Contract Insanity

---

@EA_Blueberry wrote:

---

@heavydutyrammer wrote:
@IrishOwl Crazy bad contract logic.. well every logic in the game is bad lol.. 3 weeks since last EA reply for this.. and it won’t be fixed this year anyways.. honestly I doubt it will be fixed next year either…
Only time ANYTHING is going to get fixed is IF the Franchise Mode gets a revamp… I say IF, not when lol… because at this rate I expect them to completely cut the Franchise Mode out of the game before actually fixing it..

---

There were changes made around this in the December update. Old save files prior to the update won't receive that change because they are save files that are in progress under a different build. Like @IrishOwl's friend said it's been better in newly created Franchises. If you come across any odd contact situations let us know. There could always be a player asking for a ridiculous offer like they could in real life. They sometimes try to talk themselves up. I personally wouldn't see that as a bug unless it's seen regularly where adjustments should probably be made. 

Franchise Mode

• Added strategy templates that get generated for draft prospects
• Fixed an issue where CPU teams did not sign Elite Low potential prospects that they drafted
• Decreased salary expectancy boost for players when they have high performance seasons
• Decreased trade value boost for 34yr+ goalies when they have high performance seasons
• Decreased X-Factors trade value impact
• Fix for the Play Next Game tile not showing the matchup on the HUB after the trade deadline
• Fixed a crash when starting a 32 Expansion Franchise with custom rosters that has created players under franchise
• Misc UI Fixes

---

Clarification to existing save files prior to the update:

Existing save files should reflect this change in any new contracts that are offered.

Hey @EA_Blueberry I noticed its better still not great. I'll let you know if year 15+ this starts to get ridiculous again.

Any word on updating the player overalls, potential, and position on the Default Roster?

---

@johum2886 wrote:
@EA_Blueberry it is still broken unfortunately, I have seen many ridiculous examples in the few times I have started a new save file

---

Can you provide specifics? 

@johum2886Yes none of it makes any sense.. they always say they fix it but they never actually do..

the contracts are so ludicrous and out of the world with what they ask.. haven’t seen any realistic 

@johum2886 

Thank you. Passed that along to a Franchise dev. 

---

@johum2886 wrote:
@EA_Blueberry as previously mentioned in this thread, Kirby Dach at 87 overall high top 6 potential asking for over 13 million no matter how long the contract after a 72 point season, Barrett Hayton asking for 2.5 million on a contract less than 3 years, 4 or more thereafter. Hayton played half the season in the minors as he broke his leg and recorded 0 points in 3 NHL games when recalled aftere injury. Vitali Kravtsov wanted minimum 4 million after a 22 point, 65ish game campaign which included 22 points in 12 AHL games. Both Hayton and Kravtsov were around 80 overall, I believe 80 and 81 respectivally. These were all in the first year of a Kansas City Franchise after relocating Arizona before starting.

In year 2 of the same KC Franchise, Timo Meier wanted nearly 11 million after a 74 point campaign, Roope Hintz asked for over 8 million after 2 55 point seasons - both of these players were 87 overall. Vince Dunn and Jack Rathbone asking for over 5.8 million each after 50 total points in 159 combined games, both are offensive defencemen with mediocre at best defensive stats. Travis Dermott played 7 games and asked for 3 million.
In a test Franchise, contracts seemed to be acceptable for player overalls and most likely performance (did not look at all season statistics) in the year 4 offseason.

Perhaps broken is the wrong word to describe it, but it certainly does still need to be looked at for the early years, I have yet to go past year 4.

---

Got some word back on why those specific players are asking for more money (Dach, Hayton, Kravtsov etc.). It's because they have potential and know that, so they are going to grow and will ask for more money. 

Team got word of the feedback here and this thread. They don't consider what you mentioned above a "bug" but took note this is what you all would like to see for future improvements in Franchise. I want to set expectations right here from the get-go. I do not anticipate in changes around this in the current title due to their existing workload, but if anything changes we will let you know right away. Please continue to post examples in this thread you would like to see changes around so we can keep tabs on this forum and continue to ping the team throughout the year.

@EA_Blueberry  it still isn't fixed.  I have a 76 elite goalie I. AHL wanting 6 million a year for extension with a new franchise I started 2 days ago. This is still 1st season so no great previous season that would push him to ask for that much 

Thanks for the update @EA_Blueberry , even if it’s not what we wanted here I really appreciate the honest update.

Although I haven’t come across these demands myself yet in 22, I find it pretty strange that it’s not considered a bug as this is from the deep dive in NHL 20.

OTHER CHANGES

• PTS/G Salary Mod - Performance based Salaries; Players who do exceptionally well will ask for a lot more money. In some sims players reaching 100+ points and asks for 10 million dollars, in other sims the same player has sub 1.00 PPTS/G and asks for ~8 million. This should also fix the issue where players who are in the minors and ask for 2M+ without ever playing in the NHL.
• Teams will now put bad contracts on the trade block to free up cap space if an RFA (Restricted Free Agent) player wants a contract extension and they don't have cap space.

So, it sounds like it used to be a problem and was fixed to avoid having contract demands like this, so why would they change it back to what it was before??

It also mentions trading players in order to have money to sign RFA’s which I have not seen happen for the last couple of years, some of the AI team's best players still sit out the entire year due to not having sufficient cap space to sign them.

---

@Beauts90 wrote:

• Teams will now put bad contracts on the trade block to free up cap space if an RFA (Restricted Free Agent) player wants a contract extension and they don't have cap space.

 

It also mentions trading players in order to have money to sign RFA’s which I have not seen happen for the last couple of years, some of the AI team's best players still sit out the entire year due to not having sufficient cap space to sign them.

 

 

---

I think that’s an issue because no team still wants to make those trades for bad contracts. IMO the best way around that would be to make the trade value for bad contract players a negative value. Then we can finally use our cap space to help with rebuilding by getting a second or third round pick for agreeing to take someone like Matt Murray. 

@kyl_35 

Negative value is something we definitely need to see as it would improve that issue a ton. I’ve also suggested in previous years to allow teams to set cap space as a surplus or want (assuming those matter) as a way to try and help get rid of contracts.

I’m wondering how often you guys see the cpu hand out bad contracts? As bad as AI GM’s are, they seem to be programmed to know exactly how much a player is worth. This makes trading for bad contracts in later years impossible as a team will have 10 NHL defenceman and no goalie, but all the d are on good contracts so they have decent value and I have to give up assets to try and help that team if they do need to sign someone.

My thoughts for contract fix: 

Gm builds relationships with players and coaches.  The results being they are more willing to sign for less money to be part of the team. 

Bonuses for players and coaches. An example would be player contract offer 5 million a year and another 750k in Bonuses for reaching goals like 50 goal season or 100 point season  or for goalies .910 save % or 10 shutouts. Coaches get 100k for making playoffs or 250 for winning cup.

Top players could also earn extra money thru team sponsors.  Sponsors are already in the game, just look at the boards. 

Just some thoughts on it.

---

@Beauts90 wrote:

@kyl_35 

Negative value is something we definitely need to see as it would improve that issue a ton. I’ve also suggested in previous years to allow teams to set cap space as a surplus or want (assuming those matter) as a way to try and help get rid of contracts.

I’m wondering how often you guys see the cpu hand out bad contracts? As bad as AI GM’s are, they seem to be programmed to know exactly how much a player is worth. This makes trading for bad contracts in later years impossible as a team will have 10 NHL defenceman and no goalie, but all the d are on good contracts so they have decent value and I have to give up assets to try and help that team if they do need to sign someone.

 

---

Another part of the issue is players don’t nose dive on the back half of their careers nearly fast enough in the game. 

If we could get a 28 year old UFA demanding a 7 year contract, and then when he’s 32/33 we start to see him decline into a third line player, then we’d have plenty of bad contracts later in franchise mode. 

I started a franchise on Dec 10th. 

5 years In I have to resign Dylan Cozens to a 12 mil a year contract when he hasn’t even had more than 60 points a season. 

Is this still a problem for anyone else?

I signed Connor Bedard to a $9mil X 8 contract. Felt like a steal. 

@kyl_35

I’d love to see a more dynamic system for player development, progression and regression.

I can’t think of a player I’ve had that completely outperformed their contract, so I’d be very interested how Bedard turns out for you.

Funny enough, I think this topic could actually go back to allowing us to fully edit players within franchise mode. It would be a lot of work, but I would love to run a franchise mode where I can change the players overall and potential every year based on their performance and not have to rely on the current system. Be interesting to see contract and trade values based on these changes.

He’s in year 1 of making $9mil and is a 94 overall player getting less than a point per game on a line with +5 chemistry… 😬