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 scully19 » Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:32 pm

If we get up into the 4 year contract territory then we would need to decide on how long there too. If someone gets offered 10m (10+10+10+10) then beating it would obviously need to be 2 years because that is in the rules, but would you then want to enforce a 3rd year because he is being offered 4.

It makes sense anyways because once you get up that high, I would rather sign 4 year over 2 and a slight increase.

So basic rule vote for me:
When using the bird rights to sign a player, you must match the contract length being offered against you. When length offered is 3 or 4 years, you can beat it with offers with 1 less year in length. (so 2 and 3 years)
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1337
(Past Year: 195)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:39 pm

KalElen wrote:
scully19 wrote:If I'm trying to sign Morrow for max MLE of 6.6(6+6.6+7.2), when beating my offer he should have to beat it at 3 years as well, or a minimum of 2 years. If I'm bidding 6m for 1 year for Morrow, then you should be able to just beat that at 6.5 for 1 year and be done with it though.

i think this is a good idea. i'd prefer 2 years to 3. anybody else got an opinion?


sounds good to me. would it help if we auctioned off the free agents with bird rights first? that way if a team under the cap pushes the team to spend over the MLE to retain their free agent it negatively impacts their ability to use the MLE or keep other bird rights players.
DVauthrin
Basketball Scribe
Basketball Scribe

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6341
(Past Year: 166)
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby KalElen » Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:44 pm

scully19 wrote:If we get up into the 4 year contract territory then we would need to decide on how long there too. If someone gets offered 10m (10+10+10+10) then beating it would obviously need to be 2 years because that is in the rules, but would you then want to enforce a 3rd year because he is being offered 4.

It makes sense anyways because once you get up that high, I would rather sign 4 year over 2 and a slight increase.

So basic rule vote for me:
When using the bird rights to sign a player, you must match the contract length being offered against you. When length offered is 3 or 4 years, you can beat it with offers with 1 less year in length. (so 2 and 3 years)

sounds good. still would like to see some other opinions. maybe an alternative solution comes up as well. we'll postpone the bidding a by a day or two until we get this resolved. if there are no alternatives proposed i'm gonna accept this rule in 24h from now and declare start of the bidding. if there is alternative that makes sense there will be another vote. this is a big issue and we need to deal with it before we commence bidding
my kung fu is the best
KalElen
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterLucky Ladders ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Smederevo, Serbia

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:45 pm

Wow, now looking at this closer, I was right in my vote of having bird rights only on guys signed to 2 year contracts. Guys at the lower end of the spectrum that will only get offered 1 year contracts for a small amount of money are always going to be signed by the team that already owns their rights if they have room on the team. Paying a little bit extra with money you don't have otherwise seems like a no brainer. Anyone in say the 2m or less range price points will get overpaid everytime if someone has their bird rights and is up against the cap (or their cap hold is small enough that it basically doesn't exist against their cap). We may want to change the way cap holds work so that the players get held for more so that if a team has cap space on their roster and a bunch of players on hold, that they would need to be taken care of first. Say something like 150% of their final year is held against you as a cap hold. Or 200% for contracts less than 25%, 150% for contracts 25%-50%, and 100% for contracts 50%+.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1337
(Past Year: 195)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:22 am

another idea to fix the bird rights issue is amend the length of contracts between 25%-49% of the max. here's a PM I sent to Kal:

However, another idea I had would be to change the year lengths between 25%-49% of the maximum. Instead of being able to offer 1-3 years, you can only offer two or three years. That way you can't offer more than 4.99 mil on a one year deal. that inherently makes teams have to offer at 2 years on good players with bird rights because those guys won't go that cheap.
DVauthrin
Basketball Scribe
Basketball Scribe

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6341
(Past Year: 166)
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby hi chi » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:40 am

scully19 wrote:New example then, look at hi chi.

He holds the rights of 7 guys, and is only barely under the cap enough to use it for more then the MLE. He could go out and sign whoever for the MLE, and then just massively overpay everyone on his team for 1 year. There is no problem with this since he is basically paying out everyone on his team, but it makes it extremely difficult to actually sign anyone not on the MLE, and people using cap space to try to sign free agents are going to have an extremely hard time doing so.

EDIT: Look at his guys too, basically no one would be able to sign Ariza or Rip or Mike Miller, because he would have too much money available to him, and nothing to do with it because he wouldn't be able to spend it otherwise. They would get overpaid by him for 1 year contracts and there is no way you can get him from him, even if you try to way overpay.


And to be honest that is exactly what I was thinking.
hi chi
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1076
(Past Year: 132)
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:46 am

Absolutely, why wouldn't you. If I had any bird rights on anybody I would too.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1337
(Past Year: 195)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby hi chi » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:52 am

I am ok with offering one year less than competing offers. I am not sure it changes too much other than the fact that you have to hold a player for an extra year (which in some cases isn't a bad thing). I am not on board with increasing the percentage for bird rights salary for a couple of reasons. 1) It starts to punish guys who have lots of guys finishing their contract (if you have a 20 million guy finishing their contract the cap hold handcuffs you or even a 10 million guy it is pretty harsh). 2) It starts to get to be a bit confusing figuring out cap holds. 3) It punishes teams with guys who have bird rights players (I know I said this already, but I think it is a very important point). The trade I made was based on making moves on the current bird rights rule and changing it (the %) at this point in time for this free agent period seems a little unfair to me. That is my two cents...changing next year is not as big a deal...but to change the % this year seems unfair to me. If we put this in for next year I think it is still a bit much, but more reasonable.
hi chi
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1076
(Past Year: 132)
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:06 am

hi chi wrote:I am ok with offering one year less than competing offers. I am not sure it changes too much other than the fact that you have to hold a player for an extra year (which in some cases isn't a bad thing).
It's would be if you were overpaying a player to play on your team for short term.
I am not on board with increasing the percentage for bird rights salary for a couple of reasons. 1) It starts to punish guys who have lots of guys finishing their contract (if you have a 20 million guy finishing their contract the cap hold handcuffs you or even a 10 million guy it is pretty harsh).
It doesn't really handcuff you, you just need to deal with it. If you have a 20 million dollar guy on your team you will likely want to resign said player, and if not you would still have a 20 cap hold anyways so it doesn't make a difference, since or release.
2) It starts to get to be a bit confusing figuring out cap holds.
It's not that tough, the math is very easy. If you look at the salary page, the 1 means salary times 1, so simply make it a 2 for anything less than 5 mill. 1.5 for 5-10, and a 1 for 10+.Takes an extra 3 seconds of thought beyond figuring out what the cap hold is of a player salary wise.
3) It punishes teams with guys who have bird rights players (I know I said this already, but I think it is a very important point). The trade I made was based on making moves on the current bird rights rule and changing it (the %) at this point in time for this free agent period seems a little unfair to me. That is my two cents...changing next year is not as big a deal...but to change the % this year seems unfair to me. If we put this in for next year I think it is still a bit much, but more reasonable.

More than likely something like that would not be changed until next year (the % part that we were talking about). Being able to sign players to a 1 year contract that you have bird rights to will likely change though.

It's pretty obvious that you care about your team first and foremost (and I don't blame you, I'd be pissed if i was getting screwed, and have been), but even if we changed the cap holds this year it wouldn't affect you. If you planning on using your bird rights players, you only have the MLE to spend, and not the entire space between guys already signed. That's what a hold is. Either way nothing changes for you. I think there are only 1 person this matters for this year, Fenris. But that 1 is enough that the percentages of holds should be held off to change until next year.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1337
(Past Year: 195)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby silentjim » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:33 am

hi chi wrote:
scully19 wrote:New example then, look at hi chi.

He holds the rights of 7 guys, and is only barely under the cap enough to use it for more then the MLE. He could go out and sign whoever for the MLE, and then just massively overpay everyone on his team for 1 year. There is no problem with this since he is basically paying out everyone on his team, but it makes it extremely difficult to actually sign anyone not on the MLE, and people using cap space to try to sign free agents are going to have an extremely hard time doing so.

EDIT: Look at his guys too, basically no one would be able to sign Ariza or Rip or Mike Miller, because he would have too much money available to him, and nothing to do with it because he wouldn't be able to spend it otherwise. They would get overpaid by him for 1 year contracts and there is no way you can get him from him, even if you try to way overpay.


And to be honest that is exactly what I was thinking.


Just to elaborate on this though, with 7 guys, a 57.4 M dollar payroll, and a hard cap, hi chi is limited to what he can actually accomplish. If he doesn't waive any of his cap holds he only has 11.5 million in hard cap to work with for seven players. Some I assume he's not interested in and will waive, but that's still not a ton of money based on some of the other salaries.

And obviously like the real NBA some teams might just try and drive up the salaries of free agents to handicap another team.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11483
(Past Year: 791)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues




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