2012/13 season discussion - Fantasy Basketball Cafe 2014
Fantasy Basketball Cafe


Return to FBC Salary Cap

2012/13 season discussion

Moderators: RedHopeful, silentjim, Fenris-77, DVauthrin, dasein

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby dasein » Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:05 am

I never used a 7 day contract in my 1st season here, and only just started using em towards the end of last year. I gotta say, once I started using them, I got to liking them. They allow you to take advantage of guys with short term upside (say because of an injury to a starter) without having to sign them outright, or to bring in temp cover for your own injuries, or just to give you a little boost in a cat or two for this week's match up. All in all, I found that using an end of bench spot for the 'pick up of the week' worked out better than filling it with a rook or whatever scrub happens to be the 9th guy in your rotation.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 917
(Past Year: 434)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby So-Tex » Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:29 am

I guess one of the issues I have with the 7 day contract is the length of it - 7 days. I know it fits with the typical "pick up a guy for this week's matchup" play. But usually, when I'm looking at a WW guy, I'm hoping to get someone who's on a streak of some sort - two, three weeks, or more even. Or, like dasein mentioned, he's filling in for someone else who's out 4 to 6 weeks. I've never crunched the numbers or anything, but injuries of any substance seem to last two to three weeks. So to pick up a guy and only get half that time in the best case scenario, just seems silly to me.

And of course, 7 day contracts come off the books after they have been used (although I understand we only get 40 of them per season to check that). I just don't see why a manager who signs a minimum or low salary guy and only gets four solid weeks out of him, should be punished by having to either a) keep him on the roster for the rest of the year, or b) pay 75% on the remainder of his salary for the rest of the season. To some, that may not be an issue. But to those guys who are flirting with the salary cap, that .19M could be a big difference.

Again, I understand the argument that you make your choices and other options are there. I just feel like I'm not using 7 day contracts simply because it doesn't make practical sense to me with regards to my management skills or basketball savvy. I can pick up any scrub to try and get stats for 7 days. Sounds a whole lot like "contracted streaming" to me. And it doesn't cost me anything? Doesn't that go against the whole principal of this particular league? :-?

I'd rather see something like a 10 day or 14 day contract, which would give a manager more use out of that player. Also, I'd like to see provisions in place which would help managers keep those players after the contract was up if they decided they were worth signing on for the rest of the season. In my opinion, most of those teams dwelling the cellar would benefit from pickups off the wire, especially if the manager (or managers) was/were savvy enough to see some worth in picking up those players in the first place.

But to have to let a guy go after 7 days just cause you wanted to role the dice seems too much like a punishment to me. Sure I understand it won't cost you anything. But what if you come across a Kris Humphries type from two seasons ago? The choice to go with a 7 day deal comes back to bite you, even though you were the one savvy enough to take a chance on him.

I role the dice all the time on guys by signing them to direct deals, cause if they don't pan out, I'll have to take the hit. Why should I have to role the dice on a guy with a 7 day deal, just to find out he was worth holding on to in the first place? What seems to happen in that case is that I lose him in a bidding war to someone who wasn't fast enough, or willing enough, to pick him up in the first place! I guess that's my whole real issue with the 7 day thing. I know we've moved on here, and I'm glad for it - but that whole first year experience for me still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. :-P

But not so much that I don't look forward to this season! ;-)
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1039
(Past Year: 217)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby silentjim » Fri Jul 06, 2012 3:42 pm

I wouldn't be opposed to making 7 day contracts more like 14 day contracts with maybe the manager having the right to pick up the player for the remainder of the season without letting the player hit the free agent pool again. Seems like it would work like this in real life.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11484
(Past Year: 792)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:54 pm

Not cool with allowing manager to pick up for remainder of the year. That is basically a way to forgo any sort of auction once the season starts. You could pick up any player for the minimum immediately and then keep them. I would be ok with the idea of matching during the auction (not the same as matching a QO) where they could keep bidding an equal amount as the max bid and would win because they had them as a short term contract.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1338
(Past Year: 196)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby dasein » Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:42 pm

scully19 wrote:Not cool with allowing manager to pick up for remainder of the year. That is basically a way to forgo any sort of auction once the season starts. You could pick up any player for the minimum immediately and then keep them. I would be ok with the idea of matching during the auction (not the same as matching a QO) where they could keep bidding an equal amount as the max bid and would win because they had them as a short term contract.


Agree. I wouldn't want to move away from auctions to first in first served- you can do that in every other league.

Don't have an issue with stretching out the contracts to 10 or 14 days though. I can see some sense in that actually.

Also, wouldn't mind if the team picking the player from the FA pool had some small advantage in the auction. Maybe the ability to match the offer the way we do it now with rookie RFAs...but that might be overpowered. Maybe the team holding the player can start the auction while he is on his roster, rather than waiting for the contract to run out (other teams can't start the auction until then). This would at least allow you to keep playing the guy while the auction runs.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 917
(Past Year: 434)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:41 am

Ya restricted FA makes it too overpowered still. I'll stay with matching throughout the auction, but they still need to bid.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1338
(Past Year: 196)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby dasein » Sat Jul 07, 2012 11:27 pm

Markos has just PM'd me to say he's pulling out of the league. Sounds like he might be giving up on fantasy basketball completely actually. Anywho, we'll need to find a replacement. Didn't we have a bit of a waiting list somewhere?
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 917
(Past Year: 434)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby silentjim » Sat Jul 07, 2012 11:59 pm

Good point on my lack of thinking everything though guys. You're right that automatic rights is way too much. I just hate to see a good manager pick a good guy only to lose out on him because of our limitations. Matching offers might make sense. We'd have to think about it.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11484
(Past Year: 792)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby So-Tex » Sun Jul 08, 2012 4:15 am

I'd be ok with matching offers as long as there were on restrictions with regards to cap space. In other words, if I had a player on a 7/14 day contract (assuming we changed that part without much issue) and I/we started an auction for said player, I could be given the right to match any offer made for that player and win him, as long as I didn't go over the hard cap and stayed within all the other rules (I'm thinking mostly about min/max rostered players).

My only question would be is a matching offer simply a point in our favor for a tie-breaker, or does that give us the win outright? The reason I ask is because I want to make sure that whatever the solution is, it's fair and reasonable to all. But more importantly, that it's simple - i.e. not tied up with a bunch of points for this and points for that. Yes, on the ground level, I feel this should be weighted a bit for the manager trying to keep the player. As Jim pointed out, I too would hate to see a good manager lose out on a player simply because he didn't think to sign him directly. But I do see how it could be too much for a straight signing without any kind of bidding or repercussions.

I was actually thinking about something along the lines of a required higher contract, where if the manager wanted to sign said player, he would have to do so at a higher, preset amount which was more than the 7/14 day contract, including making it an amount relevant to how much cap space he has left. So basically, we could set the rule as a manager can sign a player off of a 7/14 day contract, but the minimum offer has to be X million dollars (I'm was thinking 1 or 2), OR if said manager is within a certain amount of the hard cap, it would have to be a percentage of what cap space he has left.

Example using 2M as the contract's hard number, and 50% as the percentage amount, all above/below 3M of the hard cap:

A. Say a manager has 5M in cap space (the cut off for this option is 3M), and he wants to sign a guy off on a 7/14 day contract. Since he has more than 3M in cap space left, he has to offer the player 2M for the remainder of the season if he wants to keep him.

B. Say that manager had only 2M in cap space. Because he's within the 3M dollar number, he would have to sign that player for half of what he has left in cap space. In this case it would be 1M dollars. And working under this option, no player could be signed for less than the amount of a 7/14 day contract - so no signing players for half of .25M - if that's the case, the player immediately goes to the FA pool for possible auction.

And finally, all numbers would not count the player's existing 7/14 day contract deal in the equation, since that would come off the books anyway if the manager in question simply let him go to the pool.

Of course, having given all that as an example, it does go against my second point as stated before - I'd like to keep it as simple as possible. O:-) So, if that means going to a "matching offer" type of rule, where the manager holding the player has the right to match a bid, and therefore win that player, I think I'd be ok with that. Again, as long as I didn't have any restrictions on how much salary I could take on (within the rules of course), or any kind of tie-breaking scenarios and such.

And sorry to hear about Markos - hope we can find another manger as dedicated as he's been in the past.
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1039
(Past Year: 217)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: Draft 2012/13

Postby So-Tex » Mon Jul 09, 2012 5:28 am

Fenris-77 wrote:Thank god for that So-Tex pick. :-b

You're welcome...I think... :-?
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1039
(Past Year: 217)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: scully19 and 0 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues




  • Fantasy Basketball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact