|
|
Post by blained32 on Dec 25, 2012 18:00:39 GMT -5
I would like to add the ability to sign players to a contract extension. I was thinking we could base the contracts on years of experience. I was thinking something like 5 years or less the contract extension would be worth like 10 mil a year. Then something like 6-14 years of experience could be a max contract which sounds like 20 mil a year. Then maybe anything after 14 years of experience could be like 5-7 mil a year. I know some people have made their team to have some cap space this offseason, so maybe we could start this rule on opening night of next season. I was also thinking that we could put a limit of one or two extensions per season so that free agency can still be competitive. This rule would also allow teams to keep there core together and avoid loosing them to higher bidders. The teams would also still have to remain under salary cap with there extensions so this rule would still follow our salary rules just help these teams stay competitive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Warriors GM (League Manager) on Dec 25, 2012 21:24:06 GMT -5
If we were to instate something like this, I agree it should be implemented around Nov 1, 2013 instead of for this season, because as Blaine said, there are teams (including my own) that have built themselves from the start in such a way that they have a good/great chance to sign a marquee player in this upcoming off-season, while only having 1 or 2 this season and not being competitive. (It seems like it takes at least 3 if not 4 marquee guys to be a contender in this type of league)
I can't really get behind this, though, at least not on the proposed salary schedule. For example, 33-year-old KG would be worth way more than 7m/yr but 33-year-old Ben Wallace probably wouldn't, yet they would be signed to the same amount. I think it would work better if we used the same scale we use for the Franchise Tag, where the automatic signing amount scales depending on where that player ranks overall based on their most recent season. That segues to my last point:
We already have the Franchise Tag and 2 RFA Tags per team per year. So based on how things already are, you could definitely maintain your best 3 players, no sweat. The Franchise Tag guy can be re-signed for an automatic 1-year amount based on their rank, while you have the option to match any offer that anyone makes on your 2 RFA guys, and even add a 5th year. I just don't think we need any more guaranteeing options than those three.
|
|
|
|
Post by blained32 on Dec 25, 2012 21:35:10 GMT -5
I think its ok but I thought when we signed free agents we could not use RFA in the contract? is that allowed because that would pretty much clear up all my concerns on this issue
|
|
|
|
Post by blained32 on Dec 25, 2012 21:43:49 GMT -5
one last thought if we can sign RFA's when they are in their last year (team option year) can we have the ability to sign them to a max contract during that year or do we have to wait to see if somebody makes an offer then match the offer?
|
|
|
|
Post by Warriors GM (League Manager) on Dec 26, 2012 4:51:05 GMT -5
No, RFA works as a tag. Meaning, at some point during the season, you can slap one of your 2 RFA tags on a player. That way, when the season ends and he goes into Free Agency, he's not a UFA, he's an RFA. Players you have the RFA tag on are semi-reserved by you so that you can match any offer anyone else puts down in an attempt to sign that player. Assuming you have the cash, you will always be able to re-sign whomever you put the RFA tag on.
|
|
|
|
Post by blained32 on Dec 26, 2012 7:47:48 GMT -5
so then do we have 2 rfa tags plus a franchise tag? or just the 2 rfa tags?
|
|
|
|
Post by Warriors GM (League Manager) on Dec 26, 2012 9:26:54 GMT -5
2 RFA, 1 Franchise, and 1 Overseas Franchise. This thread should be able to answer the rest of your questions, but if not, ask Frank. |
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (League Commish) on Jan 4, 2013 17:34:12 GMT -5
Guys, I have implemented a new max contract rule and have eliminated the franchise tag. My reasoning is that an owner can offer a max contract and still keep his core players, he will just have to pay for it. It's an option that they have, but it will be a discouraging option that will open up free agency. We have a very top heavy league here when it comes to talent (mainly because of bad management decisions by some teams) and I would like to get it balanced out in the next year or two. The real war will come down to contract decisions, and how a GM uses their cap space. We will keep the two Restricted Tags and the Overseas Tag as well. I really believe that the combination of a tougher max contract rule along with removing the franchise tag will help teams at the bottom and give them access to more talent in the free agent pool.
I think with a watered down max contract rule, a franchise tag and two restricted tags gave owners too many protections. This should help.
|
|
