Max Salary Discussion - Fantasy Basketball Cafe 2014
Fantasy Basketball Cafe


Return to FBC Salary Cap

Max Salary Discussion

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

Re: Max Salary Discussion

Postby Fenris-77 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:16 pm

DVauthrin wrote:Basically to hammer Rob's point home. He's the Spurs of the league. He has his Duncan(LeBron in our league), and then wisely spent to build a strong core around them. Punishing him for being a well run team is silly. There are always going to be have's and have not's in any league. Not everyone can win. I personally think the solution is to lower the hard cap significantly. Then increase minimum salaries going forward to at least 1M, and watch how much harder it is to keep everyone forever. Force owners to have tighter budgets, and guess what, more big ticket free agents will be in play, even with a max salary.

This really isn't going work given the weight of existing salaries in the league, at least not anytime soon. It would probably have be a two or three year intro period. Beyond that, if you lower the hard cap significantly but leave max salaries the way they are, all you're really doing is magnifying the impact of guys like LeBron and Durant on those 20M deals, regardless of who owns them, which doesn't seem to address the issue at hand.

DVauthrin wrote: Then eliminate bird rights, and just use the tiebreaker system to see which team gives the guy a better chance of winning.
This is problematic too since the tie-break system as it stands is a wonky piece of shizz. Given how difficult it's been for us to sort out a better alternative, which would be essential if that system is going to decide who gets to own LeBron, I think there's a lot of pitfalls to the plan. Not the least of which is the heavy emphasis it would place on gaming the tie-break system as much as possible (who doesn't want to be the LeBron or Durant owner in this set-up?). At that point what you really have is a single sub-set of rules that determines who gets to own the handful of max-level free agents, a solution I don't think I can get behind.

I'm not actually against trying to support frugal cap management, but at the end of the day it's in the hands of each GM to do the best job they can with the cap they've got, and that isn't always going to go well. That sucks for guys who overpay for injured and under-performing players but it's also a part of how dynasty leagues work.
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: Max Salary Discussion

Postby scully19 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:21 pm

How is it punishing? Seriously? He had the best player in the league for 5 years (ignoring year 1) and we need to feel bad for him that he MAY (emphasis here on may) lose him or have to pay more to keep him? If we keep the same rules, or mimic NAB close in which the guys don't leave a good situation, then they would be locked in forever since they are the best players in the league, and they are got at a discount. That means they are getting huge value on the best players. Ask the experts on auction leagues and they say OVERPAY for the elite guys because you can find cheap quality guys later. These guys are UNDERPAYING on elite guys and complaining the gravy train might end and that THAT isn't fair. Please.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1337
(Past Year: 195)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: Max Salary Discussion

Postby silentjim » Thu Aug 15, 2013 6:36 pm

scully19 wrote:How is it punishing? Seriously? He had the best player in the league for 5 years (ignoring year 1) and we need to feel bad for him that he MAY (emphasis here on may) lose him or have to pay more to keep him? If we keep the same rules, or mimic NAB close in which the guys don't leave a good situation, then they would be locked in forever since they are the best players in the league, and they are got at a discount. That means they are getting huge value on the best players. Ask the experts on auction leagues and they say OVERPAY for the elite guys because you can find cheap quality guys later. These guys are UNDERPAYING on elite guys and complaining the gravy train might end and that THAT isn't fair. Please.


I think there's agreement with this, but let's keep discussion to how to fix it. Hahaha. :-D
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11483
(Past Year: 791)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: Max Salary Discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:09 pm

Fenris-77 wrote:
DVauthrin wrote:Basically to hammer Rob's point home. He's the Spurs of the league. He has his Duncan(LeBron in our league), and then wisely spent to build a strong core around them. Punishing him for being a well run team is silly. There are always going to be have's and have not's in any league. Not everyone can win. I personally think the solution is to lower the hard cap significantly. Then increase minimum salaries going forward to at least 1M, and watch how much harder it is to keep everyone forever. Force owners to have tighter budgets, and guess what, more big ticket free agents will be in play, even with a max salary.

This really isn't going work given the weight of existing salaries in the league, at least not anytime soon. It would probably have be a two or three year intro period. Beyond that, if you lower the hard cap significantly but leave max salaries the way they are, all you're really doing is magnifying the impact of guys like LeBron and Durant on those 20M deals, regardless of who owns them, which doesn't seem to address the issue at hand.

DVauthrin wrote: Then eliminate bird rights, and just use the tiebreaker system to see which team gives the guy a better chance of winning.
This is problematic too since the tie-break system as it stands is a wonky piece of shizz. Given how difficult it's been for us to sort out a better alternative, which would be essential if that system is going to decide who gets to own LeBron, I think there's a lot of pitfalls to the plan. Not the least of which is the heavy emphasis it would place on gaming the tie-break system as much as possible (who doesn't want to be the LeBron or Durant owner in this set-up?). At that point what you really have is a single sub-set of rules that determines who gets to own the handful of max-level free agents, a solution I don't think I can get behind.

I'm not actually against trying to support frugal cap management, but at the end of the day it's in the hands of each GM to do the best job they can with the cap they've got, and that isn't always going to go well. That sucks for guys who overpay for injured and under-performing players but it's also a part of how dynasty leagues work.


I'm fine with massively increasing the max. I just don't want a straight auction style setup. I believe 20M is too low with such a high hard cap. As to your 2nd point, the FA in question should never be factored in to tiebreakers. it's based on the quality of the roster they would be joining. But i'm not attached to our tiebreaker either.

As to your 2nd point, exactly. Owners will make good and bad trades, FA decisions, etc, no matter what rules are in place. It is what it is.
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: Max Salary Discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:19 pm

scully19 wrote:How is it punishing? Seriously? He had the best player in the league for 5 years (ignoring year 1) and we need to feel bad for him that he MAY (emphasis here on may) lose him or have to pay more to keep him? If we keep the same rules, or mimic NAB close in which the guys don't leave a good situation, then they would be locked in forever since they are the best players in the league, and they are got at a discount. That means they are getting huge value on the best players. Ask the experts on auction leagues and they say OVERPAY for the elite guys because you can find cheap quality guys later. These guys are UNDERPAYING on elite guys and complaining the gravy train might end and that THAT isn't fair. Please.


Calm down. I'm fine with significantly increasing the max(25M isn't enough imho). But you can't just go change this rule today right before we start an offseason. At least give owners a season to clear cap space to prep for the change as necessary. That's fair. Whether it's the LeBron or Durant owner is immaterial. Also, I tend to take the attitude that we can't protect owners from their mistakes, whether it's trades, FA, etc. They have to dig their own way out, that's how dynasty leagues work, and sometimes it requires building through the draft like you are doing.
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: Max Salary Discussion

Postby Fenris-77 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:27 pm

Not even next year IMO, the issues with existing contracts would still be massive. It would have to be the LeBron FA year at the earliest. We'd also probably have to allow some discount cap shedding of some sort league wide to accommodate the change depending on when we were going to implement it. NOt an amnesty I think, but perhaps some sort of super-waiver for guys signed to deals before X date... :-?
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: Max Salary Discussion

Postby TheRobSays » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:30 pm

At that point you might as well reset the league then since all other contracts are unfair vis-à-vis a no max or higher max world. Would you rather own Carmelo at $14, Griffin at $9 and Gasol at $9M or Lebron at $32? Hell James Harden is FA next year - he is a Top 5 guy now - what's he worth?
TheRobSays
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 427
(Past Year: 72)
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: Max Salary Discussion

Postby Fenris-77 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:40 pm

TheRobSays wrote: Hell James Harden is FA next year - he is a Top 5 guy now - what's he worth?

Right now? 20M, and he's still not as good as James or Durant. :-b

And no, all the contracts aren't unfair just because the max changes. The contracts are what they are, and reflect market value at the time, for that player. If a given contract seems low there are a bunch of reasons why that might be, but it it's not somehow unfair. Those players were bid on in a free market setting and the high bid won each guy with room to raise. It couldn't possibly be more fair, and doesn't reflect the enhanced value of certain max deals in any regard whatsoever.
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: Max Salary Discussion

Postby TheRobSays » Thu Aug 15, 2013 7:45 pm

I guess we can agree to disagree then.

Based on our showing this year in the baseball league perhaps we should just ask Thrill instead as he is clearly WAY smarter than the two of us combined?
TheRobSays
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 427
(Past Year: 72)
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: Max Salary Discussion

Postby scully19 » Thu Aug 15, 2013 8:18 pm

I don't see how this so drastically changes the landscape that it needs a redraft. This change only seriously affects the top 5 guys MAYBE. I'll give 10 to be generous. I'll be generous more and say that on average those guys increase on average of 5mill a year. That means you would have 50 instead of 55 for the rest of the 13 or so guys on your team. 5mill difference for 13 guys is a difference of 0.38mill a year per person. This is not a lot of money that their respective value could be potentially lowered. I'm also pretty sure that's very generous. Do top 16, so on average every team has 5 mill less to spend then to be even more generous, and that affects every other player not in the top 16 by lowering their value by roughly 0.38mill. That's hardly significant.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1337
(Past Year: 195)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
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




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