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 » Sun Sep 19, 2010 3:36 am

I'm also now unsure what the advantages of bird rights would be under this new rule. Probably related to this is- where did the 6.9M come from in DV's example? The manager offered 3 years with average of 6.6, but why is 6.9 needed to beat him?
Also, it seems that front loading a contract is a perfectly reasonable strategy for future flexibility, not to mention hedging against decline with age for older players. Why do we have to have it increasing each year?
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 RocketsDWM » Sun Sep 19, 2010 3:47 am

Warning: Ignorant post below...

I thought the MLE only came into play (at least in the NBA) when teams were over the hard cap? Is there a reason why that is not done in this league? Do teams in the NBA renounce the MLE?

Once a year, teams are allowed to sign a player to a contract equal to the average NBA salary, even if the team is over the salary cap already, or if the signing would put them over the cap. This is known as the Mid-level exception (MLE). The MLE may be used on an individual free agent or split among multiple free agents, and is available to any team that exceeds the salary cap at the beginning of the offseason. The Mid-Level Exception for the 2008–09 NBA season was $5.585 million.[2] The MLE is $5.854 million for the 2009–10 NBA regular season.
RocketsDWM
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 589
(Past Year: 144)
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:16 am

dasein wrote:I'm also now unsure what the advantages of bird rights would be under this new rule. Probably related to this is- where did the 6.9M come from in DV's example? The manager offered 3 years with average of 6.6, but why is 6.9 needed to beat him?
Also, it seems that front loading a contract is a perfectly reasonable strategy for future flexibility, not to mention hedging against decline with age for older players. Why do we have to have it increasing each year?


It should be 6.85M(not 6.9M, my fault)needed to beat an offer of 6.6M. You have to exceed a previous offer by 250K in average salary to make a new bid. Hi chi could only match at 6.6M(and use the points system) if 6.6M was the remaining amount he had under the hard cap.

You can increase or decrease salary as long as the yearly amount increases or decreases by no more than 10% of the previous year salary. So if you wanted to make it harder for someone to match an elite FA, you could offer the MLE as 7M-6.6M-6M)

-minimum increases and decreases in negotiations and bidding: 100k for contracts starting at less then 2.5M, 250k for contracts starting at 2.5M or more. 10k increase is allowed only if anothr team uses it's max offer to match original team's offer-Kal in rules
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 DVauthrin » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:23 am

RocketsDWM wrote:Warning: Ignorant post below...

I thought the MLE only came into play (at least in the NBA) when teams were over the hard cap? Is there a reason why that is not done in this league? Do teams in the NBA renounce the MLE?

Once a year, teams are allowed to sign a player to a contract equal to the average NBA salary, even if the team is over the salary cap already, or if the signing would put them over the cap. This is known as the Mid-level exception (MLE). The MLE may be used on an individual free agent or split among multiple free agents, and is available to any team that exceeds the salary cap at the beginning of the offseason. The Mid-Level Exception for the 2008–09 NBA season was $5.585 million.[2] The MLE is $5.854 million for the 2009–10 NBA regular season.


In the NBA you get the MLE(rounded to 6 mil) when you are over the the soft cap. If applied to our league, it would be granted to teams with payrolls over 65 million in our league. However, Kal decided to offer every team the MLE regardless if you are over the soft cap or not. He wanted more activity in Free Agency and didn't care for the NBA's rule.

Yes, you can renounce the MLE. Basically, if you have less than 6 mil in cap space under the soft cap or have a team payroll over 65M you keep the MLE. If you have more than 6 mil in space under the soft cap you renounce the MLE, just like cap holds.
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 DVauthrin » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:24 am

dasein wrote:I'm also now unsure what the advantages of bird rights would be under this new rule. Probably related to this is- where did the 6.9M come from in DV's example? The manager offered 3 years with average of 6.6, but why is 6.9 needed to beat him?
Also, it seems that front loading a contract is a perfectly reasonable strategy for future flexibility, not to mention hedging against decline with age for older players. Why do we have to have it increasing each year?


The advantage to bird rights is you can increase or decrease their salaries at 15% of the previous year salary rather than 10% like every other team.
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 DVauthrin » Sun Sep 19, 2010 4:43 am

Here's another example:

With the cap holds and MLE, RedHopeful has 6.175M under the hard cap. If a team offers Scola a MLE deal, he has to offer an average salary of 6.85M(250K increase on 6.6M average salary) for three years to lead on Scola. If he wants to bid only two years on Scola, he has to offer 8.91M in average salary over two years. 6.85M*.3=2.055M. 2.055M+6.85M=8.905M, but we round bids to two decimal places. Therefore it costs him 8.91M over two years to retain Scola if another team offers a full MLE deal. Or he can get him cheaper but on a longer deal. Considering Scola's cap hold is 2.1M, he has to offer 6.81M more to retain him for only two years. He can't afford that, unless he renounces the MLE or the cap hold on Jermaine O'Neal. If he decided to offer 6.85M over 3 years, it would only cost him 4.75M in extra money, leaving him 1.425M of cap space left and the MLE unless he renounces O'Neal.

This is fair, because look at the value of the offers. Full MLE=19.6M over 3 years while 8.91M over 2 years=17.82M. That is a situation where a free agent would be more apt to choose the shorter contract. But if I offered 6.85M average salary over two years he's only getting 13.7M. That's a year's worth of MLE salary difference, so he would rarely choose that offer.

If we add 20 percent(instead of 30%) to the value when you go down a year in contract length it's 6.85M*.2, which equals 1.37M. 6.85M+1.37M= 8.22M. therefore, you would need to offer 8.22M over two years. That's 16.44M in total contract value, or 3.2M less than the full MLE.
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 DVauthrin » Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:00 am

hi chi wrote:So I guess I am 100% ok with changing the years. I am kind of ok with changing the %s each year (but I do think it seems like a bit of a punishment to have a bird right with this change). I am not so ok with the increase of the cap hold (especially if it is to take place this year).


There is no need to increase the cap hold amount if we implement a combination of my plan and Markos' plan. That would be entirely unfair to bird rights player.

I don't feel the percentage increase in value as you offer shorter contracts is a punishment. If you want to offer the minimum increase to beat the leading bid, offer the same years as the leading bid. If you want that player for a year less than the leading bid, you have to offer substantially more than a 250K increase in average salary. If i'm a free agent and I get offered 5.5M over 3 years(16.5M total), i'm not going to be keen on an offer of 5.75M over 2 years. That's only 11.5M in total salary, or a 5 million dollar dropoff. If we use the 30% over two years, the average salary would be 7.48M. The contract value then comes out to 14.96M, or within 1.5 mil of the three year amount. Now the player will be more apt to consider the 2 year deal over the three year one.
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 dch17 » Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:36 am

Just in case it was lost in all the comment since; I agree to the new plan & 30%.

I am new too, but I just think it seems to be a much fairer rule.
dch17
Playground Pundit
Playground Pundit


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

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:14 am

hi chi wrote:That sounds fair to me. But to be honest I am a bit of simpleton and might need help doing all the math with the ALL the new rules and %s and years. I am worried about making a wrong big and messing up the process.

This is why I wanted to have a protection so that the clock wouldn't keep getting reset, still a bunch of new guys and mistakes are going to happen.
I think making rules to keep things fair is a good thing, but as we get more complicated we are going to have more problems (always the case in leagues). And to be honest this sounds like it is going to get complicated. I am cool with the 20-30% increase in yearly salary, although it seems like a bird right punishment and I am not sure if it is better under this proposed rule not to have bird rights at all...what is the advantage to having bird rights? I am ok with forcing guys to offer at least one year less than an opposing offer (this seems the most reasonable). I am still not sure I like having to have 200% of my guys salary count against my cap...that will suck when I have a 20M guy come up and I have to have 40M against my cap.
That isn't the idea really though, someone who is at 20M will count for 20M against the cap. That's the way it is in the NBA, so that a team couldn't stockpile all these assets, go out and sign free agents because they have players barely costing anything to hold their rights, then resign their own players. Makes it hard for anyone to sign someone from someone elses team ever.
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q31
Look at the numbers for NBA, up to 300% counts against the cap (up to the max salary), so that teams can't take too much advantage of guys whose bird rights they hold. Right now we as a league allow too much of an advantage to teams with bird rights.
[/quote]
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


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

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby scully19 » Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:19 am

dasein wrote:I'm also now unsure what the advantages of bird rights would be under this new rule. Probably related to this is- where did the 6.9M come from in DV's example? The manager offered 3 years with average of 6.6, but why is 6.9 needed to beat him?
Also, it seems that front loading a contract is a perfectly reasonable strategy for future flexibility, not to mention hedging against decline with age for older players. Why do we have to have it increasing each year?

Bird rights are a huge advantage in this league because we are not using real money, even with the rule changes using bird rights is an advantage. Let's keep looking at hi chi's team because he has the most players on bird rights and also is very close to the cap. Simple answer is that he now likely will be spending about 75m on his roster, and most everyone else here will be stuck at something closer to 65-70. He'll be able to retain talent on his roster and have a much easier time at being able to than the rest of the league. Simply put, if you have access to more money, you likely have a good chance of having a better team.

EDIT: BTW, front loading is fully allowed.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


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

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