View Single Post
01-16-2013, 08:08 PM
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 15,719
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by dbridge92 View Post
Maybe there should be something with age too though? I signed Jagr, Malhotra, and Jovanovski to 1 year deals because I have no idea if they'll be getting worse next year (if they don't retire). Then a guy like Kyle Wellwood was signed purely for depth needs, but I don't want him locked into my team for more than one year. I think ruling out one year deals for a certain age and overall could be beneficial, but I don't like the idea of no one year deals in general.
Yeah, I mean there's no cap penalty if they retire, and I guess the argument would be that you need to take into account the possibility they might decline when gauging the value of the two year offer. Remember, everyone would be bound to it, so everyone would face the same concern.

As for guys like Wellwood, if you're signing them to less than 900k, it isn't going to have a big impact on your cap anyway--since there are likely some AHLers in your system already near that level, so you're basically just bumping someone else down the contract list--below whatever cutoff EA actually uses.

(I did the math last night. I could not figure out where the EA number came from--it wasn't my 23 largest contracts, which was always what I thought.)

EDIT: or an even simpler system: only allow 2 year offers during the first window. Allow one year offers beginning on the second window? This way, GMs have to make choices about who they are willing to commit money to for 2 years.

Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 01-16-2013 at 08:13 PM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote