|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 11, 2010 4:08:09 GMT -5
I've got to say I am a bit surprised the teams with cap space are not leaping at the chance to have the teams that "overpay" for players saddled with 25% or 30% of those salaries for the term left in that players contract.
They seem fixated on the 50% in season cap hit that currently goes completely away on April 1st each year.
Currently: A player earning $50 with a 3 year contract waived, say, week 10 would cost that team $25 until April 1 when they get that $25 back.
When the proposal is that same scenario would now cost that team around $15 dollars for the next 3 years or $45 total.
Add on that it is a year round hit, where now, you can waive that same $50 player any time from April 1 - July 15th for zero dollars.
Why a team with conservative spending habits would be against that is stunning to say the least.
We would still maintain a week in the offseason where a team could waive that player for zero cap hit. But not the 3 or 4 month period we currently have.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 11, 2010 14:52:37 GMT -5
So..... you still want feedback, or.... what color should I paint the cat? I was thinking hunting vest orange, that way we can spot them easier.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 11, 2010 15:36:00 GMT -5
yes on the salary cap thing I want feedback.
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Jun 11, 2010 17:42:15 GMT -5
I'm for the higher cap hit. I've said it before, although it was tied up in my other proposals and may have gotten over looked. I like say a 25-30% during the off-season and a 50% cap hit in season for that years salary.
So if you cut a player week 8 worth $100 with three years left on his contract then you lose $50 off the cap for that season, and then at the start of the off-season you have a $25 cap hit for remaining two years of his contract.
I think it puts more emphasis on smart bidding and trades. Draft salaries are set and can be put on the TS, so bidding is how we all control our teams. May the shroudest owner be rewarded. Sorry Nate.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 11, 2010 21:07:08 GMT -5
I assume this comes with your self nomination as cap secretary?
My point is, and I've said it several times, I want one cap hit for in and offseason.
Prime example of why, when you cut Anthony Gonzales, his salary reset to $2. I had no idea what his salary was to assign back to you if you decided to trade him or whatever. Luckily I was able to find it still in the 2009 league.
I just want to set it to a certain % and not have to fudge with it in the offseason then again in the regular season.
If it is 25% or 30 or 50. Just one year round hit %.
Nobody is going to get away with some current overbid on player because we still can cut them next week for free under current rules and proposed tax free periods.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 12, 2010 3:26:37 GMT -5
I'm for the higher cap hit. I like say a 10-20% during the off-season and a 50% cap hit in season for that years salary.
And I like the idea of one tax free.
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Jun 12, 2010 11:19:44 GMT -5
I like how you said that you'd like one % for the year and then Nate says he's still in favor of one in season and one off-season. He must standing too close to all that paint he's been using.
I think maybe starting at like 25% for the year seems reasonable. That's a pretty small price to pay on low to average salaries that are like $20-$50, but it does make an impact on higher paid players and hopefully makes people really plan out how much they're willing to bid/risk on a player (taking things into account like position, age, etc).
Not sure how I feel about a week where we can cut without penalty because if we have one I feel like it basically allows an owner to totally screw up and overpay a few players in any given year with no consequences beyond that year. However, I'm sure I'd take advantage of such a week if we have one.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 12, 2010 11:59:24 GMT -5
I agree with your assesment of the tax free week. That's why I said the first week of the april. So at least they have to decide early who to cut. Then those players are available through the blind bidings.
The tax free week needs to occur before some milestone of the offseason. Forcing owners to make a decision of some sort that isn't easy.
BUt honestly I can't wrap my head around what it is. We need a reason to force owners not to wait for the tax free week. Who on earth would cut a player before that time.
I'd be fine with 30%, I also agree with your reasoning Pete, that it should be a stiff consequence. 30% for more years is, in my mind close to 50% for the rest of the season, what we have now.
How would it work if it was 20% but you multiplied the 20% times the remaining years for a one year cap hit of that total.
$100 for 3 year player is cut. $20 times three years= CAp hit of $60 for one year. (Seems a bit extreme maybe)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2010 12:16:43 GMT -5
If it needs to be 1 cost all year, then 20% works for me.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 12, 2010 16:37:13 GMT -5
Who wants to see the picture of the cat I painted?!
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 12, 2010 22:57:27 GMT -5
If it needs to be 1 cost all year, then 20% works for me. I wouldn't say needs to be. If we vote keep it as is will be an option. I don't want to change it and have it still be two different %'s
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 15, 2010 0:30:44 GMT -5
Driving to work tonight had some ideas. I think the tax free week, TFW, needs to be early in the offseason year. Or else owners will just wait for months to cut players.
If they cut them early at least they have to decide, "hey this guy isn't worth the money, but I might not get the FA's I want, do I cut him or wait."
If they are forced to cut them early then they are available during all the blind bidding periods.
The logical week for this, to me, is the same week teams can match offers on their franchise players and RFA's. So you could say, "oh crap, I need to match this high franchise bid, ok let me waive that high priced guy to make cap room."
Also what if we put a limit on it of 2 or 3 players a tfw? Use the free cuts or lose them, no carryover from year to year. So if you overpaid for a couple players you can cut them very early on but not make wholesale changes for free.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 16, 2010 14:07:08 GMT -5
Those are some deep thoughts steve. Were you holding in a bowel movement at the same time?
|
|