Markos wrote:But what I'm still concerned about is this; When a player's auction ends and a GM with bird rights retains him, are they then forced to replace the cap hold with the new salary immediately?
In the NBA I can add a FA with my cap space, and then use my bird rights on a player to exceed the soft cap. But I can't do it the other way around. I can still resign my own guy of course, but I can't then go out and offer the FA the same cash I could have in the previous scenario as I'm limited by the cap.
that depends on how big the hold is. if you have small hold and you want to resign a player to a significantly larger contract then yes, he's gonna eat your cap space and under current rules (both ours and nba's) that is unavoidable. if you want to resign a max player you lose nothing because he holds max cap hold. i understand why you don't like that rule, but what you are talking about has more to do with the order of bidding then it has with the bird rights and cap holds. in the nba you could try to convince one player who is up for a big pay raise to allow his team to use cap space and then use his bird rights, effectively removing him from the "bidding pool for other nba teams, though i don't actually remember that happening in recent years. if we were to simulate such a situation, it would essentially mean giving gm's additional protection on their bird rights fa's in the form of ability to postpone player's entering the bidding pool. i don''t like that idea because it complicates free agency significantly, but in my opinion it doesn't make it better. it will be heavily used here while it's rarely used in the nba (i really can't remember last time something like that has happened) so it doesn't even lead to more realistic experience.
allowing gm to sign a bird rights player, but not count him towards cap is not fair to other gm's bidding on him, who would have to have him against their caps and to a degree defeats the purpose of having cap holds and bird rights as they stand today