|
|
Post by C-Low(The Panthers) on Nov 4, 2020 16:31:15 GMT -5
Stick I know you hate rule changes but think this one has enough managers behind it to at least consider / put out to the group as a whole.
|
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Nov 4, 2020 16:55:44 GMT -5
I’m usually the one against changing rules in this league but I do think anything that responsibility addresses dead cap space (without immediate relief for reasons mentioned earlier) will make this league more competitive.
|
|
|
|
Post by C-Low(The Panthers) on Nov 5, 2020 10:55:05 GMT -5
Ya - it alarmed me most when I looked at my dead money and realized. Not only am I playing twice for Dedmon - I'm paying for Rudy to play on someone else's team after I traded him to as well. So I did the same thing with Rudy as Dedmon never really looking at the implications because salary site is normally not updated right away.
So to break it down I'm paying 16.7mil+ in dead salary, 1 for a player that's mine and 1 for a player that was mine that I traded...factually makes no sense lol yes my fault for picking up players I dropped, but at the same time I should[ve just had to reassume their shitty contracts and not pay them twice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis Lemansky (Run N Gun) on Nov 6, 2020 5:07:34 GMT -5
I'm not sure about this:
So the scenario is:
Team A signs Dedmon in 2019 -2020, waives him, and is on the hook for 60% of the remainder of his contract (let's say 15 mil contract per year - 9 mil per year dead money on his payroll for 2019 - 2020 + the next 2 years)
Then Team A goes and signs Dedmon for min in 2019 - 2020, then again waives him but the new rule suggests that he should be only on the hook for the previous waive and should not incur any additional cap hit?
Am I getting it wrong? I frankly don't understand the logic behind this suggestion. So you sign a player, think he sucks, waive him and get the cap hit and then say "well he actually doesn't suck", go ahead, sign him again and then say "wait he sucks" and then waive him again and then for some reason not penalized with the cap hit because you have made twice the mistake of signing the same shitty player?. Additionally, it creates an imbalance in free agency because you waived Dedmon before, and signing him again has no future risk for you whereas other teams will be on the hook for future salary if that player is to be waived and you are not? Furthermore, if Dedmon turns things around and Team A keeps him next season, will he have the same "get out of Dedmon's contract for free" card for the rest of the duration of his contract (2 more years in this case)?
Am I missing something here? I absorbed salary hits for the same player twice so many times and I never saw any problem in it because it was my mistake to sign the player again and I should be of course penalized accordingly if I decide I don't think the player is any good and waive him regardless of whether I have signed him in the past or not.
And if we are going to go by "this would never happen in real life", a team waiving a player and eating a multiyear contract would never go back and sign that player even for the minimum so if there is a rule going to be in place, maybe that should be it.
Also, this will open up a can of worms, for the above scenario, for instance, how about Team B signs Dedmon for min, decides to cut him but doesn't want the cap hit so he trades him back to Team A along with a 2nd so Team A can waive him for free so Team A will be basically profiting from a mistake he (Team A) made (signing Dedmon in the first place)
|
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Nov 6, 2020 7:54:40 GMT -5
Legitimate concerns. I would still like to see relief provided when another team signs a cut player (even at the min). It makes little sense for two or more teams to be paying a full salary and 40% in year two for the same player. That amount should drop off the the teams who cut him when a player is back to his full salary. This would also provide relief to teams cutting and signing a player again.
All we accomplish now is a a lot of dead money in this fantasy basketball league under the current rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis Lemansky (Run N Gun) on Nov 6, 2020 8:45:28 GMT -5
Legitimate concerns. I would still like to see relief provided when another team signs a cut player (even at the min). It makes little sense for two or more teams to be paying a full salary and 40% in year two for the same player. That amount should drop off the the teams who cut him when a player is back to his full salary. This would also provide relief to teams cutting and signing a player again. All we accomplish now is a a lot of dead money in this fantasy basketball league under the current rule.and accountability for signing players on multi-year contracts... |
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Nov 6, 2020 12:09:13 GMT -5
Legitimate concerns. I would still like to see relief provided when another team signs a cut player (even at the min). It makes little sense for two or more teams to be paying a full salary and 40% in year two for the same player. That amount should drop off the the teams who cut him when a player is back to his full salary. This would also provide relief to teams cutting and signing a player again. All we accomplish now is a a lot of dead money in this fantasy basketball league under the current rule.and accountability for signing players on multi-year contracts... Which is why I only have one player on my cut list lol. |
|
|
|
Post by C-Low(The Panthers) on Nov 6, 2020 17:38:27 GMT -5
I'm not going to go into all the what if team a did etc etc.
Going to maintain that there should be no scenario in where a team is double paying a player. Also should definitely be relief if a cut player is claimed by another team.
We can talk through the different ways to make that happen. Think KAZ has presented some good ideas.
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis Lemansky (Run N Gun) on Nov 6, 2020 19:01:04 GMT -5
I'm not going to go into all the what if team a did etc etc. Going to maintain that there should be no scenario in where a team is double paying a player. Also should definitely be relief if a cut player is claimed by another team. We can talk through the different ways to make that happen. Think KAZ has presented some good ideas. I still don't get the first part. Why shouldn't you pay him twice if you have signed/acquired him twice and waived him twice? What is the internal logic of it? I'm really asking this because I don't understand why the gm should be entitled here to a special consideration? I have been in that boat more than anyone else in this league ( and actually paid not double but triple for some players) but I never thought of it warranting some special consideration. For me it is pretty fair, nobody puts a gun on anyone to sign a player so if you sign him and then waive him you are on the hook for 60% of his salary regardless of whether you had signed & waived him in the past. God knows I will probably be in the same situation in the future more often than you or anyone else as well but I just dont think it is an unfair practice. |
|
|
|
Post by stick (Disastercycle) on Nov 7, 2020 8:34:02 GMT -5
I'm not going to go into all the what if team a did etc etc. Going to maintain that there should be no scenario in where a team is double paying a player. Also should definitely be relief if a cut player is claimed by another team. We can talk through the different ways to make that happen. Think KAZ has presented some good ideas. Also there is relief if another team signs a player |
|
|
|
Post by C-Low(The Panthers) on Nov 7, 2020 8:42:16 GMT -5
Ya but not really most players get signed for min.
I mean once someone claims the subsequent year you should have their salaries significantly decreased or removed. Or at least change the amount that comes off if it's simply a min bid.
|
|
|
|
Post by ucf (Air Republic) on Nov 7, 2020 10:32:23 GMT -5
The min signings should come with a reduction to the previous team in year two if that player is still on a roster. That’s the change I think is most fair to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by headliner (Halifax) on Nov 7, 2020 11:40:19 GMT -5
Ya if I sign bob at 8/8 And cut cut him and then team X signs bob for the min, it should cost me 8 this year and nothing next year, and cost team X min this year and 8 next
|
|
