View Single Post
07-14-2012, 01:44 AM
Agent 0091
Quik's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Unknown
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,889
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
A 5 year ELC will be terrible for elite players who can get into the league at 18 but are good for prospects who need time to develop. I always thought a 4 year ELC made some sense but maybe tweak the bonus structure to benefit time in the NHL.
Or maybe bring back some kind of mutual option where the 4th year of the ELC would be optional, in the sense that if the player declines it, they delay their UFA clock by one more year and there's a cap of $xx (7.5% of the cap?). Otherwise they'd play out the full 4 years of their ELC and go by the NHL's guidelines on UFA status. (Maybe push UFA status back by 2 years? 1 may not be enough of a deterrent since players are usually compensated well enough after their ECLs are up anyways).

I've always liked the MLB's way of enforcing low-service players having no control on their contract for the first couple years, in that you can't have a hold out because if you do, the team can set your salary. Obviously, I don't think it would work considering the difference in player handling and the fact that UFA is decided solely on service time, something that the PA won't give in on, but something similar would be nice. Example, if an RFA doesn't sign their QO and remains unsigned at the start of camp, the team can re-sign them at a minimum of 110% their previous salary, or what they deem to be fair. Hiccups in that plan are obvious (under-performance, players walking, etc.), just another scenario I thought up and figured I'd share lol.

Quik is offline   Reply With Quote