EDIT (10/12): -Under Veteran Contracts it is now made explicit that annual raises are of a fixed amount: BYS.r -emphasised the fact that tie breaks are applied sequentially.
EDIT (14/12): - Penalties section added - Salary restrictions for trade removed - RFA rule clarified; rookies become RFA after final year of rookie contract. - Rules around team options (for rookies), and partially-guaranteed contracts (for veterans) updated and clarified.
EDIT (18/12): - Added new section: 2.1 Cap Holds. Makes explicit the illegality of bids that take you over the cap in the current year.
EDIT (5/1/2012): - Emphasised that Partially Guaranteed Contract Buyouts and Team Options can only be excercised during the offseason.
EDIT (17/1/2012) 3.2- swedish rounding to be used to round salaries to nearest 0.01M 4.2 - Teams with full rosters may win an auction before dropping a player. 24hr limit to do so. 4.4 - The above does not apply to weekly contracts. Teams must drop then add. 5.0 - Teams cannot sign a player they had dropped during the same season.
Here are a few things that I've either changed or omitted, or not included for various reasons. I put them here to draw attention because some will require league action or consent.
Papa Bears
1. I haven't filled in the detail for Team Options, because I'm not aware that we have agreed how to do it. 2. Dito for Injured Player Exemption. The current rule is a FBOC, to borrow a phrase from fenris. We haven't discussed how to do it though. 3. I've kinda invented a system for veteran contracts. Those who care should pay special attention here and make sure they're happy. 4. Do we want to uses best team or worst team wins the 3rd tie break? 5. Those who care should pay special attention to the weekly contract laws. I've never used them, so not sure what rules around them should be. Do we even want to keep these? It seems like a pain to keep track of them?
Baby Bears
1. Do we need a minimum roster spend? I've currently ignored this and just put a min roster size. 2. I’ve chosen to scrap the concept of restricted free agents entirely. This OK? 3. I've made the salary restrictions for trades the same as new NBA CBA. This makes trading easier. 4. I've defined bird rights as contract lasting 2 or more years because the last definition was too much work to keep track of. This ok? 5. Got rid of ‘you have to use 1st round pick every 2 years’ rule. Pain to keep track off, and new rules offer strong incentives to keep rookies. 6. Are rookie contracts currently too high? I've left as is but maybe we want to lower them.
I would use best team as the 3rd tiebreaker, and I think the rookie scale is fine. I don't think we should scratch restricted free agency as its another incentive to value draft picks. Also, you should be able to use a player on two consecutive 7 day contracts(and I'd change the time they have to spend on waivers to 24 hrs).
I'm going to look over these some more in the morning, but I just had a thought regarding the whole 7 day contract thing: something I would like to see is the ability to sign a guy to a permanent contract, if during the 7 days, a manager decides he wants to keep the guy on his roster. Maybe set up a rule of some sorts, where If a manager decides to keep a 7 day player permanently, he must offer up to 5 times the salary (is this even a realistic number?) from the initial 7 day bid, provided he is under the cap. And/or he can not drop said player for the remainder of the season. Or, if he does drop the player, the entire contract counts against his cap, not just a % of it.
It just seems to me that in real life, a team has the option of signing a guy they pick up on a 10 day contract. And I'm sure that any player under contract making the league minimum, is probably making a WHOLE lot more than a guy on a ten day deal.
I just found it frustrating last season that I could pick up someone like Humphries after only one huge game, and after 7 days, and several more huge games, he's available for cherry picking by guys who might have the ability to outbid me in one shot.
DVauthrin wrote: I don't think we should scratch restricted free agency as its another incentive to value draft picks.
Maybe I don't understand the restricted FA concept as it was applied in the past, but I don't see how it makes draft picksmore valuable. I thought it would actually mean the opposite, because it provides an opportunity for other teams to swoop in and offer contracts to your guys.
DVauthrin wrote: I don't think we should scratch restricted free agency as its another incentive to value draft picks.
Maybe I don't understand the restricted FA concept as it was applied in the past, but I don't see how it makes draft picksmore valuable. I thought it would actually mean the opposite, because it provides an opportunity for other teams to swoop in and offer contracts to your guys.
In restricted free agency, the market sets your players price for you and you get to decide whether to match the other owners contract where you automatically win the player.
For example someone other than snake offers 20 million per year for curry. he gets the right to match that contract, and he automatically wins curry back. let's say harden goes for 6 million over 3 years, scully gets the right to match harden's salary at those numbers and if he does, he gets him back at that price without ever having to bid.
So-Tex wrote:I'm going to look over these some more in the morning, but I just had a thought regarding the whole 7 day contract thing: something I would like to see is the ability to sign a guy to a permanent contract, if during the 7 days, a manager decides he wants to keep the guy on his roster. Maybe set up a rule of some sorts, where If a manager decides to keep a 7 day player permanently, he must offer up to 5 times the salary (is this even a realistic number?) from the initial 7 day bid, provided he is under the cap. And/or he can not drop said player for the remainder of the season. Or, if he does drop the player, the entire contract counts against his cap, not just a % of it.
This makes a lot of sense to me. The GM who picks up a player that then breaks out should have the chance to keep them on the roster, provided they sign them before the 7 days are up.
DVauthrin wrote: I don't think we should scratch restricted free agency as its another incentive to value draft picks.
Maybe I don't understand the restricted FA concept as it was applied in the past, but I don't see how it makes draft picksmore valuable. I thought it would actually mean the opposite, because it provides an opportunity for other teams to swoop in and offer contracts to your guys.
In restricted free agency, the market sets your players price for you and you get to decide whether to match the other owners contract where you automatically win the player.
For example someone other than snake offers 20 million per year for curry. he gets the right to match that contract, and he automatically wins curry back. let's say harden goes for 6 million over 3 years, scully gets the right to match harden's salary at those numbers and if he does, he gets him back at that price without ever having to bid.
Ok, I understand this now, but I still don't see how having this is more beneficial to the owner than not having RFAs. With no RFAs, snake gets to keep Curry at a guaranteed low price for 4 years, and doesn't have to worry about conserving cap space to prevent others from poaching him.
Maybe having only the 4th year as RFA (rather than 3rd and 4th) would be ok, although it seems like rule 'fat' to me.
I think that restricted free agency is an important part of a salary cap league. It gives teams a solid chance to retain their own breakout players. Adding a hard cap cuts back on how impactful this for the big spenders, which I'm fine with.
Isn't the first tiebreaker problematic? In that, if I were to offer ie. Durant 2 year max deal I would beat out everyone who had offered him a 4 year max deal. Or have I missed something whereby additional seasons adds value to a contract?
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Hockey
by dasein » Sun Dec 04, 2011 5:30 am 
