ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Archive => Archive => ARCHIVE => Topic started by: Daddy on July 13, 2019, 04:33:52 PM
-
Any ideas to make the league a better league are welcomed.
All suggestions considered
-
I'm going to throw this out there, but what about removing the money paid on contract option that plagues other leagues on here.
-
I'm going to throw this out there, but what about removing the money paid on contract option that plagues other leagues on here.
Something like what we have in BOD, where you are allowed to pay up to 50% of full contract might be a fair middle ground?
-
I'm going to throw this out there, but what about removing the money paid on contract option that plagues other leagues on here.
I thought about that. We already cannot swap draft picks.
The money trail is a major headache.
-
I thought about that. We already cannot swap draft picks.
The money trail is a major headache.
Having a hard/standard cap and limiting or eliminating the ability to pay on contracts will over time increase the value of cap space and potentially lower the annual salaries since GMs will know they are on the hook for the salary they hand out in FA unless they can find a trade partner to take on the salary or offset it with contracts in return.
-
I agree with brent This alone will make everybodys job exspecially on the spreadsheets. I want to make this a easy league for everyone including mods. The rest of the leagues in baseball and rest of the sports spend way to much time on spreedsheets.
-
I agree with brent This alone will make everybodys job exspecially on the spreadsheets. I want to make this a easy league for everyone including mods. The rest of the leagues in baseball and rest of the sports spend way to much time on spreedsheets.
When the other mods weigh in or anyone with an opinion we may make this change as well.
Depends on feedback
-
Having a hard/standard cap and limiting or eliminating the ability to pay on contracts will over time increase the value of cap space and potentially lower the annual salaries since GMs will know they are on the hook for the salary they hand out in FA unless they can find a trade partner to take on the salary or offset it with contracts in return.
This only works if re-sign values are fair, give the state of the salary cap and amount of total players per roster.
If re-sign values are just thrown out there, or if they are in line with the real life league, then it doesn't make sense that we can't pay money on contracts.
Might make it harder on mod's on the outset to set the fair market value for re-sign values, but overall in the long run might cause less spreadsheet headaches.
That said, it has worked well where when say you pay $10m on Player-X to make a deal work, that $10m always is paid on him from the original team. So if he has a $20m contract and $10m is paid for when he gets traded - that $10m paid goes with him. It's not like you can trade for a player and get money paid on him, and then turn around and flip him and not pay money on him but have that extra $10m in salary cap because someone else paid you in the original deal. Makes it easier for spreadsheets that way.
But overall there are some big big salary contracts currently that are pretty well un-tradeable unless you're sending another big money contract he other way. Sometimes the only way to move those enormous contracts (or bad contracts) is to help out with salary.
(Case in point, Brian - you in BoD having to pay money when trading a guy, to get rid of some of your overpriced players. You still get value for them, but there's not way you're trading a player without paying money one him to get a deal completed).
-
To piggyback on Westcoast's comment. I think it's almost a necessity to allow trading of money. I have always liked the idea of not tying that money to a player though. It does seem that it would make it easier on the spreadsheets and would allow for some potentially interesting trades.
-
To piggyback on Westcoast's comment. I think it's almost a necessity to allow trading of money. I have always liked the idea of not tying that money to a player though. It does seem that it would make it easier on the spreadsheets and would allow for some potentially interesting trades.
Detaching it from a player and making it money traded would be a different then what we are used to on this site, but it would make it easier since it is not tied to a player.
-
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.
-
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?
-
I would prefer to not allow money to be traded at all. Keeps an even playing field and requires more strategy from GMs.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
Hey not sure this was asked already but what about IR slots?
-
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.