|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Jul 23, 2014 12:19:50 GMT -5
So since it's always been a "precedent" to never amend contract amounts/years/options we know to be false or inaccurate. I'd like to propose starting with free agents signed this year that an owner of a contract may request a review of the salary paid/years/options at their request if they still own the player or have the rights. If they do not request it, than no change would be made. Owner would have to provide documented proof from a reputable source (espn, fox, yahoo, hoopshype, team press release, etc). This request could only be made once per season.
|
|
|
Post by oldno7 (Rockafellas) on Jul 23, 2014 15:08:05 GMT -5
I would add that this request should have to be made within a set time period (IE within 6 months of VBA signing) and only by the GM who signed him in FA.
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Jul 23, 2014 15:34:05 GMT -5
I would rather limit an owner 1 time per year or something modestly restrictive to keep it from happening all the time. Or, you can't contest it in the last year of the deal on our VBA salary page for the player. Not allowing second owners would keep sign and trades from having a chance at an accurate contract.
The point of this is to get contracts right.
|
|
|
Post by C-Low(The Panthers) on Jul 27, 2014 12:44:55 GMT -5
I think leaving it to only the owner who took him in FA doesn't make sense. If an owner acquiring a guy is more diligent who should have the right to dispute his salary.
|
|
|
Post by Curtis Lemansky (Run N Gun) on Jul 27, 2014 13:13:03 GMT -5
I think leaving it to only the owner who took him in FA doesn't make sense. If an owner acquiring a guy is more diligent who should have the right to dispute his salary. Disagree with this. Players' trade values are directly related to the length of their contracts. If you are trading for a player with a certain contract, the details (amount and length) of that contract should remain the same.
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Jul 28, 2014 5:58:20 GMT -5
But if the contract isn't correct it screws up timing of extensions. The point isn't to reward someone who traded for a guy in the last year of his deal, it's to get the right contract setup early on. News reports aren't always accurate in the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Jul 28, 2014 6:10:22 GMT -5
Exactly, it might mean he doesn't catch an extension. So his value is directly tied to that. It rarely happens and it sucks, but if there were to be a change it should definitely not become an advantage in making trades.
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Jul 28, 2014 14:33:17 GMT -5
My objective with the proposal is to get contracts to be as accurate as possible. There is zero recourse if they are not posted correctly with how the rule is currently interpreted. It's not about an "advantage". The websites sometimes get things wrong and if an owner should have the ability to question/ask for an appeal to have it corrected. The concession to ward off would be abusers is the deal couldn't be altered on an expiring VBA contract or a contract you only have rights to.
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Jul 28, 2014 14:37:30 GMT -5
Exactly, it might mean he doesn't catch an extension. So his value is directly tied to that. It rarely happens and it sucks, but if there were to be a change it should definitely not become an advantage in making trades. But it also impacts sign and trades. For example if you gave Ariza only a 2 year deal instead of the 4 year deal he signed. His contract was never posted prior (other than his first year salary) but I'm stuck having no way to contest his contract amount /years/options etc.
|
|