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: League Vote on trading rules

Postby silentjim » Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:56 am

I choose B as well. Simpler is better and I agree it should keep things more interesting as well as have trades easier to make.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11491
(Past Year: 733)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby nsink » Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:58 am

DVauthrin wrote:
nsink wrote:
DVauthrin wrote:Our rules right now say that you have to match salaries by either 150% or 100% + 5 million dollars, whichever is lower. This follows the NBA model, but the NBA uses a soft cap, while we have moved to a straight hard cap.

Option A) keep it as is, 150% rule or 100% +5 (the lesser of the two numbers) Used in all trades even when both teams are under the cap.

Option B) no percentage restrictions on trades, as long as both teams remain under the hard cap of 75 million after the trade, the trade is legal.

Here's how to vote: I'm including a poll with option A or B, you click which you prefer. Your vote is final after first submission(no changing Later)

Or you can post option A: number, option B: number

My vote is option A: 2
Option B: 1



could we make the % rule, whichever is larger not smaller. the smaller makes it real hard to trade a cheap overperforming player (150% of 300K is only 450K, but if it ws 100%+5 he cld be trade for a comparbly peforming player just someone on a more vetern contract up to 5.3M) (for example Kevin love last year was only 2.something million he was just as valuable as anyone in the league but it'd have been hard to trade him for anyone except the cheapest players in the league)


If we keep the percentage rule, the 150% works both ways
. Like last year if I'm trading love(3.92M) I can take on 5.88 mil or 2.62 mil in salary back.


yea i ws just pointing out if u changed it to greater u cldve gotten 8.92 back, giving u more flexability in a trade to get a better larger ssalary player
nsink
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 388
(Past Year: 117)
Joined: 7 Dec 2011
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby DVauthrin » Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:01 am

nsink wrote:
DVauthrin wrote:
nsink wrote:

could we make the % rule, whichever is larger not smaller. the smaller makes it real hard to trade a cheap overperforming player (150% of 300K is only 450K, but if it ws 100%+5 he cld be trade for a comparbly peforming player just someone on a more vetern contract up to 5.3M) (for example Kevin love last year was only 2.something million he was just as valuable as anyone in the league but it'd have been hard to trade him for anyone except the cheapest players in the league)


If we keep the percentage rule, the 150% works both ways
. Like last year if I'm trading love(3.92M) I can take on 5.88 mil or 2.62 mil in salary back.


yea i ws just pointing out if u changed it to greater u cldve gotten 8.92 back, giving u more flexability in a trade to get a better larger ssalary player


I see just like mine and cnotes reconfigured frye and Johnson trade which still doesn't fit the current rules.
DVauthrin
Basketball Scribe
Basketball Scribe

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6341
(Past Year: 162)
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby TheRobSays » Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:27 am

Option B - if you can make it happen under the cap so be it.
TheRobSays
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 429
(Past Year: 72)
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby dasein » Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:49 am

I voted B.

Assuming this wins (it's well ahead at the moment) does this implie that we can make pure salary dump trades where one side gives nothing up?
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 935
(Past Year: 443)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby silentjim » Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:54 am

dasein wrote:I voted B.

Assuming this wins (it's well ahead at the moment) does this implie that we can make pure salary dump trades where one side gives nothing up?


Assuming whoever takes the salary is under the cap, then yes.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11491
(Past Year: 733)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby nsink » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:05 am

dasein wrote:I voted B.

Assuming this wins (it's well ahead at the moment) does this implie that we can make pure salary dump trades where one side gives nothing up?


id assume so, lakers just did it.

maybe ud probably have to get a pick or something though. Commish probably has final say/veto powers. But if u are out of contention why not trade a productive vet to a contending team and take some young cheap potential guys and some picks (or even just a straight salary dump of a declinging guy on a long trem contract - say im not contending this year wldnt it be smarter to salary dump jason kidd for nothing than to hold him and pay him on a rebuilding squad - a team that managed their cap well wld be nicely positioned to make a smart play before the playoff - at the same point its not like i wldnt shop him and try and get best value) .
nsink
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 388
(Past Year: 117)
Joined: 7 Dec 2011
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby Markos » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:07 am

I vote for B, simple is better.
Eradicating Marijuana one blunt at a time
Markos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster

User avatar

Posts: 291
(Past Year: 7)
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Down Under

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby scully19 » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:17 am

dasein wrote:I voted B.

Assuming this wins (it's well ahead at the moment) does this implie that we can make pure salary dump trades where one side gives nothing up?

Well this would be a no considering the other team would be getting nothing from the deal, but yes in terms of trading someone with a lot of money on their contract for someone with less.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1342
(Past Year: 196)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: League Vote on trading rules

Postby 4ndrew » Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:24 am

The other part of it too is that teams must have the minimum 11 roster size. So I assume you can't make a trade that puts you under that?
4ndrew
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster


Posts: 314
Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues



Get Ready...
The 2014 NBA season starts in 21:18 hours
(and 98 days)


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