Billy and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I had a lot of the same thoughts and questions so I am glad someone asked. I honestly really like that this league doesn't get overly complicated with a lot of things. I think there are often extra complications that don't add a whole lot to the league. I do really like bidding by total contact as it is a lot simpler in my opinion. I also like that it might tempt people to make bad long term contracts. I like rules that can allow people to make gambles to win the championship but have a chance at backfiring. In my experience rules like that create great league parity. If someone wants to win now it should hurt a little in the future or have the potential to hurt in the future. Just my experience. Another question on bidding on a total contract. If I have a winning bid of $50m do I have to evenly dispense the contract into 5 years of $10m for example or can I go $5m this year, $10m in year 2 and 3, $15m in year 4, and $10m in year 5 or something like that? Can the winning bid be spread out unevenly over the years and is there a limit to the unevenness? 4 years at 2.5m, one year at $40m?Thanks!
Clarifications that I want to double-check I understand correctly:Can any player on an expiring contract be given an extension (with RFAs being slightly different as described in the rules? For FA signings and extensions, are the ranges the required number of years or the max? For example, could someone extend/sign a player for 1 year, 20 million (which would not make any sense for an FA signing but would for an extension)?Are G-League players still on normal contracts that just don't count against the cap (I assume so based on the rules)? Also, does the free drop for G-league rule basically mean that anyone with less than 60 games experience can be dropped with no cap hit?Suggestion/comment on FA biddingAlso, salaries being based on total amount seems like it encourages long (and likely bad) contracts for older players a ton. It seems to me like using salary per year might be better, possibly with discounts for multiyear contracts. For example, something like paying 100% of the bid per year for 1 year, 90% per year for 2 years, ... 50% or 60% of the bid per year for 5 years. This still gives an advantage to owners willing to make multiyear deals without practically forcing long contracts for older stars. But if the total amount seemed to work well before, it might be best to keep it. My suggestion would probably require a rule restricting extensions to multiyear contracts as well to prevent high one-year contracts followed by extensions to abuse the system.I also thought a soft cap/hard cap (min contracts, rookie contracts, resigning allowed to go over soft cap) seemed like a good idea at first, but that might just make things more complicated without much benefit. I don't see anything else with the rules right now. They seem pretty good to me.