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 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:47 am

Your math is off. If hi chi decides the use the holds on their players and uses the 6 million MLE on one player, that would bring their spent money to 63.17. That's 16.83 mill to spend. I'm not including any of the holds here because at this point nothing needs to be release as nothing has actually been spent for any of them, they are simply just holds. So hi chi could spend the entire 16 mill on 1 player alone and then have to start releasing players to do so, otherwise spread out the money and buy them all (the likely scenario).
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


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

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby RedHopeful » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:01 am

scully19 wrote: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)

At this moment, I'm on board with this but am going to mull it overnight and into tomorrow as bird rights still seem to powerful...
Image
RedHopeful
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse Team LeaderFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 18230
(Past Year: 703)
Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: http://twitter.com/Redhopeful

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:02 am

Here's a question. Say Team A has 10 mill in cap space and a hold on player X for 1 million. If this person goes to spend the 9 mill in space under the cap, has a player currently bid on for the whole 9, and then player X starts getting bid on before the other new player is signed, and the bidding is higher than 1 mill. Team A obviously can't get involved right now because this now exceeds all the space available on the team. What happens though, if team A signs the player they were going for for 9 mill? They currently are not bidding on anyone and hold the rights still of player X, could they then proceed to join into the bidding of that player and exceed the soft cap?
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


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

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby dch17 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:04 am

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)


I agree with this; but In the real NBA why would a player turn down 10m 10m 10m 10m (4yr 40m) contract for a 10.5, 10.5, 10.5 (3yr 31.5m) contract? (or have I got it all wrong and we go by total contract $? - I looked in the rules thread & in old winning / losing bets thread but so much info had been edited I couldn't see any proof either way).
dch17
Playground Pundit
Playground Pundit


Posts: 87
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:10 am

The way it was done was that you could beat a bid by adding on years (as long as it was more than 5m). So if I bid 6 mill on someone, you could beat it by bidding 6 (6+6), I could in then beat that by bidding 6.5. Years only really comes into play on equal amounts.

It would make sense to, instead of have average per year, have total contract value. In that case 3.5+3.5 would beat a 1 year 6 mill. Also in this situation, a tie should go to the higher average contract, so 1 year 7m beats 3.5+3.5. This should pretty much take care of the MLE problem for the most part, although someone could still sign a player for 1 year 12.5m with the bird rights to beat the 2 year 6+6.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


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

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby Markos » Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:16 am

$7m x 2 > $7.5m (despite average annual salary being less)
and
$6m > $3.5 x 2 (despite total salary being less)

In my league each extra year adds 20% value to the average. So

3 x $10
2 x $12
1 x $14.4

are all equal

IMO this is the best way to go about it. It far better mimics the player's mindset than simply going with either total money offered, or with the annual average salary. It incorporates both. You could probably bump up the percentage to 25% or 30% even
Eradicating Marijuana one blunt at a time
Markos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster

User avatar

Posts: 289
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Down Under

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby KalElen » Fri Sep 17, 2010 10:17 am

Markos wrote:$7m x 2 > $7.5m (despite average annual salary being less)
and
$6m > $3.5 x 2 (despite total salary being less)

In my league each extra year adds 20% value to the average. So

3 x $10
2 x $12
1 x $14.4

are all equal

IMO this is the best way to go about it. It far better mimics the player's mindset than simply going with either total money offered, or with the annual average salary. It incorporates both. You could probably bump up the percentage to 25% or 30% even

i had similar idea last summer, but at that point simplicity was number one priority so i dropped it. i wouldn't mind implementing something like this at this time
total salary being the deciding factor is not a good solution imo. no player would take 2*3.5 over 1*6.5. system in place favors longer contracts when we're talking big money and shorter ones otherwise, because it makes sense for player to want to test free agency again as soon as possible if he isn't getting a huge contract and to want to get as many years as possible if he is getting boatload of money, but obviously that system isn't prefect especially around the edges
one thing i can absolutely promise you is that whatever we decide to do, nobody will get screwed. if there is no good solution that doesn't screw anybody we will leave the rules as is. they might be faulty, but they were known for a long time and we've all operated so far with these rules in mind. having said that i think that we will be able to resolve this issue in a way satisfactory to everyone
i'd like to hear some more opinions on these suggestions before proceeding with making any final decisions
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 hi chi » Fri Sep 17, 2010 10:42 am

silentjim wrote:
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.


You are right about releasing a few of those players. I only have interest in a couple of them and even then it is not a huge interest in a couple of the ones I am considering using the bird rule for.
hi chi
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1072
(Past Year: 128)
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby dch17 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:13 pm

KalElen wrote:
Markos wrote:$7m x 2 > $7.5m (despite average annual salary being less)
and
$6m > $3.5 x 2 (despite total salary being less)

In my league each extra year adds 20% value to the average. So

3 x $10
2 x $12
1 x $14.4

are all equal

IMO this is the best way to go about it. It far better mimics the player's mindset than simply going with either total money offered, or with the annual average salary. It incorporates both. You could probably bump up the percentage to 25% or 30% even

i had similar idea last summer, but at that point simplicity was number one priority so i dropped it. i wouldn't mind implementing something like this at this time
total salary being the deciding factor is not a good solution imo. no player would take 2*3.5 over 1*6.5. system in place favors longer contracts when we're talking big money and shorter ones otherwise, because it makes sense for player to want to test free agency again as soon as possible if he isn't getting a huge contract and to want to get as many years as possible if he is getting boatload of money, but obviously that system isn't prefect especially around the edges
one thing i can absolutely promise you is that whatever we decide to do, nobody will get screwed. if there is no good solution that doesn't screw anybody we will leave the rules as is. they might be faulty, but they were known for a long time and we've all operated so far with these rules in mind. having said that i think that we will be able to resolve this issue in a way satisfactory to everyone
i'd like to hear some more opinions on these suggestions before proceeding with making any final decisions


I'd vote for 30%
dch17
Playground Pundit
Playground Pundit


Posts: 87
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:16 pm

I'm going to repeat myself, but my suggestion is to change the length of contracts between 25% and 49% of the maximum. Right now, you can offer up to 9.99 mil on a one year deal, which allows people to exploit the bird rights loophole. In my proposal, you can only offer 2 or 3 years for contracts between 25% and 49% of the maximum. That would mean people could only offer a starting salary of 4.99 mil on a one year deal. Therefore owners would have to offer at least 2 years of bloated salary to match any elite FA, since those guys should command at least the full MLE. Thus, they can't just continue to have bird rights guys on bloated one year offers.

If you want to make it even more impactful, change your salary percentages to be: min bid-20% of max: 1 or 2 year deal, 20%-49%: 2 or 3 year deals only, 50%-100%: 2(i'd recommend starting with 3) to 4 years. That would mean teams with bird rights free agents would have to offer 2 years as soon as the starting salary on that player gets to 4 mil.

Another addition would be you lose bird rights on a player the next season if you sign your own bird rights player to a one year deal in the offseason.
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

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues




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