Official RC Vote on Clearing Extension Loopholes

[Colby]

# 1.  Did we really agree to 30%.  I said no more than 10-20%.

#2 should contain some language about the market discounts being available after the contract ends.  That was a major problem no too long ago, so it should be spelled out in clear terms.

The majority said 30%.  Quick vote on this just to make sure we have a consensus?

Howe, Ben, and I said 30%; Roy said 15% (average); Dan didn't care; Jake abstained from voting.

[Dan Wood]

i said 30...50 originally but changed to 30 once ben  and i discussed further

[rcankosy]

If we are sticking by the 30%, I would like to suggest that we limit the amount of cash that comes back on contracts in future trades.  Maybe it's me, but something just doesn't look realistic to me when I see large market teams eating huge amounts of money on contracts in trades such as the ones for Verlander, Scott, and Cuddyer.  I know that this will limit small market teams from trading for high-priced guys in the future, but it's simply too backwards from reality for my taste.

[Canada8999]

If we are sticking by the 30%, I would like to suggest that we limit the amount of cash that comes back on contracts in future trades.  Maybe it's me, but something just doesn't look realistic to me when I see large market teams eating huge amounts of money on contracts in trades such as the ones for Verlander, Scott, and Cuddyer.  I know that this will limit small market teams from trading for high-priced guys in the future, but it's simply too backwards from reality for my taste.

Isn't this a totally different topic?

[rcankosy]

Forget about it.  Too much change is bad in and of itself.

[Colby]

Forget about it.  Too much change is bad in and of itself.

Plus... that is where this is a fantasy league.  The type of moves we make allow for quick transitions from a loser to a winner (see 2011 Royals and 2010 Blue Jays / Athletics).

[Colby]

Are we all in favor of putting these changes instantly?

Rule #1 - Future Cap Management inspired by the 2010 Angels: Management of salary caps for not just current year but future six years.  This is something we are doing in New Era and is much more realistic for a franchises' books.  It also prevents GMs from financially ruining future years with cash exchanges.  Future salary caps will have a buffer of 30% but no more than $20m.  For example, if the Pirates’ cap in 2013 is expected to be $62m then the 30% buffer allows the team to have a projected salary based on current contracts of $80.6m in 2013.

This rule has been APPROVED

Rule #2 – Signing window for expired prospect contracts: Prospect extensions on expired prospect contracts will be the only type of extensions allowable for expired contracts in the offseason.  Therefore, after the 2011 regular season is over, a P-2011 contract is still eligible for the prospect extension at the 2011 rate.  This window for prospect extensions is open until one week prior to the beginning of offseason free agency.

This rule has been APPROVED

Rule #3 – True Extensions: Extensions are being changed, so that they are true contract extensions that take place after the current contract expires. The extension is added on in future years, and can be given to a player at any time during their current contract.  For example, a 2011 contract could get a three year extension starting in 2012 and ending in 2014.   We still have minimum and maximum years protecting this new contract status, so the total number of years may not increase more than six.

This rule has been APPROVED

Rule #4 - Prince Fielder Rule: Contract extensions on expired veteran contracts not be allowed after the regular season ends.  It really isn't feasible to have this for such a realistic league.  This puts more onus on the trade deadline and free agency.  Players signed to an extension cannot be traded for 60 days.

This rule has been APPROVED

Rule #5 – June 1st window: In addition to our 60-day NTC rule, any players signed to extensions and FA contracts in the offseason cannot be traded until June 1st the following year.

This rule has been APPROVED

Rule #6 – Extending players less than MV: A player may be given an extension that is less than their current salary.  However, such an extension has three restrictions. 
1) The eligibility period for granting a player an extension below their current salary is only in the last year of their contract.
2) On top of the minimum and maximum years for contracts, the longest this type of extension can be is two years.
3) New salary may be no less than 70% of previous salary.  Therefore, a player with market value of $2.5m, current one-year deal of $5m, can have an extension for two years equal to $3.5m (0.7 * 5 = 3.5).

This rule has been APPROVED

[rcankosy]

That's fine, but you didn't include the modifications to #2 and # 6 that Dan and I suggested.

[Colby]

That's fine, but you didn't include the modifications to #2 and # 6 that Dan and I suggested.

#2 already has the language... updated #6 :judge:

[rcankosy]

#2 already has the language... updated #6 :judge:

Does "2011 rate" mean the market discount (40%) associated with extending after the final year of prospect eligibility?