guest- Guest
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Voted
Good points were made. Seeing the injured player as a lottery gift that you can do whatever you want with seems a bit much
Good points were made. Seeing the injured player as a lottery gift that you can do whatever you want with seems a bit much
_________________
DmanofGod1- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Integrity wrote:how do I apply for a job at McDonald's ?
Um, dont think you are qualified.
ericdm70- Premium Member
Re: IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
Alrighty looks like this rule will not pass as of now.
If anyone is really adamant about revising this part of the rules please draft another idea for voting, but for now, we will continue with the current rule system.
If anyone is really adamant about revising this part of the rules please draft another idea for voting, but for now, we will continue with the current rule system.
Xezus- Premium Member
Similar topics
» Tavares to ir exception
» Dorsett ir exception
» Arenas exception for Philly?
» Chris Pronger IR Cap Exception
» Sheldon Souray IR Cap Exception
» Dorsett ir exception
» Arenas exception for Philly?
» Chris Pronger IR Cap Exception
» Sheldon Souray IR Cap Exception
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum