Author Topic: Rule change Proposal - ARB Extensions  (Read 2204 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EastCoastGonzo

  • League Moderator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2019
  • Posts: 6112
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Rule change Proposal - ARB Extensions
« on: January 03, 2024, 01:14:28 PM »
Here is my rule change proposal for extensions. A lot of people have asked about doing extensions for ARB players. The trouble is doing that in a way that it confers a benefit on the manager and is realistic enough to not destroy competitive balance. The proposal:

Once a player has 1 year of Armchair service time, so is beginning a season as an ARB2 player they will eligible for an ARB extension depending on their service time, using the extension table. Examples below:

An ARB2 player can receive: 9 yr extension at 90% of their respective positions extension amount listed on the extension table.

ARB3 / 8 yrs at 95%

ARB4 / 7 yrs at 97%

ARB5 / 6 yrs at 100%

ARB6 / 5 yrs at 110%

FA / up to 5 yrs at x% (extension value determined normally)

So an example. Say you have a pitcher who you believe will be a rockstar, he finishes his rookie season and you decide to take the gamble and lock him up in a monster extension. His extension would be 9yrs / $8,800,000 = 79M. I think it balances the risk and reward correctly. You forego the cost saves of ARB2-3 for cost certainty in the future, and protection against a real life ARB number that may be 15M+ if he really is that good. If he pans out you get an ace for a below market rate, if he doesn't that's the risk you take but it won't be so terrible as to destroy your team.

I think trying to lock up a player right before he goes into FA should be costly, you have to pay them to forgo FA. But for certain teams it would be advantages, if for example the following off-season they would have 3 players eligible for extensions and wanted to keep all three, they could sign one to an above market extension before hand.

Players who receive an ARB Extension would not be eligible to be traded until the trade deadline of year 3 of their extension. So if you were to give a player an extension this off-season he could not be traded until June - August 2026. The rules for a normal FA Extension would not change, you could still trade that player after June 1 of that same year.

Extensions would still be limited to 2 per off-season, including 1 ARB Extension.

The extension years posted are fixed, so you could not do a ARB2 extension for say 4 years, it must be 9.


This rule change may require us to adjust how much or how salary is traded among teams.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2024, 01:31:10 PM by EastCoastGonzo »
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Shannonlwalker2

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2020
  • Posts: 1397
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :MIA-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :ANA:
    • :Florida:
    • :LAD:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule change Proposal - ARB Extensions
« Reply #1 on: January 13, 2024, 02:04:27 PM »
Voted NO:  the competitive balance is already pretty skewed.   There are 10 teams that are good.  10-15 that are pretty lousy ( for 1 reason or another), and 5 teams are floating around mediocrity.  I feel the good managers will just continue to further the divide by locking up the best young talent for years (at significant discounts).  If the this WAS to play out, then I think it would be even harder to keep and find owners for the teams that are so far behind.
 Just conjecture on my part: if we want a truly competitive league. This should probably be tabled until we (the league) can secure descent, active, and consistent managers for all the teams in the league.


funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline EastCoastGonzo

  • League Moderator
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2019
  • Posts: 6112
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule change Proposal - ARB Extensions
« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2024, 02:08:18 PM »
I hear what you're saying @Shannonlwalker2 but that split you described is pretty much how real MLB is, and I think that means that we are reflecting reality pretty well lol.

But I get what you're saying. I proposed this to try and address something people have been asking for for a couple years. I don't necessarily have a problem waiting to make it happen. Or even adjusting it.

The teams that don't have owners aren't as bad off as they seems anymore they all have average farms. In fact if we're being honest it's some of the owned teams that are way off at the bottom of the league...
funny
0
like
1
dislike
0
No reactions
Members reacted like:
Shannonlwalker2,
No reactions

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Daddy: Whoever takes over that expansion gets to name the team.
    Yesterday at 11:07:01 PM
  • Daddy: Probably four years before the actual NBA does it. To hell with 2028.
    Yesterday at 11:07:53 PM
  • Braves155: Las Vegas Gold Diggers
    Yesterday at 11:08:26 PM
  • Daddy: I dig it
    Yesterday at 11:10:25 PM
  • Bigdon: I am chicago right
    Yesterday at 11:29:29 PM
  • Daddy: Sign up Bigdon. Chicago is gone already.
    Yesterday at 11:36:50 PM
  • Daddy: NBA LIVE [link] Pre-reserved sign up
    Yesterday at 11:37:29 PM
  • STLBlues91: Ill switch for Vegas if he wants the bulls
    Yesterday at 11:39:17 PM
  • Daddy: Sounds good
    Yesterday at 11:43:59 PM
  • Daddy: I knew Vegas would be tempting :rofl:
    Yesterday at 11:44:25 PM
  • Daddy: He still needs to select NCAA
    Yesterday at 11:44:40 PM
  • Daddy: You get to name them sir. NBA LIVE will start with an expansion draft, followed by the rookie draft.
    Yesterday at 11:45:39 PM
  • Daddy: Vegas will get the #1 pick :toast:
    Yesterday at 11:46:07 PM
  • Daddy: Super Sonics #2 pick (insert eye emoji)
    Yesterday at 11:46:44 PM
  • Daddy: All subject to trade before the draft of course.
    Yesterday at 11:47:03 PM
  • Brent: With an expansion draft, does that mean we select x number of players on our roster to protect?
    Yesterday at 11:47:51 PM
  • Brent: Also, I might have missed it, but will it be a H2H cats or points league?
    Yesterday at 11:48:39 PM
  • Daddy: @Brent yes & @Brent CATs
    Yesterday at 11:49:36 PM
  • Daddy: It will all be in the handbook as per usual.
    Yesterday at 11:50:04 PM
  • Daddy: Think MLB LIVE hoop style only not quite as deep scoring in basketball.
    Yesterday at 11:51:08 PM
  • Daddy: We are trying something thats never been done to our knowledge.
    Yesterday at 11:53:06 PM
  • Brent: I like it.
    Yesterday at 11:54:07 PM
  • Daddy: No other basketball league in the world has a Vegas NBA team. Till tonight.
    Yesterday at 11:54:13 PM
  • Daddy: I thought you might. :)
    Yesterday at 11:54:45 PM
  • STLBlues91: Yeah got to figure a solid name out for it
    Yesterday at 11:55:35 PM
  • Daddy: Had a few good suggestions. Just dont be corny.. this represents all of us.
    Yesterday at 11:57:03 PM
  • Daddy: We are the first to give Vegas a suggestion. Lets let it be a good one. Make them take notice.
    Yesterday at 11:57:48 PM
  • STLBlues91: Yeah will research it a bit
    Yesterday at 11:57:58 PM
  • Daddy: One of the NHL signup sheets has 68k views? Thats ridiculous. Where all these people at? We should have 20k leagues.
    Today at 12:00:38 AM
  • Rhino7: I used to use Las Vegas Vipers as a team name
    Today at 12:04:13 AM
  • Daddy: NHL & NCAA have 100k views on the bullpen. Nobody ever looked at that thing. There should be a few more new accounts no? I mean what they looking for. Its a sign up sheet.
    Today at 12:04:17 AM
  • Daddy: Vipers works for me if it does you. Kinda goes with the logo i gave them.
    Today at 12:05:04 AM
  • STLBlues91: Yeah writing down the names sent out and adding a few I find/think of like Las Vegas Legacy and then will narrow them down
    Today at 12:06:47 AM
  • RyanJames5: Can I take the Sonics?
    Today at 12:07:14 AM
  • Brent: Vipers is cool.
    Today at 12:08:08 AM
  • Daddy: Yes sir
    Today at 12:08:19 AM
  • Daddy: I will tentatively put the Vipers until we launch fantrax
    Today at 12:08:59 AM
  • RyanJames5: Very fun idea to expand.
    Today at 12:09:36 AM
  • Daddy: Indeed sir, indeed. What College RJ?
    Today at 12:10:11 AM
  • RyanJames5: Gonzaga
    Today at 12:13:00 AM
  • Daddy: Roger that Zags
    Today at 12:14:13 AM
  • BayAreaBallers: im excited for this a properly run nba dynasty from scratch
    Today at 12:15:51 AM
  • RyanJames5: Thank you sir
    Today at 12:15:59 AM
  • BayAreaBallers: this is my first LIVE that i sstarted from beginning and didnt take over
    Today at 12:16:16 AM
  • BayAreaBallers: NHL and NBA excited to start those from scratch
    Today at 12:16:59 AM
  • Daddy: All the leagues are well run, we just have different ideas.
    Today at 12:17:35 AM
  • Daddy: There is nothing like virgin teams that nobody else has been into. You get to inherit todays rosters. Then take them into the future.
    Today at 12:18:36 AM
  • Daddy: Usually taking over a team is inheriting someones mess which is why it was open. In startup leagues that isnt an issue.
    Today at 12:19:25 AM
  • Daddy: I forgot to text Brian. :doh:
    Today at 12:21:02 AM
  • Daddy: NBA LIVE Pre-Reserve sign up sheet [link] updated!
    Today at 02:31:32 AM