2016 Off-Season Draft Dates & MAJOR RULE CHANGES 2017

[Florida Panthers]

Hey guys now that we are in the off-season, Dallas Stars and myself have created the schedule for the off-season. We have also made some MAJOR rule changes that will not be taking effect until the beginning of the 2016-2017 season.


Entry Draft Date - The 2016 OGSHL Draft will begin on Saturday, June 25th. This is one day AFTER the 1st round in the real life NHL draft, which can help GMs choose a certain player. The Entry Draft should end by July 12th.

Free Agent Draft Date - The 2016 OGSHL Free Agent Draft will begin on Saturday, July 30th. and will last approximately until August 12-14th





Major Rule Changes

Re-signing Contracts - From now on teams will not be able to re-sign their players until the off-season. This includes both UFAs and RFAs. This will be further explained in the next rule.

Teams can be 10% over the cap 2 weeks prior to the trade deadline. - Just like the NHL, you can now be 10% over the cap within 2 weeks of the trade deadline. For example if the cap is 70 million, you are now allowed to trade for players that bring you to $77 million. This allows teams more flexibility when dealing at the deadline in order to perhaps grab that player you desperately need in order to make a cup run, however your committed salary for the following season CANNOT be higher than the following years cap space.

For example if you trade for Ryan Getzlaf on a 1 year deal at 10 million and it brings you to 77 million it is allowed.
However, if you trade for Ryan Getzlaf on a 2 year deal at 10 million and it brings you to 77 million BOTH this year and the following season, the trade will not be put through.

Compliance Buy-Outs only once every THREE years - We are now changing the way the compliance buy-out system works after this season. You will only be allowed to use a compliance buy-out on a player ONCE every THREE seasons. This will be tracked in a google doc that the league can access as well. This will prevent teams from using poor management, but will allow them to use it when desperatelt needed. However, this rule will not take effect for new GMs as they will be given a free compliance buy-out when they take over a new team. For example if a team uses their buyout in 2017, the next time they can use their buyout isn't until 2020. We join these leagues primarily to have fun and be under somewhat realism that is of the NHL with salary. However, we want this to be a fun league at the same time. Buying out ONE player once every 3 years I believe is a good balance that brings both competitiveness and FUN to the league. New GMs will receive 1 free buyout when they join and can opt to use their 3 year buyout in the same season.

Once again, if anyone has any questions, uncertainty, or suggestions please post below or let Dallas Stars or myself know.

[Columbus Blue Jackets]

[Philadelphia Flyers]

Interesting changes. I thought the 10% over-age was offseason only and not after the deadline but I will trust you are correct on that. Either way so long as we are all on the same footing it will make the deadline more interesting for sure. I take it the $ over have no impact on next season's cap for a team?

I am glad to see movement on the buyouts. I'd still like it be even tougher than one every 2 years but I am glad to see it being phased out. My reasoning is that eventually every player becomes buyout worthy so it takes away some of the longer term planning in my view. Even a contract like Crosby/Towes/Kane likely becomes albatross in year 7-9 or whatever so it really allows teams to get out from under them after they enjoyed the market or under market rate for the prime years.

[Deleted]

Do I just submit a compliance buyout via email? I have a player in mind already.

[Florida Panthers]

Jun 14, 2016 16:39:38 GMT -5 @canucksgm said:

Do I just submit a compliance buyout via email? I have a player in mind already.

You can either post them in the Free Agent Thread or PM it to me or Dallas Stars

[Deleted]

The new compliance buy out rule definitely complicates things for me. Was going to buy out Girardi this year and Datsyuk next year, but now I'm going to have to pump the breaks on that one. Probably going to need to hold on to Girardi this season now so that way I'm not strapped to Datsyuk's contract next season.

Oh the intrigue!

[Florida Panthers]

Jun 14, 2016 21:55:46 GMT -5 @nashvillepredators said:

The new compliance buy out rule definitely complicates things for me. Was going to buy out Girardi this year and Datsyuk next year, but now I'm going to have to pump the breaks on that one. Probably going to need to hold on to Girardi this season now so that way I'm not strapped to Datsyuk's contract next season.

Oh the intrigue!

You can use your buy-out this year, the rule does not take effect until NEXT season.. So you can buy somebody out this year and next year because the rule isn't taking effect yet.

[Andre]

We have the 10% increase rule before the deadline in the VHL as well and it is a bitch to manage. There are a ton of loopholes.

What if I have 7 million in cap space and I trade for Getzlaf who has 6.5 million left on the last year of his deal, but has an NHL extension of 9 million per year for the following year... is that permitted? Technically I am not committing more then the 7 million I have because technically, Getzlaf is not signed for next year, but I will obviously sign that extension. Would I be prevented from trading for him, or from signing him after I have traded for him.

Are we considering players on the last year of their deals, but who have already signed their NHL extensions (IE Anze Kopitar from January 16 onwards) as counting towards next year's salary commitments? Let's say he is on my roster and I am trying to figure out what my salary commitment for next year is to see if I can acquire a player. Sure he counts for 6.8 million against my cap this year, but he'll make 10 million next year and there is no way I would chose not to re-sign Kopitar. Would he then count as 10 million in salary committed for me for the following year with regards to this temporary cap increase?

Also, while limiting the compliance buyouts to once every two seasons is an improvement it is still absurdly frequent. This is a cap league where the cap is designed to make life hard on GMs and force them to break up winning rosters. Why are we permitting GMs to have a get out of jail free card every two years? I thought that we were lining up to offer it only to GMs in their first off-season to assist with erasing errors that were not of their own making?

Also, did we ever get around to writing a rule for how much salary can be buried in the minors? I know there was some discussion on that, but I don't recall ever seeing an official rule being announced.

[Florida Panthers]

Jun 14, 2016 22:09:09 GMT -5 Andre said:

We have the 10% increase rule before the deadline in the VHL as well and it is a bitch to manage. There are a ton of loopholes.

What if I have 7 million in cap space and I trade for Getzlaf who has 6.5 million left on the last year of his deal, but has an NHL extension of 9 million per year for the following year... is that permitted? Technically I am not committing more then the 7 million I have because technically, Getzlaf is not signed for next year, but I will obviously sign that extension. Would I be prevented from trading for him, or from signing him after I have traded for him.

Are we considering players on the last year of their deals, but who have already signed their NHL extensions (IE Anze Kopitar from January 16 onwards) as counting towards next year's salary commitments? Let's say he is on my roster and I am trying to figure out what my salary commitment for next year is to see if I can acquire a player. Sure he counts for 6.8 million against my cap this year, but he'll make 10 million next year and there is no way I would chose not to re-sign Kopitar. Would he then count as 10 million in salary committed for me for the following year with regards to this temporary cap increase?

Also, while limiting the compliance buyouts to once every two seasons is an improvement it is still absurdly frequent. This is a cap league where the cap is designed to make life hard on GMs and force them to break up winning rosters. Why are we permitting GMs to have a get out of jail free card every two years? I thought that we were lining up to offer it only to GMs in their first off-season to assist with erasing errors that were not of their own making?

Also, did we ever get around to writing a rule for how much salary can be buried in the minors? I know there was some discussion on that, but I don't recall ever seeing an official rule being announced.

Nobody making 2million or more can be in the AHL that has been the rule for awhile now.

There is a reason we aren't allowing re-signs until the off-season for the 10% increase purpose. The 10% will increase trade activity which is what we all join these leagues for.

While you make a fair point about it being a get out of jail free card, once every two years is completely acceptable given the fact that there is no way for people to create their own contracts here. This may be revisited next season eventually creating it to once every 3 years, but for now it will remain at two as we begin to phase out of the early stages of the league.

We also still have plenty of time to add more rules between now and next season. One of the ideas we are tinkering with now is to address the point you made about trading at the deadline. We are going to make it that all teams must be cap compliant before the Free Agent Draft, you will not be able to sign players and be ANY amount over the salary cap and then trade them away. We will be doing away with the ability to trade for the "rights" of a UFA as these trades will need to be done at the deadline.


I hope all of that clears things up ! Feel free to add your opinion, it is nice to hear others thoughts than Kyle and myself.

[Andre]

Jun 14, 2016 22:15:46 GMT -5 Florida Panthers said:

There is a reason we aren't allowing re-signs until the off-season for the 10% increase purpose. The 10% will increase trade activity which is what we all join these leagues for.

So if I understand this right, because the above answer did not address either of the scenarios I presented directly, you are saying that no player with only one year left on their contract, regardless of what their NHL re-sign salary is and regardless of how obvious it is that the GM will indeed use one of their re-signs on said player, they WILL NOT count towards salary committed to next season for the purpose of determining whether or not a trade can go through.

So if this were to have happened this past season, Brendan Gallagher who has a one year contract worth 685k would not be counted in the total committed salary for next season for my team, despite the fact that I know (and everyone should assume) that I will be re-signing him as soon as I am able to a deal that will in fact pay him 3.75 million next season. I am purposefully subtracting what I know to be a 3.75 million commitment from an important calculation that determines whether or not I am compliant with a rule.

I don't understand the logic of using next year's committed cap to determine one thing (will a trade pushing a team above the salary cap into the 10% buffer zone be acceptable), while purposefully shrouding what next year's committed cap will actually be (by ensuring that no re-signs may be declared until the offseason). If anything, teams should be FORCED to declare their re-signs BEFORE being permitted to enter the 10% zone so that the admins can accurately tell whether or not they are surpassing their cap commitments for next season.

[Philadelphia Flyers]

Jun 14, 2016 22:15:46 GMT -5 Florida Panthers said:

Nobody making 2million or more can be in the AHL that has been the rule for awhile 

While you make a fair point about it being a get out of jail free card, once every two years is completely acceptable given the fact that there is no way for people to create their own contracts here. This may be revisited next season eventually creating it to once every 3 years, but for now it will remain at two as we begin to phase out of the early stages of the league.

While we don't sign the contracts we still make the choice to resign them ato their known value.   Since contract values are known a year before we sign them so everyone can make the trades etc. During that year to fit the players in.  Inot my view the buyout prevents superstars from ever hitting the market since it is so frequent.  Take Stamkos for example.  He'll get 7 years 10MM per.  For at least 2 or 3 years he's worth that money or close enough that you resign him knowing full well in 2 or 3 years you can just release him and move on. Much tougher choice if you know you are stuck with him for the next 7 years and have a bunch of other expensive resigns in that period. 

[Philadelphia Flyers]

Jun 14, 2016 21:55:46 GMT -5 @nashvillepredators said:

The new compliance buy out rule definitely complicates things for me. Was going to buy out Girardi this year and Datsyuk next year, but now I'm going to have to pump the breaks on that one. Probably going to need to hold on to Girardi this season now so that way I'm not strapped to Datsyuk's contract next season.

Oh the intrigue!

This is a good example of how this affects the FA market. $13MM in Cap space generated from buyouts. That's two solid players or one superstar he's able to sign essentially for free while he enjoyed the prime years of the bought out contracts.

[Florida Panthers]

I would like more input from the other GMs on this issue in regards to the Compliance Buy-Outs. I personally would like to get rid of it as well, but there are many owners here who enjoy having the buy-out as it creates flexibility, and a more laidback cap league. However, I would still like to remind people that players who retire or have their careers ended due to injury their contracts come off your books automatically for obvious reasons after their final rated year.

[Tony]

I just got here so as a new guy I should keep at least one compliance buyout for a fuckup I didn't commit

But why is everybody else getting them ?

[Andre]

Obviously GMs want to keep the buyouts... should we ask kids if they want ice cream for breakfast?

Individual GMs who are motivated by their own self interests will want to have as much flexibility as possible as it allows them to erase their mistakes. But if you look at the bigger picture, there is no justification for permitting free buyouts on a regular basis in a hard cap league. We need a decision by the league on what's in the best interest of the league, not what individual GMs want. I'll leave it at that as my thoughts on the matter are fairly well known at this point.

[Florida Panthers]

Jun 14, 2016 23:09:05 GMT -5 Tony said:

I just got here so as a new guy I should keep at least one compliance buyout for a fuckup I didn't commit

But why is everybody else getting them ?

They have been in the league as it started as many people were not acquainted with running a team before and have never been in a cap league. Now that our 2nd season is over, I too believe the compliance buy-out should be eliminated for existing members, however it is up to the league as a whole, in which we allow members to vote. Buyouts will always remain for new GMs.

[Florida Panthers]

To draw further upon the 10% increase, it is something that actually occurs in the NHL , ala Andrew Ladd trade this year for example for Chicago.

To draw upon the issue Andre brought up, teams will only be allowed to trade away their RFAs and their players who already have a signed contract. There will now be a UFA window at the end of the season before the Entry Draft in which teams must sign their UFAs however if signing a UFA puts you over the cap, you subsequently will not be able to sign that player and will then be put into the FA draft. The only way a team could make room for said UFA is by trading people off of their current roster.

[Florida Panthers]

Keep in mind none of this takes place until NEXT season so we have plenty of time to hammer out all the details!

[Deleted]

I think having a Compliance Buy-out is okay for one reason ONLY and that is because we do not control the players salaries here. They are based directly from the NHL. Would I sign Clarkson to that horrendous contract? Fuck no. (just an example). But saying that, I also think it is a cop out so to speak. I suggest that each team get 2 compliance buy-outs and that is it. Once you use them you get no more (much like the NHL gave to teams when the new CBA was introduced. Just my 2 cents.

[Florida Panthers]

Jun 15, 2016 2:07:41 GMT -5 @shammy said:

I think having a Compliance Buy-out is okay for one reason ONLY and that is because we do not control the players salaries here. They are based directly from the NHL. Would I sign Clarkson to that horrendous contract? Fuck no. (just an example). But saying that, I also think it is a cop out so to speak. I suggest that each team get 2 compliance buy-outs and that is it. Once you use them you get no more (much like the NHL gave to teams when the new CBA was introduced. Just my 2 cents.

That's a good idea actually was thinking the same thing before I went to bed last night. The question would be do we give only 1 buyout that can be used at any point in time, since everyone has a free one this season already.