ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => NHL Leagues => Dynasty NHL => Topic started by: Rob on September 22, 2021, 10:14:40 AM
-
See this thread for reference: http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=391651.0
Columbus is trading Dumoulin and paying off his 23/24 season, but not 21/22, 22/23.
Nothing in the rules against it, but it's a bit odd. I'm contemplating the negative effects - like setting up teams to have cap defecits in the future... Some leagues rule against that - you can't be OVER the cap in any future season. We have nothing like that. Is there any utility those rules in our format?
Really just thinking out loud since nobody's tried this in the past and it's unconventional.
Your thoughts appreciated!
-
Already voiced my concern but want to add that I love the new GM's being creative and throwing us for a loop!
-
I find it rather hilarious that a trade I have been involved in has generated this discussion, as I substantially limit the amount of cap hits I am willing to take.
With that said, I have always been one to open up as many avenues to allow someone to build their team in different ways. These cap deals are not uncommon in baseball, but we do tie the cap to the actual player there. I think if there was some kind of limit to cap hits for the future that might help provide comfort about this practice, however, I also understand the idea of keeping cap clean as possible to help keep teams attractive to new GMs.
-
we all look for creative ways to improve our teams. my only concern is its so far in the future will the team owner still have the team then. I think a good rule would be something like future years cash cant be more the the year before it or to limit the number of years the cash can be traded
-
This is the best. After all the years in this league there are still little nooks and crannies to find in the rules.
My opinion is if it is easily managed in Fantrax then I have no problem with it. The cap isn't coming after the end of a player's contract. They are just paying a single year instead of a piece of all of them.
It would be tough to say a GM cannot balance their teams payroll next year or years down the line based on a single trade. Especially a trade involving a $3.5m player.
I say great job by the GMs here to make a trade work. :thumbsup:
-
My opinion is if it is easily managed in Fantrax then I have no problem with it. The cap isn't coming after the end of a player's contract. They are just paying a single year instead of a piece of all of them.
Gypsie said what I was thinking -- as long as the tracking is not a burden to anyone and the cash exchange is sometime during the term of the traded contract, it's OK with me.
-
I don't think there's any real negative effects of allowing this. Future cap can be affected similarly by any cap exchange. Anyone could trade for a $9M multi year contract paid for in the first year, then spend that cap space in year 1, putting them in the negative in year 2. That can be managed and bandaged in the off-season.
In terms of maintenance, all future cap exchanges are handled manually right now, so it makes no difference as long as our logs are clear about it. Hopefully Fantrax enhances to handle future cap exchanges in the future.
I'll make a note in the rules, so that when this comes up again in 10 years when we're all more senile, we won't be as stumped!
-
I wasn't aware paying future money wasn't norm here, but saw it is legal and it made most sense given both our team situations. I had the cap now but Dumoulin is still overpaid at 3.5m so needed something to make it worth for me.
I see there is no real objection to continue having this allowed in the future, but guess I will toss an additional 2 cents:
Perhaps we can cap total money allowed to be paid on any player to be max 50% of salary. We have this in PDH and works well as a middle ground, opposed to leagues going all or nothing - either allowing full salary or not allowing any payment. However, each league is unique so I'm on board keeping as is, but since we got this thread figured I'd toss the idea.
-
I wasn't aware paying future money wasn't norm here, but saw it is legal and it made most sense given both our team situations. I had the cap now but Dumoulin is still overpaid at 3.5m so needed something to make it worth for me.
I see there is no real objection to continue having this allowed in the future, but guess I will toss an additional 2 cents:
Perhaps we can cap total money allowed to be paid on any player to be max 50% of salary. We have this in PDH and works well as a middle ground, opposed to leagues going all or nothing - either allowing full salary or not allowing any payment. However, each league is unique so I'm on board keeping as is, but since we got this thread figured I'd toss the idea.
We've always allowed trading of future cap, just never had a trade where it was one single future year.
What's the utility of the 50% rule? We allow trading up to the value of the contracts being moved. And it was only a couple years ago that we added that rule to avoid picks being traded for cash. Aside from that I don't see the utility in further limiting the cash exchange rules.
-
We've always allowed trading of future cap, just never had a trade where it was one single future year.
What's the utility of the 50% rule? We allow trading up to the value of the contracts being moved. And it was only a couple years ago that we added that rule to avoid picks being traded for cash. Aside from that I don't see the utility in further limiting the cash exchange rules.
Yeah I have no issue as is, just tossed it out as food for thought.
I guess main benefit of limiting is to prevent a team paying big sums in any given year and then leaving. From what I can tell doesn't seem like this is something we need to worry about.
-
I generally agree that as long as it is trackable, it should be okay.