HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

A recently signed UFA (Theoretical Discussion)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-08-2011, 08:27 AM
  #1
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
A recently signed UFA (Theoretical Discussion)

Theoretically an UFA player going to the team giving him the Highest contract($) Have a negative value. He should clear the waiver as no other teams in the league was willing to give him his contracts. (Unless we have a credible source, we cant be 100% sure a player went for the highest contract. But i think in some case we can safely assume it with a reasonable margin of error. See my Komisarek example for more about this Topic.)

The value of a recently signed UFA can become positive if one or more of these conditions are meet. (Or it could decrease their value even more if the opposite of these conditions happen.)

1 - He exceeded expectation.
2 - The cap increased Significantly.
3 - The teams assumed most of his contract and/or we are near deadline.
4 - The supply/demand for this kind of player around the league did change.
5 - His actual salary is now inferior to his cap hits.

Of course this theory doesn't fully apply to the UFA accepting a contract below his best contract offer.

************************************************** ******

Another problem with UFA signing is that at 27yo, the odds is that the player peak is behind him.

Of course many players have still many good years left in the tank, we can all find example one way or another, but we have to go with the average odds.

Declining players after their UFA contract like Gomez, Drury, Blake, Bouwmeester, Kovalchuk (?), Campbell, Souray, Redden, Komisarek Should not be considered as an unlucky anomaly, but as an expected odds.

Is there a way to know which player are more lickely to decline than other one? I dont know, but if there is one, im not sure all GM are using it.

************************************************** ****

Before including a recently signed UFA in your proposal, please take this theory into consideration.

Example:

lets take Tomas Fleischmann contract this summer. (4 years x 4.500.000$

We can safely assume (even if we cant 100% verify it) he signed with the teams willing to give him the best contract.

So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.

So theoretically players like Fleischmann have a negative value for Proposal purpose. Panthers fans trying to trade him, should take this into consideration.

*******************

Example to figure out if a players went to the highest bidder..

Komisarek stated he wanted to stay in Montreal. Montreal made it public they did made an offer to Komisarek. So we can safely say that Komisarek went to the highest bidder, or close to it. and we can be 100% sure montreal would not had claimed Komisarek on the waiver, the day after he signed).


Last edited by palindrom: 08-08-2011 at 03:34 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:32 AM
  #2
Mansfield
possession obsession
 
Mansfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,944
vCash: 500
tl;dr: op is trying to explain why wade redden is playing in the ahl

Mansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:32 AM
  #3
Celtic Note
Chi Town Bound
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,626
vCash: 500
I am not sure that I really follow your line of thought. Can you clarify or provide an example?

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:43 AM
  #4
TyMy57
Enroth is God
 
TyMy57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 786
vCash: 500
yeah, what you said.

TyMy57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:45 AM
  #5
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundo View Post
I am not sure that I really follow your line of thought. Can you clarify or provide an example?
Well, my English is poor and i did try my best to explain myself clearly.

About an example...lets take Wisniewski contract this summer. (6 years x 5 500 000$

We can safely assume (even if we cant 100% verify it) he signed with the teams willing to give him the best contract.

So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.

So theoretically players like Wisniewski have a negative value for Proposal purpose. Colombus fans trying to trade him, should take this into consideration.

I will edit my main post and include this example.

Does it clarify thing?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:54 AM
  #6
PaulSedin
#lydia2012
 
PaulSedin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Well, my English is poor and i did try my best to explain myself clearly.

About an example...lets take Wisniewski contract this summer. (6 years x 5 500 000$

We can safely assume (even if we cant 100% verify it) he signed with the teams willing to give him the best contract.

So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.

So theoretically players like Wisniewski have a negative value for Proposal purpose. Colombus fans trying to trade him, should take this into consideration.

I will edit my main post and include this example.

Does it clarify thing?
its like columbus signed another comodore

PaulSedin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:59 AM
  #7
Celtic Note
Chi Town Bound
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Well, my English is poor and i did try my best to explain myself clearly.

About an example...lets take Wisniewski contract this summer. (6 years x 5 500 000$

We can safely assume (even if we cant 100% verify it) he signed with the teams willing to give him the best contract.

So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.

So theoretically players like Wisniewski have a negative value for Proposal purpose. Colombus fans trying to trade him, should take this into consideration.

I will edit my main post and include this example.

Does it clarify thing?
It think that helps a bit.

My only real problem with that theory is that we as fans don't know what our GMs are thinking or doing. There is a lot of speculation going on here.

If all your assumptions are correct, then you are probably right. But, thats assuming you know more than you could possibly know unless the GM came out and verified everything, which seems rather unlikely.

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 08:59 AM
  #8
Hennessy
Blank Space
 
Hennessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Östersund, Sweden
Country: United States
Posts: 6,787
vCash: 1100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundo View Post
I am not sure that I really follow your line of thought. Can you clarify or provide an example?
He's asking if there is a method by which you can predict a player's decline.

No, of course. Granted, you can recognize some tell-tale signs, but they aren't universal.

Also, most of the guys on the list in the OP were widely recognized as being bad UFA signings at the time, let alone now. It wasn't a matter of them declining so much as it was a GM overpaying for what was already known to not be worth it. That they didn't play up to the contract isn't surprising. The real shock would have been if they had.

Hennessy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 09:05 AM
  #9
Celtic Note
Chi Town Bound
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennessy View Post
He's asking if there is a method by which you can predict a player's decline.

No, of course. Granted, you can recognize some tell-tale signs, but they aren't universal.

Also, most of the guys on the list in the OP were widely recognized as being bad UFA signings at the time, let alone now. It wasn't a matter of them declining so much as it was a GM overpaying for what was already known to not be worth it. That they didn't play up to the contract isn't surprising. The real shock would have been if they had.
If thats the question, then I offer up a simple response... They can make projections about a players decline and this will likely happen via a collaboration of scouts, coaches and the GM. As for accurately predicting a player's decline, there is no common formula. After all, how many people can predict the future of anything?

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 09:06 AM
  #10
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennessy View Post
He's asking if there is a method by which you can predict a player's decline.

No, of course. Granted, you can recognize some tell-tale signs, but they aren't universal.

Also, most of the guys on the list in the OP were widely recognized as being bad UFA signings at the time, let alone now. It wasn't a matter of them declining so much as it was a GM overpaying for what was already known to not be worth it. That they didn't play up to the contract isn't surprising. The real shock would have been if they had.
I think it goes both way. Some ''widely recognized bad signing'' (Briere, Streit) did turn well. Some ''widely recognized good signing'' did turn bad.

But we cant denies that at the time of the signing each GM thought sincerely they was doing the best to help their team. They didn't thought they was committing to a bad signing.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 09:17 AM
  #11
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.
1) We don't know that none of the other teams was willing to give him that contract.

2) Maybe a team couldn't offer him the contract at that time, but would be willing to do so now.

There are a lot of variables here that we can't possibly know.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 09:24 AM
  #12
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
1) We don't know that none of the other teams was willing to give him that contract.

2) Maybe a team couldn't offer him the contract at that time, but would be willing to do so now.

There are a lot of variables here that we can't possibly know.
Thats why its a Theoretical Discussion.

its not 100% sure, But we can always go with the odds and likeliness of a situation.

What is the odds that Wisniewski did sign to the team giving him the most $ and he would clear the waiver now.

I would say at least 90%. Anyone Agree ? disagree?

Of course clearing the waived doesnt mean he would be not tradable, we have seen many trade involving two negative value player before.

The waiver test, IMO, is a way to determine if a player have positive or negative value.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 10:05 AM
  #13
ChibiPooky
Moderator
Caps/Avs/Bills fan
 
ChibiPooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Fairfax, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,324
vCash: 50
This also assumes that the player signing a UFA contract signed after July 1. Plenty of UFAs signed prior to July 1 and thus none of the other teams had the opportunity to give the same contract or better, despite the player's UFA status.

ChibiPooky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 10:12 AM
  #14
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChibiPooky View Post
This also assumes that the player signing a UFA contract signed after July 1. Plenty of UFAs signed prior to July 1 and thus none of the other teams had the opportunity to give the same contract or better, despite the player's UFA status.
Technically, There is none UFA prior 1st july.

So yes, i dont mean potential UFA re-signing with their teams, or seeing their Negotiating right traded and then sign before 1st july.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 12:14 PM
  #15
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,343
vCash: 50
2 big assumptions that I don't agree with.

1) Players take the highest value contract. There are many things that go into where a player signs. Maybe they want short term. Maybe they want long term. Maybe they want the bulk of the money now. Maybe they want to sign with a team on the upswing. Maybe they only want to live in big cities. Maybe they like to live more anonymously. All things that would mean the contract could be palatable for a GM if given a chance.

2) That the supply/demand did not change. I think it's very likely that the supply will have changed. If the player signs early in July, then the other GMs might have dropped out because they felt "well if the salary is going this high, I'll just go on to option b." In FA period there's a lot of options. But with almost any amount of time later, then the supply would have changed. More guys would have signed.

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 12:19 PM
  #16
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Well, my English is poor and i did try my best to explain myself clearly.

About an example...lets take Wisniewski contract this summer. (6 years x 5 500 000$

We can safely assume (even if we cant 100% verify it) he signed with the teams willing to give him the best contract.

So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.

So theoretically players like Wisniewski have a negative value for Proposal purpose. Colombus fans trying to trade him, should take this into consideration.

I will edit my main post and include this example.

Does it clarify thing?
This specific example doesn't quite work very well, tho, as Wisniewski was signed before free agency started.

Also, you're assuming that everybody else who was looking for a player like him found one. That's not always the case.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 12:21 PM
  #17
Blane Youngblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
@OP - I think its safe to say you are correct on the day the contract is signed if you assume that the player signed the best contract offered.

The day after a contract is signed things can change, maybe another team that wanted him had one of their top players (here's looking at you EJ) hurt themselves in a golf cart accident suddenly requiring them to find a replacement. This may help increase a recently signed UFAs value.

Team's usually don't trade recently signed UFAs because there's a reason the UFA signed there and it would be kind of poor for the team to ship him out right away.

Blane Youngblood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:04 PM
  #18
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
This specific example doesn't quite work very well, tho, as Wisniewski was signed before free agency started.

Also, you're assuming that everybody else who was looking for a player like him found one. That's not always the case.
Your right, i forgot that Colombus trade for his right, i did modify it by using Fleischmann instead.

My mistake.


Last edited by palindrom: 08-08-2011 at 01:11 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:07 PM
  #19
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blane Youngblood View Post
@OP - I think its safe to say you are correct on the day the contract is signed if you assume that the player signed the best contract offered.

The day after a contract is signed things can change, maybe another team that wanted him had one of their top players (here's looking at you EJ) hurt themselves in a golf cart accident suddenly requiring them to find a replacement. This may help increase a recently signed UFAs value.

Team's usually don't trade recently signed UFAs because there's a reason the UFA signed there and it would be kind of poor for the team to ship him out right away.
Or course many factor change, but it can change both way.
And even if we suppose that market change, it would probably be by small step and not by a big swing. So the goal is not to assume that an ex UFA have an exact negative value, but Somewhere around a low to negative.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:18 PM
  #20
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
2 big assumptions that I don't agree with.

1) Players take the highest value contract. There are many things that go into where a player signs. Maybe they want short term. Maybe they want long term. Maybe they want the bulk of the money now. Maybe they want to sign with a team on the upswing. Maybe they only want to live in big cities. Maybe they like to live more anonymously. All things that would mean the contract could be palatable for a GM if given a chance.

2) That the supply/demand did not change. I think it's very likely that the supply will have changed. If the player signs early in July, then the other GMs might have dropped out because they felt "well if the salary is going this high, I'll just go on to option b." In FA period there's a lot of options. But with almost any amount of time later, then the supply would have changed. More guys would have signed.
1 - i agree we cant be 100% sure even if some other are made public.
But i think in some case we can safely assume with a reasonable margin of error that the player did in fact chose the best offer.

2 - you didn't read my paragraph about the reason the reason an recent UFA value could change, i specifically stated your point about Supply and demand.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:22 PM
  #21
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Thats why its a Theoretical Discussion.

its not 100% sure, But we can always go with the odds and likeliness of a situation.

What is the odds that Wisniewski did sign to the team giving him the most $ and he would clear the waiver now.

I would say at least 90%. Anyone Agree ? disagree?

Of course clearing the waived doesnt mean he would be not tradable, we have seen many trade involving two negative value player before.

The waiver test, IMO, is a way to determine if a player have positive or negative value.
There are just too many moving parts to be able to say with 90% certainty. There are 29 unique scenarios involved, multiplied by so many variables involving the player's ability to "play up" to his contract.

As a very general rule, yes it is fair to say a player has negative value if he can't pass waivers.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:33 PM
  #22
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
There are just too many moving parts to be able to say with 90% certainty. There are 29 unique scenarios involved, multiplied by so many variables involving the player's ability to "play up" to his contract.

As a very general rule, yes it is fair to say a player has negative value if he can't pass waivers.
I changed the Wisniewski example for Fleischmann. As someone mentioned, this example was not valid, Wisniewski never ever been UFA.

We have to go with the odds, What is more likely:

- Fleischmann would clear the waiver, or have a really minimal value

or

- Fleischmann would bring a good return if Florida tried to trade him to the highest bidder.

I think it is safe to presume the first option is right, with a reasonable margin or error. If there is a team that much interested to Fleichmann, enought to be willing to give asset to acquire him, why did the team didnt outbid Florida to sign Fleischmann?

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:38 PM
  #23
Hennessy
Blank Space
 
Hennessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Östersund, Sweden
Country: United States
Posts: 6,787
vCash: 1100
We don't know that Flash would clear waivers. For all we know, 8 other teams were interested at around that price, but he chose to go elsewhere. $4.5 is a lot to pay for him, which leads me to believe there was a bidding war between at least two teams.

Florida had (has) a lot of cap room and needed some talent after selling the farm last season. Colorado was almost certainly interested in retaining him, and had (have) plenty of cap space, themselves.

Having said that, I doubt anyone else offered anything near that length and that price for him. Maybe similar dollars for 2 years, or 4 years at $3M, but there's a lot of risk tied into locking him up that long and at that amount. Not only is he coming off a very serious and scary injury, but he doesn't really have the resumé to command that sort of payday, despite how good he has looked.

But just as important as contract cost to this discussion is what teams have done since the signing period. A team that would have gladly spent $4.5M on Flash in the first week of July has probably since gone on to seek help elsewhere, making such an acquisition redundant. It becomes a question of not only if Flash would be worth the contract, but if he'd also be worth the cost of moving guys around, potentially having to lose a trade just to get rid of a guy so you could fit him in.

At any rate, just as there are too many variables to predict if a player will have negative value in terms of his performance against his contract, there are also too many variables to state that a guy's value automatically dips once he's signed. It's why there are still humans as GMs (though maybe New York should look into hiring a machine to replace Sather).

Hennessy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:42 PM
  #24
DG
Registered User
 
DG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Well, my English is poor and i did try my best to explain myself clearly.

About an example...lets take Wisniewski contract this summer. (6 years x 5 500 000$

We can safely assume (even if we cant 100% verify it) he signed with the teams willing to give him the best contract.

So what if he was put on waiver today ? He would clear it as none of the 29 other teams in the league was willing to give him this contract.

So theoretically players like Wisniewski have a negative value for Proposal purpose. Colombus fans trying to trade him, should take this into consideration.

I will edit my main post and include this example.

Does it clarify thing?
Yes, but I don't agree. If Brad Richards was put on waivers, he'd be taken in a second.

DG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2011, 01:43 PM
  #25
Finnish your Czech
Jermain Defriend
 
Finnish your Czech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Finland
Posts: 44,284
vCash: 50
Yes, theoretically, if a player signs with the highest contract, that only the team that signed him offered, and was subsequently put on waivers, he would not be claimed.

However, he may not have negative trade value because there may be other teams who were interested in him, but just couldn't fit in his cap hit, but if they make a trade for him, they can also send salary back the other way.

for example, If Brad Richards signs with Toronto for 1 year @ 12.5million per year (ie, he only cared about the money, and wanted a 1 year term), and they were the only team willing to sign him to that contract. But Toronto then put him on waivers, theoretically, no one would claim him, because no one wanted to sign him for that much, but say Montreal was interested in him, but couldn't afford that contract, they could move Gomez + Eller + 1st for him, and they'd be able to fit him under the cap, so he would have trade value.

I think that's what the OP was asking.

Finnish your Czech is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.