Discussion: Buyout Discount on Same Player (Jack Skille - Sharks)

[izaman3]

I don't think that you get a buyout discount when you are the one who resigns the player you bought out.

[PigsRule]

Izaman, I split this out from the Jack Skille FA thread.

I think it's not a move we "like" seeing too often, however it's still a move that is valid given the rules.
Also, in fantasy there's a need to allow teams to correct errors or bad situations a little more quickly than in real life so this is a legal move within FNHL.

One area of buyouts I would like to edit and clarify is that discounts can only be applied x1 on cannot be cumulative (the team buying out cannot apply multiple discounts from different FA signings if the B/O team still has residual contract on their B/O books).

[PsychoticPondGoons]

Skille was a free agent and anyone could've bidding on him. The fact San Jose ended resigning him after being the team that released him just means he got a better deal. Good on them. If 29 other teams passed on the guy :SJ: deserves the cheap contract and the discount. It gives teams flexibility in fantasy so that's a good thing.

[izaman3]

Thats a very fair point, its just that I thought I remembered it being not allowed. Guess I was wrong.  :thumbsup:

[snugerud]

I am with Detroit on this one.  A team shouldnt be able to buy out a player (discount) and then rebid on and get the buyout discount (on top of the already discount).  It is way too easy of a cop out for a league that is supposed to be challenging. 

This just screams to be exploited heavily and takes away any reason to try and find a trade partner to get rid of a bad contract, it also mocks the whole idea of having a salary cap.

What happens if San Jose, re-drops Skille?  Does he get to re-buy him out again at the 66% ? 

[Jonathan]

If a GM wins someone they buy-out, shouldn't they get the original contract back? This is confusing for me. How can they even drop someone and then immediately start bidding on them? Makes no sense to me.

[Jonathan]

With this logic, whoever has Anderson for 10M a year, should of already bought him out, because most teams are up against the cap, meaning nobody could possible make a bid anywhere near that. Seems like a risk-free situation and nobody is paying him 10M to start with.

[snugerud]

this is one of the situations I was thinking of. I am just thinking if any player is playing under their contract value, what stops a person from dropping them and then rebidding on them up to the point of the contract break even.

I would consider this no consequence bidding.  Worse case scenario someone outbids you but you are 100% free and clear of that contract ,  or alternative you get that same player back 33% cheaper. 

I have no problem with people being able to re-bid on the same player  since they have a small window to win them again. ie. a 6 mill per year player , buyout is (4.0 mill) If they can get a former 6 mill per year player back for under 2 mill per year than all the more power to them.  I am fine with that because they still have the liability of that contract if they choose to re-sign them.

[PigsRule]

I think in fantasy you have to have a few more options to make moves a little faster. no team wants to be buried by a bunch of big contracts that can't trade away.

this way, teams can take the risk of buying out a player with an overstated contract and trying to win them back... there's still the risk someone outbids you, but as Snugerud mentioned, at least part of the cost (if not all) gets picked up by the new team.

no one wants to walk into a league and get stuck with a bunch of players they can't move.