WAR rules proposals (new proposals or changes)

[WestCoastExpress]

In this case, essentially you can trade some of your cap space to another team though.

ie.
I trade $20m in cap ($20m cash in 2020) to Brent, in exchange for a prospect or two.

Is this what we want to do moving forward?

A team could then be "over" the cap by $70m for a season ... Would be tough for people to compete with that.

[RyanJames5]

Well, I think it would need to come with the caveat that you can't just buy players.  It could say something like the amount of money traded cannot exceed the amount of the yearly salary of players involved? 

[Brent]

I would prefer to not allow money to be traded at all.  Keeps an even playing field and requires more strategy from GMs.

[Daddy]

The idea of even cap across the board was to eliminate teams having an advantage. When you're paying salary on a player that is still using your cap.

Some players salaries are unmovable without paying on them. Deals already can't be sweetened by including draft picks.

I'm open to all ideas, I'm very partial to allowing cash paid for just one season. The season of the trade only.

Doing this won't eliminate a team from having say 70m paid in one season but then the following season(s) they are on the hook for those contracts likely needing to pay on them themselves in order to move them.  Advantage nullified by the disadvantage of planning beyond the trade year.

The real MLB allows cash exchanges. Eliminating it altogether may not be the way to go but not allowing anything beyond the trade year is easier to keep track of and still keeps in play the strategy of same cap.

Only thing I would alter about this would be allowing up to a set percentage to be paid on years 2+: for example no more than 20-25%.

But I do like the idea of team with who handed out bad contracts being stuck with immovable assets and making more strategy overall

[WestCoastExpress]

Doing this won't eliminate a team from having say 70m paid in one season but then the following season(s) they are on the hook for those contracts likely needing to pay on them themselves in order to move them.  Advantage nullified by the disadvantage of planning beyond the trade year.

The real MLB allows cash exchanges. Eliminating it altogether may not be the way to go but not allowing anything beyond the trade year is easier to keep track of and still keeps in play the strategy of same cap.

That would be a good way to do it. Just for the current season.

It doesn't strap a team long-term with having dead cap because you've paid for a player with 4 years left on his contract. Also helps incoming GM's for the same reason.

I don't mind either way - have never played in a league that doesn't allow cash to move, so it could be a different twist.
But as pointed out, makes trading a bit tougher. You'd have to trade back high contracts to make a deal work.

[Brent]

The idea of even cap across the board was to eliminate teams having an advantage. When you're paying salary on a player that is still using your cap.

Some players salaries are unmovable without paying on them. Deals already can't be sweetened by including draft picks.

I'm open to all ideas, I'm very partial to allowing cash paid for just one season. The season of the trade only.

Doing this won't eliminate a team from having say 70m paid in one season but then the following season(s) they are on the hook for those contracts likely needing to pay on them themselves in order to move them.  Advantage nullified by the disadvantage of planning beyond the trade year.

The real MLB allows cash exchanges. Eliminating it altogether may not be the way to go but not allowing anything beyond the trade year is easier to keep track of and still keeps in play the strategy of same cap.

I like this option, current year (trade year) only.

I played in a sim basketball league years ago that followed the NBA CBA so salaries had to match, it was interesting.

I'm in an offsite league that doesn't allow money paid.  There are still a lot of trades.  The buyout rules before the trade deadline are more favorable which helps to deal with bad contracts.

[indiansnation]

Are we going to have anything set up where a player gets suspended that we recoop his salary? Or if a player gets hurt and it causes  to retire before his contract is up?

[Daddy]

Are we going to have anything set up where a player gets suspended that we recoop his salary? Or if a player gets hurt and it causes  to retire before his contract is up?

suspension no... That's part of the game.

In the rules under contracts all things are explained.  Here is an excerpt from that....

In the event of death or retirement the GM is afforded a "free drop" regardless of contract there is no cap hit.
In the event of suspension or anything other than death/retirement the players contract stands in full.

[blkhwkfn]

Hey not sure this was asked already but what about IR slots?

[Daddy]

Hey not sure this was asked already but what about IR slots?

Because we use an active 40 man roster and not a 25 man roster we do not use IR slots.