dave wrote:Broph I really don't want to get into a pissing contest with you over this. I know where you stand on it and that's fine but I think its an area for improvement which is what this thread is about. It's not a perfect system.
Anyways guys like Chris Webber, Yao Ming, Antawn Jamison, Oscar Torres, Ray Allen, Jason Terry, Michael Finley, Jason Williams are all hard to move due to ballooning veteran salary and/or declining skill. Don't forget Mourning, Shaq, Divac, Muresan, and others in the past.
dave, if you are going to try to make an argument, don't mislead
I had no problem moving Jason Williams when I signed him to that contract, it was quick and easy, if he has less value now its because he isn't as good, and because he more importantly is 33, same with Ray Allen, 34, his contract isn't a problem, its gms not valuing old players
Torres is on the last year of his deal, and his performance is terrible right now, 11 ppg this year, of course he has less value at 33 (even if my guess is he was treated poorly in his offense.) When he was on the block that first time his scoring explosion was somewhat out of nowhere, and as I recall his contract was expiring, so teams didnt trust him and keeping him.
Yao is probably the best, since he is on the end of ROOKIE MAX, yeah, not a vet max, its a rookie max, not sure how he is being affected by "ballooning veteran salary", especially since his deal is perfectly reasonable.
Teams shouldn't benefit by giving out long term deals to old players, your new system would do that.
Like I said we have differing opinions. I see my idea as a stimulus to the league that will generate more activity and fluidity in the league while you view it as a non issue and a cop out for guys making "bad decisions"
The game isn't perfect. Just trying to make it better.
dave wrote:Broph I really don't want to get into a pissing contest with you over this. I know where you stand on it and that's fine but I think its an area for improvement which is what this thread is about. It's not a perfect system.
Anyways guys like Chris Webber, Yao Ming, Antawn Jamison, Oscar Torres, Ray Allen, Jason Terry, Michael Finley, Jason Williams are all hard to move due to ballooning veteran salary and/or declining skill. Don't forget Mourning, Shaq, Divac, Muresan, and others in the past.
dave, if you are going to try to make an argument, don't mislead
I had no problem moving Jason Williams when I signed him to that contract, it was quick and easy, if he has less value now its because he isn't as good, and because he more importantly is 33, same with Ray Allen, 34, his contract isn't a problem, its gms not valuing old players
Torres is on the last year of his deal, and his performance is terrible right now, 11 ppg this year, of course he has less value at 33 (even if my guess is he was treated poorly in his offense.) When he was on the block that first time his scoring explosion was somewhat out of nowhere, and as I recall his contract was expiring, so teams didnt trust him and keeping him.
Yao is probably the best, since he is on the end of ROOKIE MAX, yeah, not a vet max, its a rookie max, not sure how he is being affected by "ballooning veteran salary", especially since his deal is perfectly reasonable.
Teams shouldn't benefit by giving out long term deals to old players, your new system would do that.
Like I said we have differing opinions. I see my idea as a stimulus to the league that will generate more activity and fluidity in the league while you view it as a non issue and a cop out for guys making "bad decisions"
The game isn't perfect. Just trying to make it better.
I view the idea as a negative for the league, not a non issue, I feel your idea would hurt things more than it helps, as it would allow hording of talent, and make older players harder to keep if testing, and way too cheap if offering to resign, driving way down their value pre resigning
I don't feel strongly either way on adding an amnesty clause.
As far as "restarting" - I wouldn't mind restarting once we've moved through all of the current players' careers. I may be in the minority on this, but I enjoy playing with the different eras and going back in time. I don't enjoy the leagues where it goes crazy and it ends up with "The 2086 World Champion Beijing Warriors lead by stars Lebron James, Jerry West, and Hakeem Olajuwon". Again, I may be in the minority, but those are the leagues where I end up having the least fun with it.
As far as the draft, I think we should give everyone a few days to submit a list and get it all taken care of in one live draft sitting. Leaving it up to everyone else drags along the process and GM's don't submit a list because they think they'll be on when their turn is up. And then OO gets busy and takes time away from the site (which is completely fine and understandable) but then we have 6-8 hours between picks and the draft ends up dragging on much longer than it should.
Also, if we stick with the current system, we should sim any second round picks where the GM hasn't submitted a list. We've taken 4 days on the first round alone, no need to do that with the second round. We'll end up spending a week on the draft
MY only question for restarting is how it would be done... Have another fantasy draft like when the league started ? or Just keep the players we have at the time and then have a 19-- draft class?
I also think something needs to be done about the draft taking so long. People said no to the extra 1 day of sims for game 7's but we take a week just to get through the first round of the draft.
As far as salary cap and contracts have to say I'm with Broph on this issue. I barely know what I'm doing but I know that if I sign an older player to a max deal he's going to negatively impact my team in the later years by eating so much money while his productivity drops.
FYI, going retro when the league runs out of real draft classes is a pretty normal practice, I typically feel its best to just choose a year and start moving forward from there, though we do have the issue of having started in 1989, so Jordan et al have already been in the league, its not a restart, nor am I in anyway for a restart, the league has great ratings for this deep in, things are fine.
Dave - I agree with your point that it would be healthy to have contracts not balloon like they do for high end vets so that they can be tradeable. However, they only balloon b/c the GM is taking the risk of winning a title the first 2-3 years of that deal and that might be worth it for that GM. I like having that risk for a team and if it doesnt pay off in the form of a title then thats the bed that they will lay in. Yes they could just lose them in FA if they dont want to pay the high fee but another GM will come in and pay it. And in that case, that GM is now inheriting that risk.
I am however willing to run a separate sim behind the scenes with your strategy and see what effects it can have in a test environment.
Joe Walker Texas Ranger wrote:
As far as the draft, I think we should give everyone a few days to submit a list and get it all taken care of in one live draft sitting. Leaving it up to everyone else drags along the process and GM's don't submit a list because they think they'll be on when their turn is up. And then OO gets busy and takes time away from the site (which is completely fine and understandable) but then we have 6-8 hours between picks and the draft ends up dragging on much longer than it should.
I agree, something needs to be done with the draft. I like the idea of taking a day and having teams submit their lists to me and I can process them in one sitting. For example, I get the draft file ready to go on a Friday night and by Sunday morning I could process the first 15 picks and Sunday night I could do the next 15 and be done with the first round in a day.
In regards to the restarting of the league, I dont see the point. We are still 1.5 years away from the current crop of players retiring but it would be nice to have a discussion when the time gets closer as to what we want to do whether it be with old draft classes and what year to start with.
Oregon Ownage wrote:Dave - I agree with your point that it would be healthy to have contracts not balloon like they do for high end vets so that they can be tradeable. However, they only balloon b/c the GM is taking the risk of winning a title the first 2-3 years of that deal and that might be worth it for that GM. I like having that risk for a team and if it doesnt pay off in the form of a title then thats the bed that they will lay in. Yes they could just lose them in FA if they dont want to pay the high fee but another GM will come in and pay it. And in that case, that GM is now inheriting that risk.
I am however willing to run a separate sim behind the scenes with your strategy and see what effects it can have in a test environment.
Joe Walker Texas Ranger wrote:
As far as the draft, I think we should give everyone a few days to submit a list and get it all taken care of in one live draft sitting. Leaving it up to everyone else drags along the process and GM's don't submit a list because they think they'll be on when their turn is up. And then OO gets busy and takes time away from the site (which is completely fine and understandable) but then we have 6-8 hours between picks and the draft ends up dragging on much longer than it should.
I agree, something needs to be done with the draft. I like the idea of taking a day and having teams submit their lists to me and I can process them in one sitting. For example, I get the draft file ready to go on a Friday night and by Sunday morning I could process the first 15 picks and Sunday night I could do the next 15 and be done with the first round in a day.
In regards to the restarting of the league, I dont see the point. We are still 1.5 years away from the current crop of players retiring but it would be nice to have a discussion when the time gets closer as to what we want to do whether it be with old draft classes and what year to start with.
I'm not a fan of a draft like that because then it doesn't allow for trade-ups if a guy falls or something like that. That just seems to rushy for me, a few days for the draft isn't that big of a deal IMHO. Having lists is fine if you want to have them and having a 2-4 hour time limit is reasonable, but to just have it run off of lists takes a lot of the fun out of it to me, and any chance of people moving the picks.
And there are enough college players, high school players, and middle school players to milk 20 classes once we hit the current season (2016). We are a long way away from having to use fake players, restart, or go retro drafts. But then again, if majority prefer one of those options, then let's roll with it.
And there are enough college players, high school players, and middle school players to milk 20 classes once we hit the current season (2016). We are a long way away from having to use fake players, restart, or go retro drafts. But then again, if majority prefer one of those options, then let's roll with it.
Agree with this! I'll be drafting Lebron Jr. in 2025!
Oregon Ownage wrote:Dave - I agree with your point that it would be healthy to have contracts not balloon like they do for high end vets so that they can be tradeable. However, they only balloon b/c the GM is taking the risk of winning a title the first 2-3 years of that deal and that might be worth it for that GM. I like having that risk for a team and if it doesnt pay off in the form of a title then thats the bed that they will lay in. Yes they could just lose them in FA if they dont want to pay the high fee but another GM will come in and pay it. And in that case, that GM is now inheriting that risk.
I am however willing to run a separate sim behind the scenes with your strategy and see what effects it can have in a test environment.
Joe Walker Texas Ranger wrote:
As far as the draft, I think we should give everyone a few days to submit a list and get it all taken care of in one live draft sitting. Leaving it up to everyone else drags along the process and GM's don't submit a list because they think they'll be on when their turn is up. And then OO gets busy and takes time away from the site (which is completely fine and understandable) but then we have 6-8 hours between picks and the draft ends up dragging on much longer than it should.
I agree, something needs to be done with the draft. I like the idea of taking a day and having teams submit their lists to me and I can process them in one sitting. For example, I get the draft file ready to go on a Friday night and by Sunday morning I could process the first 15 picks and Sunday night I could do the next 15 and be done with the first round in a day.
In regards to the restarting of the league, I dont see the point. We are still 1.5 years away from the current crop of players retiring but it would be nice to have a discussion when the time gets closer as to what we want to do whether it be with old draft classes and what year to start with.
I'm not a fan of a draft like that because then it doesn't allow for trade-ups if a guy falls or something like that. That just seems to rushy for me, a few days for the draft isn't that big of a deal IMHO. Having lists is fine if you want to have them and having a 2-4 hour time limit is reasonable, but to just have it run off of lists takes a lot of the fun out of it to me, and any chance of people moving the picks.
This, the draft runs fine, this has never been a fast league, have some patience
Oregon Ownage wrote:Dave - I agree with your point that it would be healthy to have contracts not balloon like they do for high end vets so that they can be tradeable. However, they only balloon b/c the GM is taking the risk of winning a title the first 2-3 years of that deal and that might be worth it for that GM. I like having that risk for a team and if it doesnt pay off in the form of a title then thats the bed that they will lay in. Yes they could just lose them in FA if they dont want to pay the high fee but another GM will come in and pay it. And in that case, that GM is now inheriting that risk.
I am however willing to run a separate sim behind the scenes with your strategy and see what effects it can have in a test environment.
Joe Walker Texas Ranger wrote:
As far as the draft, I think we should give everyone a few days to submit a list and get it all taken care of in one live draft sitting. Leaving it up to everyone else drags along the process and GM's don't submit a list because they think they'll be on when their turn is up. And then OO gets busy and takes time away from the site (which is completely fine and understandable) but then we have 6-8 hours between picks and the draft ends up dragging on much longer than it should.
I agree, something needs to be done with the draft. I like the idea of taking a day and having teams submit their lists to me and I can process them in one sitting. For example, I get the draft file ready to go on a Friday night and by Sunday morning I could process the first 15 picks and Sunday night I could do the next 15 and be done with the first round in a day.
In regards to the restarting of the league, I dont see the point. We are still 1.5 years away from the current crop of players retiring but it would be nice to have a discussion when the time gets closer as to what we want to do whether it be with old draft classes and what year to start with.
I'm not a fan of a draft like that because then it doesn't allow for trade-ups if a guy falls or something like that. That just seems to rushy for me, a few days for the draft isn't that big of a deal IMHO. Having lists is fine if you want to have them and having a 2-4 hour time limit is reasonable, but to just have it run off of lists takes a lot of the fun out of it to me, and any chance of people moving the picks.
Agreed. It could go plenty fast if people would just adhere to the 2 hour rule. Go ahead and pick if someone's turn is up.
