0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
All this said, I am fine with the current setup. I like that players are getting too expensive to make the extend decision easily. What we may want to look into is there a way to tie our extension factor to total league production. For example this season there has been some crazy offense compared to others. Having the same multiple of 25000 with higher league production and static cap is making many players extension costs more than what is reasonable given our cap has not changed. Or alternatively maybe our cap number is based on total league production but we keep the extension factor of 25k the same.
Might need to change the league name then no? Seriously I think there are other ways to encourage more turn-over. A cap on trading cash for example. Would like to hear more about your idea for extensions even if radical.
I pulled this out of the Q&A thread since it's as good a time as any to have this discussion. It's been a couple years using this method - how does everyone feel about it?
If anything we need a bit less dynasty and bit more more turnover of players year to year. I pretty much support anything that pushes more players into free agency.
I attribute the stagnant trade market the last two years with the top teams being just so dominant that there weren't 2-3 trades that would put a team into contention. Maybe that will change this upcoming year.
My opinion recently has been to reduce the number of years of prospect extensions down to 3 years. This will allow for more players to be making full scale money faster which would push more players into FA and probably increase trading.
$25k is an arbitrary number designed to improve free-agency options and accelerate improvement of lower tier teams. The trade-off is that teams are less able to retain talent. (No Dynasty for you!)The second-order effect is a sluggish trade environment. Prospect contracts are more valuable than salaried point producers.I support the intention of the change but have always argued against the the mechanics. I see a time where others will join me in calling for tweaking the static multiplier slightly lower.
if anyone thinks that the calculating numbers need to be adjusted they can always start that discussion.