ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => NBA Leagues => Cross-Court Dynasty => Topic started by: Interpaga on January 14, 2024, 01:49:28 PM
-
Please post here your proposals for rule changes starting from next season.
Changes already approved:
1. FA bidding (starting from 2024/25 season). The duration to win a player in FA will be 24 hours. Basically, in order to avoid too long auctions, you win a player after being the highest bidder for 24 hours
-
The rulebook has been just updated to reflect the changes already agreed upon for the next season and to remove some obsolete parts
-
You should consider canceling all money paid on contracts this year. It only helps the elite teams and keeps bad teams held down. Getting subsidies out of the league was a good start, but it should be accelerated.
If you won't do that you should increase everyone's cap to match.
It's not fair that one team has $34 mil in cap space more than the rest of us in 2024. It's killing the league.
-
If my calculations are correct, the overall impact of previously agreed cash exchanges on 2024/25 should be relatively limited. There is only one team with around $17mn of net total paid salaries and two teams with around $12-13mn of net paid salaries, all the other teams have less than $10m paid on a net basis.
Then in the 2025/26 season previously agreed cash exchanges will go close to zero, so the impact of the old rule will become almost null.
Please also consider that, according to the rules, each team must be salary cap compliant for all seasons and stay always under the cap also in the subsequent years, so the almost full wipe out of cash exchanges in 2025/26 will have some impact also on the upcoming season. To make this impact even stronger, in the upcoming 2024/25 season, we plan to move the deadline to extend a player (and pick up team option) before the end of regular season, so basically a team will need to re-sign an expiring contract before the playoffs (and obviously will need to have cap space to do it), otherwise the player will become a UFA in the offseason.
I cannot cancel unilaterally previously agreed cash exchanges, because cash exchanges were within the previous rules and managers who gained cap usually had to gave more assets to make that happen.
On the other side, a cap 'premium' for teams without cash exchanges on their balance would be too hard to quantify
-
I would disagree that a team having $17 mil extra in cap this year as "relatively limited".
I also would disagree that in 25/26 the impact of the old rule would "become almost null" because the assets that teams acquired will still be on their teams or traded for other assets. I would expect the top teams to remain top teams for at least several years past the cap advantages. I would say it's impossible to quantify the time it will take for this to be fixed.
That's why I was thinking the sooner these deals are gone the better.
Why not give extra cap this year to the teams who do not have these subsidies? I don't understand how it's too hard to quantify. But it's ok.
Thanks for responding to my post
-
It is true that a team in 2025/26 could be able to continue to benefit from expensive players previously acquired through cash exchanges, but, if the salaries paid disappear, this same team will have to have the ability to maintain these players while remaining under the salary cap without subsidies, otherwise it will have to sell assets. And it is important to note that obtaining a salary paid has generally had a cost (in terms of players or picks) for those who have benefited from it.
Surely the effects of what has happened so far in the league will also be felt in 2025/26, but I believe that more than to the old cash exchanges going forward, this will be due to the high activity that some teams have had since the start of the league. For this reason, I believe it is key for the league to increase further the engagement and activity of the participants.
Regarding a possible cap premium, first of all, some teams with paid salaries could feel penalized since the cash exchange typically came at a cost (players, picks). Even assuming that no team disputes the cap premium, what is the fair level of the premium?
A premium of $17m is undoubtedly high, it would create an enormous amount of cap space for all teams with difficult to predict consequences and above all, by opening up new cap space, it could benefit the most active owners which are often also those with the best teams (at the moment some of the teams are constrained because they are close to the cap). On the other side, an arbitrary premium of $3-5mn for teams without paid salaries would in my opinion remain subject to criticism without helping the teams that would benefit from it much
-
It is true that a team in 2025/26 could be able to continue to benefit from expensive players previously acquired through cash exchanges, but, if the salaries paid disappear, this same team will have to have the ability to maintain these players while remaining under the salary cap without subsidies, otherwise it will have to sell assets. And it is important to note that obtaining a salary paid has generally had a cost (in terms of players or picks) for those who have benefited from it.
Surely the effects of what has happened so far in the league will also be felt in 2025/26, but I believe that more than to the old cash exchanges going forward, this will be due to the high activity that some teams have had since the start of the league. For this reason, I believe it is key for the league to increase further the engagement and activity of the participants.
Regarding a possible cap premium, first of all, some teams with paid salaries could feel penalized since the cash exchange typically came at a cost (players, picks). Even assuming that no team disputes the cap premium, what is the fair level of the premium?
A premium of $17m is undoubtedly high, it would create an enormous amount of cap space for all teams with difficult to predict consequences and above all, by opening up new cap space, it could benefit the most active owners which are often also those with the best teams (at the moment some of the teams are constrained because they are close to the cap). On the other side, an arbitrary premium of $3-5mn for teams without paid salaries would in my opinion remain subject to criticism without helping the teams that would benefit from it much
His suggestion is valid.
The teams over the cap should be forced to move those assets to get under the cap.
-
Last year we made the important decision to prohibit new cash exchanges starting this offseason, but there has never been a ruling on canceling existing cash exchanges. A transition year is normal for the effects of an important old rule to be phased out; then next year, previously agreed cash exchanges will go near zero.
I am confident that the effects of the old rule on the upcoming season will be limited in any case, also thanks to the all-seasons cap compliance rule as described in my previous post.
I do not think it would be fair to introduce now a rule to immediately penalize teams that have salaries paid in their balance sheet. Cash exchanges were allowed to the entire league and teams that received salary payments operated within the rules and usually spent assets in exchange for cash received.
I would rather consider introducing a cash bonus for this season only, available exclusively to teams without paid salaries in their balance sheet.
In essence, these teams could apply for a cash bonus of up to $10 million in exchange for picks (for example, $3 million for a second-round pick and $10 million for a first-round pick). The picks would then go to open teams to favor new owners and help rebuild these teams.
This would address jimw's request to accelerate the transition (it's a kind of cap premium) and at the same time avoid disputes with managers with paid salaries who could argue that cash exchanges have cost them picks or players.
If a similar proposal gains support, we can consider it
-
If there is not enough time for teams to adjust to losing their subsidies for this season, why not remove all subsidies for 2025? Everyone has a year and a half to be prepared for that.
-
Taking away the payments that were already made doesnt seem to make sense in my head. The trades were made with that considered in the trade.
-
For the same reason they were eliminated moving forward. They have created a large competitive imbalance in the league. A team like yours would be fine since the cap has increased enough to cover it
-
I agree I will be fine, however you cant penalize someone for using the rules that were in place. For instance I dont trade for KD last year without the future payments.
-
When we decided to eliminate new cash exchanges starting from 2024/25 season, it was also established that existing cash exchanges will not be touched.
Therefore we will not impose new rules to penalize teams that currently have positive cash exchanges on their balance sheet.
However, to further reduce the impact of previously agreed cash exchanges, we propose the following two solutions:
- in the 2025/26 season, each team will not be able to have more than one player with paid salary. It should be noted that in the 2025/26 season only 8 players will still have salaries paid and the highest payment will be $7.5m;
- in the upcoming 2024/25 season and only for this season, a cash bonus* will be introduced for teams that have no salaries paid in cash or a net salary payment amount of less than $1m.
*Cash bonus details. Teams that have no salaries paid in cash or a net salary payment amount of less than $1m in 2024/25 can apply for a 2024/25 cash bonus of up to $10 million in exchange for picks. The picks collected would then go to a pool for open teams to favor new owners and help rebuild these teams. The deadline to apply for the bonus is 6/30/24.
Cash bonus table:
- 10mn. A first round pick 2024
- 9mm. A first round pick 2025
- 8mn. A first round pick 2026.
- 3mn. A second round pick 2024
- 2.5mn. A second round pick 2025
- 2mn. A second round pick 2026.
For each team, the total 2024/25 cash bonus cannot exceed $10mn and no more than 2 second round picks can be moved
-
I would say trading picks for extra cap room could hurt some struggling teams who might try it.
My thought was with the increased cap we are getting each season teams at the top could go without the benefit of being subsidized. If not for this season, at least next season. I can see that is not favorable to the top teams.
I thought then maybe extra money could be given to teams that didn't participate in the ponzi scheme or who found themselves on the losing end of it, but that too appears unfavorable to league management without teams having to pay for the privilege.
So I would say just leave it alone and we can see how competitive it might be a year from now. I don't want to see any bad teams make themselves worse by trading picks to sign FA that won't help them or by taking on bad contracts from the contenders to bail them out with increased cap.
I formally withdraw my ideas and hope that we don't trade picks for minimal cap space. I do appreciate that you have eliminated future cash exchanges, so thank you for that.
-
I am sorry that the cash bonus proposal did not receive a positive reception.
While I would not recommend using it for a rebuilding team, some playoff teams might find it beneficial to offset potential salary discrepancies caused by existing cash exchanges during the upcoming season. Therefore, if at least 5 owners support the proposal, we will move forward with it (any team in favor of the proposal can post here or use the poll to vote, only owners with no salary paid on their balance sheet can vote). Otherwise, the proposal will not be implemented.
Regarding the 2025/26 limitation on number of players with salary paid, this rule will go into effect in the 2025/26 season without the need for further approval.
-
Several significant changes have been made recently to CCD to promote the competitiveness and the balance of the league as well as the activity and engagement of the members:
- Removal of new cash exchanges
- All seasons salary cap compliance
- Launch of the in-season tournament with a format that favors rebuilding teams
- Creation of a dedicated league chat
- Advancement of the contract renewal deadline before the playoffs (season 2024/25)
- Limit to the number of players with cash exchanges (season 2025/26)
Also thanks to some of these changes, several top teams are approaching the salary cap limit and will face challenges in improving their rosters due to the reduced flexibility imposed by the restrictions. This opens up opportunities for other teams to bridge the gap and compete for championships, as some teams already demonstrated last season. Anyway it will take some time for some changes to have full effect and for some teams to rebuild.
We remain committed to continuously improving the quality and competitiveness of the league. We welcome and encourage any feedback, suggestions, or proposals, such as those from jimw, that can make CCD better and further enhance the league experience for all members
-
In order to avoid teams trading away all their draft capital and to partially protect the rebuilding process of lottery teams, we are going to implement the following 3 new rules:
- introduction of Stepien Rule. A team cannot be without a own first round pick for more than two consecutive years. Basically, at any given time, a team must have at least 1 own first round pick in the next 3 drafts. This rule will take effect just after the upcoming draft;
- each trade posted must clarifies if the pick is protected or not;
- each first round pick traded 3 years out must have a top-5 protection. If the protection kicks-in, the team acquiring the pick would receive the first available first-round pick from the selling team in a subsequent year
-
I am sorry that the cash bonus proposal did not receive a positive reception.
While I would not recommend using it for a rebuilding team, some playoff teams might find it beneficial to offset potential salary discrepancies caused by existing cash exchanges during the upcoming season. Therefore, if at least 5 owners support the proposal, we will move forward with it (any team in favor of the proposal can post here or use the poll to vote, only owners with no salary paid on their balance sheet can vote). Otherwise, the proposal will not be implemented.
Regarding the 2025/26 limitation on number of players with salary paid, this rule will go into effect in the 2025/26 season without the need for further approval.
The proposal for cash bonuses for the 2024/25 season was unsuccessful and will therefore not be implemented