2010-2011 Season Stuff - Fantasy Basketball Cafe 2014
Fantasy Basketball Cafe


Return to FBC Salary Cap

2010-2011 Season Stuff

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

Re: ***il list management***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:55 am

Well, I need to add a guy now, so I'm just going to go ahead - T-Will's going in and West is going to the IR.

In general I think we can manage to add guys ourselves without it turning into a cluster. If we put a 2 day waiver hold on 10 day and other new contracts, with the intention to add posted here, we could probably save ourselves some confusion though, as both you and the rest of the GMs would get a chance to catch mistakes before they happen.
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***expansion***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:19 am

I don't think 40M is enough personally, as a cap amount. Just because of the way the auction worked there are a lot of good players out there on 3-6M contracts, and a team losing two of them (as an example) is a huge hit. I think we need to look at the extremes - teams with two max guys, and teams with a very balanced contract load, and make sure the mechanism we're using works for everyone.

I think we need to provide more protection than that for the existing managers. I think we'd need to go to at least 50M to keep things fair considering how differently some of the teams are built (if we're going to use a salary figure at all). Having a total number of players a team can protect is also a good idea - it should be at least 5 and maybe more. We could easily just call it X number of players too, and forget about salary (still 5+ IMO in that case).

As for the number of teams, I'm ok with one or two, but I think things would get ugly if we try to expand too fast. The more teams we add the more the existing teams get hit all at once, and I doubt anyone wants to feel like they were just acting as placeholders for a bunch of players. If we keep the number of teams lower they have a better chance to build through the draft and free agency as well as expansion, and then when we add teams in future years, those teams that were added can help alleviate the individual cost of expansion by contributing players themselves. I am in favour of giving expansion teams a good shot in the lottery.

how expansion draft will look:
-snake draft where all selected players keep their salaries on new teams - much easier to maintain
Sure.
if we decide to do do an expansion we should probably hold expansion draft/auction after the rookie draft, but before free agency
I disagree. I think the expansion draft should be done before the rookie draft and before free agency. That way the teams losing players have the most opportunities to fill the resulting holes.
do we give teams that lose players through expansion tpes (taken player exceptions) in the amount of lost player's contract that can be used in trades or renounced in order to regain cap space? yes
Yes
d) expansion teams start year one with reduced soft cap limit - yes, 45M and they have to draft at least half of that worth of contracts during auction
Sure, but I don't think the rookie scale contracts they draft should count against this total. A lower limit keeps the new teams from swinging too big a stick in free agency, but we also want them to be somewhat competitive.
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***next year free agency***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:39 am

I think there's an easier way to do this. The first question is are we going to be to be using cap holds for free agents? That's where a FA counts against the cap as some percentage of his previous years salary until he;s either resigned, signed by another club, or renounced. Personally I think this sounds like way to much work.

It's perfectly workable to use exactly the same mechanism we used this year for free agency next year. Every Gm is allowed one active nomination thread, and he can choose anyone from the free agent pool to bid on. In a scenario like that there's lots of strategy around whether to deal with your own FAs first or go after a guy you want from someone else's roster (or a guy who wasn't rostered of course). If you spend too much elsewhere you won't be able to resign your own guys because we're not using restricted free agency yet.

I don't think we need to bother with lists of who goes in when either, I say let actual demand sort that out and keep the paperwork to a minimum. Just have a master list done at the end of the season that lists all free agents for that year (that were on teams of course), then strike them off the list as they get contracts. I think it makes more sense to have all the FAs available to be nominated all at once than trying to separate them into separate pools.
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***min offers rule***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:59 am

Gaaah, no. Why should a capped out team be allowed to get a min guy for less money? That makes no sense at all. This will work fine as is, now that we'll have rosters and results to work with. Min bids don't count against the cap, fine, and any team can make a min bid on a player, and any team can match that offer, with team's that have available cap obviously with the option to raise if they like. They should not, in any case, be forced to spend more money or lose that player simply because they have cap space and another team does not. Capped out teams do not need the helping hand there.

If a FA has more than on min bid tendered then the tie breaker rules come into effect - all the points and whatnot. With the MRL as a back-up if needed.

If we take a close look at the points system we could have scores for most things worked out before the FA period even begins. The only variable I can think of that would change would be available roster spots. Every teams could have a score at the start of FA, which could be modified in each FA case by the available roster slot bonus. Yes, that means a better team can slide in and match already knowing that they'll get their man (if there's PT for him), but that's about how the NBA works now.

Keep in mind that capped teams will also have the MLE to work with, so this whole min salary thing won't be as big an issue for those teams when it comes to team building - if they really want a guy they can spend a potion of the MLE.

Speaking of that we do need ironclad rules about the MLE too. Personally, I think the easiest way to do it is to say that any team who comes within 250K of the soft cap (or goes over it) at any point during the free agency period is automatically awarded access to the MLE. That's not how the NBA works, but it has the virtue of simplicity. We could also have the MLE count against the cap for the purposes of determining who gets it, but that's a little more work. A median approach looks like number one, but stipulates that a team that's within the MLE value of the soft cap can offer a contract up to the maximum value of the MLE and exceed the soft cap in doing so.

My personal fav would be to give the MLE to teams over the cap, and have it count against the cap for teams under, with the option for them to renounce the MLE to clear the space if they wish. We can alter the size of the MLE as well, if we think that 5.8 or 6M is too much. It could be a flat 5 for example. It should also have years rules - say minimum 2 max 4 for any contract offered with any portion of the MLE.
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***team direction rule***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:19 am

I think it needs to based on players under contract, not previous season's results. We already have points for the previous season's results anyway.

What if we ranked the players under contract based on their BBM scores for our cats, and then assigned Pts for players at different levels. For example...

.75 and above = 5 pts
.5 to .74 = 4 pts
.25 to .49 = 3 pts
0 to .24 = 2 pts
-.25 to -.01 = 1 pt
less than -.25 = 0 pts

Then just total up the scores for players under contract. When a team signs another player they can add his score, if any, to their team direction total. Obviously those points I've used above might not work relative to the other points systems, but that's a matter of scale, not workability.

The points in place for season results give a maximum of 26 points - that's for a team that comes first in the regular season and then wins overall. The minimum is one point.

Available roster slots counts for between 15 and zero.

So where do we want to slot Team Direction as far as importance goes? Id say somewhere between results and roster slots. Using my numbers from above, and not counting players who will be free agents next season, my roster would score 14 points there, which actually doesn't sound too far off where it should be.

Plus you'd need set scores for rookies. I'd say top three picks count for 2 pts, other lottery players for a point, and other rookies for 0pts. So add a point to my team for Williams.

I have a pretty decent roster, and I think that something like 15 points sounds about right for the weight that should be given. Is everyone ok with the idea of using BBMs value to allocate the points though?
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***next year free agency***

Postby KalElen » Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:37 am

i don't like your idea because a team can have all his fas bid on at the same time, which could happen if we implement your idea. i implied that every team can have no more then one free agent in the bidding pool at a time in both of my ideas
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: ***il list management***

Postby KalElen » Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:45 am

Fenris-77 wrote:Well, I need to add a guy now, so I'm just going to go ahead - T-Will's going in and West is going to the IR.

In general I think we can manage to add guys ourselves without it turning into a cluster. If we put a 2 day waiver hold on 10 day and other new contracts, with the intention to add posted here, we could probably save ourselves some confusion though, as both you and the rest of the GMs would get a chance to catch mistakes before they happen.

let's try to keep it simple if possible. either all the responsibility is on you or on me. no 2 day waivers or any other combinations. either way you have to post here and in the league message board
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: ***il list management***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 11:55 am

The responsibility here can lie with the GMs imo. They should have to post here to move a guy up fomr the IL, and guys need to be alert to who's on who's IL. Same with adding FAs - the rsponsibility to post here and not add the wrong guy should lie wiht the GMs - you have enough to do.

I do think that there should be consequences for egregious disregard here to. Maybe not for the first offense, since innocent mistakes do happen, but rather to target the careless GMs who might be making work and headaches for other people in the league.

Anthoer possibility here is to label all the guys on all the teams, plus the IR as keepers, at which point they're clearly identified in the Player list. I'm not sure if that tag stays when they're on the wire though. :-?
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***next year free agency***

Postby Fenris-77 » Tue Oct 27, 2009 12:03 pm

On the other hand I think GMs should be able to target their first priority FAs, well, first. And they certainly shouldn't be able to keep guys off the market by artificially manipulating a list. Further, the idea that someone can prevent a GM from offering a contract to one of his own free agents because someone else made an offer on another guy form the same roster doesn't make any sense.

We're using a salary system here, so whatever system we put in place needs to allow a GM to spend his money first where it's most important. If we want to limit the number of players who can be bid on at the same time form one team it would also work to stipulate that no more than one FA from a given team can be be nominated by a different GM at the same time. So the Gm in question here can both address his most pressing FA in an order he wants to, but without limiting too much the ability of other GMs to target players form other teams that they want to bid on.

It still doesn't need a list.
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: ***il list management***

Postby KalElen » Tue Oct 27, 2009 1:19 pm

Fenris-77 wrote:I do think that there should be consequences for egregious disregard here to. Maybe not for the first offense, since innocent mistakes do happen, but rather to target the careless GMs who might be making work and headaches for other people in the league.


i agree. as you said first offense could be tolerated if it doesn't result in a gain (somebody winning a match up because of it), but repeat offenders should be punished by having their roster cleared for a day. every subsequent offense by the same gm would result in his roster being cleared again and for one day longer then the previous (1day, 2 days, 3 days, etc.). i was thinking about cap penalties as well, but if offender gets mad and decides to quit his successor would inherit team with reduced cap through no fault of his own, so i dropped that idea

Fenris-77 wrote:Anthoer possibility here is to label all the guys on all the teams, plus the IR as keepers, at which point they're clearly identified in the Player list. I'm not sure if that tag stays when they're on the wire though. :-?


i don't know how this would work, i have never dealt with the keeper tags. if anybody knows, please explain
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

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dasein, Google Adsense [Bot] and 2 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues




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