OFFICIAL SCL RULES - Fantasy Basketball Cafe 2014
Fantasy Basketball Cafe


Return to FBC Salary Cap

OFFICIAL SCL RULES

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

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby dcdoorknob » Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:15 am

I think having bird rights giving the ability to match the highest bid in an (ongoing) auction is a decent enough idea.
dcdoorknob
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster

Fantasy ExpertMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 340
(Past Year: 120)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby dasein » Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:42 am

Da Ruhl wrote:"

I'm not sure how this can be too powerful regardless of what x% is. I think, logically, for very low values of x, it should be useless/not worth the complication and for very high values of x too powerful, with some midde ground in between. Now, I'm not saying I know exactly what very low / very high / middle ground are, but I do think all three must exist.

But if somebody can explain to me why (extreme example to prove my point) a 0.01% "phantom increase" would be too powerful, I'd love to hear it! :-)


Ok, this is fair enough comment. Lets use an example of a basic 4 year deal offered by a manager with bird rights where x = 1, and 5

Basic 4 yr contract: 40M (10, 10, 10, 10)

if x = 1, phantom contract = 40.4M. The next manager needs to increase the average yearly bid my a little more than 0.1M. This isn't overpowered, but I'd argue scully's "match" proposal does pretty much the same thing and is easier and less confusing to deal with.

if x = 5, phantom contract = 42M. This would require the next bidder to add more than 0.5M per year average salary. It's subjective as to whether this is overpowered or acceptable. I'd guess that at best, this would be around the upper limit of acceptable. Wouldn't be surprised if most find this overpowered.

Ok, so writing it off as fundamentally overpowered was perhaps a little lazy. It's probably fair to say though, that the combination of subjectivity attributed to the %, and relatively cumbersome nature of using it in auctions means it's unlikely to be the best way to go. Again, I'd say the "match" proposal achieves pretty much the same end and is easier and less confusing to use.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 937
(Past Year: 432)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby Da Ruhl » Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:19 am

Gotcha. So our min bid increment (essentially what matching allows you to avoid is):

Minimum Bid Increments
- If BYS is less than 2.5M, C must increase by at least 0.1M
- If BYS is greater or equal to 2.5M, C must increase by at least 0.25M

Depending on the BYC and contract length, you can work out an implied x% in the system I was proposing. Some of it seems reasonable i.e. on a 1.25, 1.25 bid the implied x% is about 4% (e.g. 0.1 / (2 * 1.25) ) as you'd save .05 per year - small amount, but on a small contract, so seems right.

On the other, hand, for a 10, 10, 10, 10 bid, you'd have an implied x% of about .6% (e.g. 0.25 / (4 * 10) ) and save .06 per year. This feels too low to me.

Finally, on a healthy 20, 20, 20, 20 bid, you'd have an implied x% of about .3% (e.g. 0.25 / (4 * 20) ), still saving .06 per year. This, frankly, I find almost completely inconsequential given the bid size.

So I'm not sure I agree that the match is better, although you could argue it is because the min bid increments are pretty small relative to larger 4 year contracts. Of course, you could change the min bid increment or add additional tiers to it, but they would be subjective (just like the x%) and (for me at least) hard to remember.

One solution might be to replace the minimum bid increment system above with a percentage i.e. new bid must be at least 5% greater than old bid. This might make the min bid increments easier to remember, make them scale better (I kind of shudder at trying to get from 20, 20, 20, 20 to 25, 25, 25, 25 in .25 increments on the total contract value), and essentially collapse the Bird rights version I was proposing and the match idea into the same thing.

But I'm good to roll either way.

-DR
Da Ruhl
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster


Posts: 169
(Past Year: 165)
Joined: 23 Jul 2013
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby nykos » Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:44 am

For the Birds rights, maybe raising the % of salary increase/decrease to +/-20% could give better flexibility to the payroll of the old owner.
nykos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster


Posts: 231
(Past Year: 226)
Joined: 23 Jul 2013
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby nykos » Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:47 am

another post for another question related to this salary management:
For RFA, when an owner decides to match an auction, can he restructure the total salary amount with different % & scheme (frontloaded or backloaded)? if not yet (from what I read from the past years posts), I guess it could be interesting too.
nykos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster


Posts: 231
(Past Year: 226)
Joined: 23 Jul 2013
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby scully19 » Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:46 pm

I'm of the opinion that %increase difference just isn't really much of an advantage. It is in the NBA because they have a soft cap and this is a way to pay more to a player but less at the start and avoid the soft salary cap limit. Since there is no hard cap in the NBA, most all contracts are done in this fashion. For us, if we use a larger increase all it means is we have less to spend the next years because we only have 75 to spend, and generally speaking everyone goes close to that number every year.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1352
(Past Year: 202)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby dasein » Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:52 pm

nykos wrote:another post for another question related to this salary management:
For RFA, when an owner decides to match an auction, can he restructure the total salary amount with different % & scheme (frontloaded or backloaded)? if not yet (from what I read from the past years posts), I guess it could be interesting too.


I don't know if this has been raised before. It's an interesting idea, with no obvious downside that I can see. Anyone else see a reason why we shouldn't allow this?
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 937
(Past Year: 432)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby nykos » Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:03 pm

scully19 wrote:I'm of the opinion that %increase difference just isn't really much of an advantage. It is in the NBA because they have a soft cap and this is a way to pay more to a player but less at the start and avoid the soft salary cap limit. Since there is no hard cap in the NBA, most all contracts are done in this fashion. For us, if we use a larger increase all it means is we have less to spend the next years because we only have 75 to spend, and generally speaking everyone goes close to that number every year.


you normally always have, each year, some contracts coming of the book, so you can backload a FA auction with 20% increase. Or the opposite would be as valuable. You frontload the offer, so you keep more cap room down the road, or when the value of the player can decrease.
It gives greater flexibility to the owner. That's a rather small advantage we could give I believe with the birds rights.
nykos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster


Posts: 231
(Past Year: 226)
Joined: 23 Jul 2013
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby dasein » Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:05 pm

scully19 wrote:I'm of the opinion that %increase difference just isn't really much of an advantage. It is in the NBA because they have a soft cap and this is a way to pay more to a player but less at the start and avoid the soft salary cap limit. Since there is no hard cap in the NBA, most all contracts are done in this fashion. For us, if we use a larger increase all it means is we have less to spend the next years because we only have 75 to spend, and generally speaking everyone goes close to that number every year.


Yeah. I was planning to use it on one of my BR FAs, but realistically it's not going to help me win the auction. You might get to save a couple mill now at the expense of paying a couple mill more in the future, but you still have to beat out the underbidder. I think generally we prefer an even spend across years so having the right to pay more in the future isn't that big a draw. It's also hard to win an auction with a front loaded contract - starting with a big number means the values drop more rapidly than if you started with a small number and went up. The BYS would have to be pretty big to make that route work with 15% decreases, which makes that of doubtful attractiveness too.

It might of made more sense when we had the soft cap, but I can't remember the nuances.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 937
(Past Year: 432)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: OFFICIAL SCL RULES

Postby dasein » Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:17 pm

Da Ruhl wrote:Gotcha. So our min bid increment (essentially what matching allows you to avoid is):

Minimum Bid Increments
- If BYS is less than 2.5M, C must increase by at least 0.1M
- If BYS is greater or equal to 2.5M, C must increase by at least 0.25M



This reminds me, we should probably rejig these as well given that the max salary vote has resulted in change. Anyone want auctions in the 20M range going up in 0.25M increments?

How about.....

- If BYS is less than 5M, C must increase by at least 0.1M
- If BYS is greater or equal to 5M, but less than 10M, C must increase by at least 0.25M
- If BYS is greater than 10M, C must increase by at least 0.5M

Thought things might be neater if we stick to the 5yr, 10yr thresholds that we use for contract length. Having a more substantial increment at the higher end would also give the BR "match" thing a bit more meat, should we decide to introduce that.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 937
(Past Year: 432)
Joined: 19 Aug 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 15:33 hours
(and 90 days)


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