|
Post by Washington Imperials GM on Jan 10, 2010 21:46:20 GMT -5
A Simple majority is needed for this to pass if there is no simple majority a runoff will occur.
Again feel free to debate and persuade. you may retract your vote.
|
|
|
Post by AVERAGE HERO'S GM on Jan 12, 2010 12:31:34 GMT -5
Just a thought, but I would rather address the cap one time and not have to consider it every year. I would propose that we vote on a percentage the cap rises each year or every other year. I would think that everyone is going to vote the way that helps their team the most. The vote should come down to the teams with the most exspensive players voting for an increase to be able to keep their players. The teams that are rebuilding or struggling should be voting to not increase it so the other teams have to make tougher decisions and possibly let players go or not not have the cap room to compete as much in free agency through the year, which will help the other teams. Personally, I would rather see something like a 10% cap increase every other year. Establishing an actual cap structure will allow managers to better plan their rosters by knowing how much they'll have each year - instead of waiting for this kind of vote each year.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Imperials GM on Jan 12, 2010 13:14:39 GMT -5
very insightful words glenn we have some other rules and adjustments being hammered out this year and I doubt in year three we will see any other rules adjustments. It would be best to then adress an automatic increase type of system because we will have seen the effects of what our adjusted rules have done to the cap and rosters. We will want to get in place a system that is taylored to how the league runs and people manage thier salary caps.
The downside to a % raise is as time increases the percent of the cap will grow. for example say we raise it 10% a year the cap would look like this
2009 $100 2010 $110 2011 $121 2112 $133 2113 $146 2014 $160
One of the things we would like to do is keep the cap somewhat tight so that players will have to make decisions weather to let a talented player hit FA and not just the busts or potential decent players but say a top 10 player at thier position.
We do not want to make it so tight that you will be forced to drop the core of your team though.
We also want people to be able to not only resign some players but also sign thier rookies as well. or not worry about where the $7 or $8 will come from to sign thier first and second round picks.
to make a long story short these are the issues we will have to hammer out if we are to automate the salary cap. and I think it is something to adress for 2011
|
|
|
Post by Waddling Mummies GM on Jan 12, 2010 14:05:01 GMT -5
at some point we will have to keep the cap the same. we will probably increase it 1 maybe 2 more times but after that i dont see the cap increasing. if we keep increasing every year or every other year it wil become to easy to retain players. so if we stop increasing the cap when we find a comfortable number for our league teams will have to make descions on good players every two years or so
|
|
|
Post by AVERAGE HERO'S GM on Jan 12, 2010 16:51:50 GMT -5
I had a really long winded post, but I compressed it to the following for the common good:
Those who manage their team correctly will consider the current year, the future impact to the cap, and their roster spots before making moves. Knowing whether the cap is or is not moving could be a huge factor in signing a player, who certain contract lengths given to, releasing players, trades, etc. I'm totally indifferent on raising the cap right now. I just don't want to see random increases that make me regret a future move I make that I would have done differently, if I knew there would be more cap room in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Waddling Mummies GM on Jan 12, 2010 17:11:39 GMT -5
the way i feel is the cap should never get past $120 ever in our league unless we decide to increase the roster sizes. i dont know if it needs to get that high at all but its something to be evaluated at the end of seasons.
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Claymores GM on Jan 12, 2010 17:23:11 GMT -5
It works great at 100. It means you can't keep resigning everyone whose contract expires and have to develop new talent. PS obviously is a Huge boost facilitating that. I'd enjoy making serious salary decisions- for eg a 10 buck rise means resigning say 5 players at 4 years ( without loooking) yet over the 4 year cycle that's 20 players you could permanently just keep, ontop of existing like-for-like replacements.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Imperials GM on Jan 12, 2010 22:46:30 GMT -5
let me say the 10% increase was not a proposal but an example of the problems of an automayic % raise. it is easy to calculate 10% and it shows how the increase accellerates over time.
if something was automated it would have to be far more restrictive than what we threw out there this year.
I personally would like to see a dynamic cap where annuallly you will have to make decisions on who to resign and who to cut lose. I want owners to take a moment nd pause as to weather they should resign that stud player to a contract that costs $2 -$3 more. A lot of the cap issues will be determined on how people resign thier players and buy out players.
at the same time I do not want it to be stressful on anyone because this is a fun league. I do not want it to be too difficult to turn off owners as well.
Glen you are absolutely correct when you sign someone now you can not just think this year. how much team planning someone does is up to them. when making your decisions I would consider the future as if the cap will be a little stressful on most teams.
Charles: dont know where the cap will end in 5 years one thing I do know is if the cap rises so will players salaries. eventuaally you will find an eqlibrium.
Rob, Claymores: we have limited resigning contracts so even if we have a large cap rise and the longer years ones can be quite costly. you can resign a total of 7 players to multi year deals only ranging from 2-5 years with no more than if you signed them all you would be paying an extra $17. in thinking about it now I think even $7 is more than I thought it would be maybe $4 wiuld have been more reasonable but we are here now where we are at. We will see what happens with the polls.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Imperials GM on Jan 12, 2010 22:50:51 GMT -5
I suppose what we really should be discussing here is the options of no cap increase or a $7 or $8 increase. after the polls are closed I will set up a posthere where we can discuss all the salary cap stuff for the future. I encourage everyone to think about the cap should there be an automated increase if so how exct ect and over the offseasn and season we will hammer out a solution that will be best for the league.
|
|
|
Post by Waddling Mummies GM on Jan 13, 2010 0:25:53 GMT -5
one thing to take into consideration for this year though, and i havent looked is that depending how many draft picks a team had in the start up O and D drafts there may not be many 1 year contracts on some teams rosters so they may not have been able to free up much cap through expired contracts and then you have to add the rookie contracts $4 and $3 for 1st rounders. thats one reason i think a cap increase for year 1 is good. the other is eventually you will have to increase the cap. we cannot opperate under $100 every year, it just wont work. i think a cap increase will also allow a few more buyouts which if it doesnt increase we probably wont see any buyouts this coming season
|
|
|
Post by AVERAGE HERO'S GM on Jan 13, 2010 7:39:15 GMT -5
In reality, managers are going to use whatever cap you give them, so allowing more cap room will only let teams sign players to higher contracts or bid higher on free agents. The point of this league is to manage the salary cap and contracts over the long term. I just don't want to see random cap increases for random amounts. If the cap stays at a fixed amount, the contract market will work itself out and conform to the cap size over time. Over time, a market price will be pretty much be established for any position from RB#1 to WR#5 or LB#2. It may take some time and be tight for some managers who didn't consider the fixed future cap ramifications while drafting or signing players, but that's an important part of this league. If the cap raises, then the players salary's aren't forced to conform to the salary cap restraints to establish a general market price and we are basically making the salary cap conform to the salaries, which is backwards in relation to this league.
I also consider that the initial draft year is the most costly part of a salary league. Because of the known studs who have a pretty established names. Every knows to bid up the studs in the startup draft. Other managers know to bid against you for those players. However, as the league progresses, managers will begin to hit on more bargins that outperfom their salary, which will decrease that amount needed to put a guy on your team. Managers act on their hunches and sign a lesser known players at bargin prices. Those who properly forcast players will significantly decrease the amount of cap money needed to field a competative team over time, but it does take time to work to that point. Especially if the pratice squad signing rule goes through. If the practice squad signing rule goes through.
|
|
|
Post by Waddling Mummies GM on Jan 13, 2010 9:54:54 GMT -5
I do not disagree with you at all but i do feel the cap needs to be higher than it is now. if we do not raise owners will not be able to resign any of their studs or maybe just one to long term contracts. with the addition of rookies cap will get eaten, depth in this league will be none because owners cant afford it.
i do agree that everything will come to an equilibrium but i dont think the equilibrium salary is $100. I dont know what it is but i know $100 is to low.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Imperials GM on Jan 13, 2010 12:38:00 GMT -5
I want t he cap to be restictive because you want owners to think before resigning thier players but I dont want it to be too restrictive that the tight cap turns them off to this league and decide not to participate. The last thing I want to do is replace owners on an annual basis. exentually we will run out of prospects and that is very bad. Loosening the cap for one year to allow some people ot fix a mistake or two is not a bad thing.
everyone makes mistakes and I dont htink they should be punished for years while they are learning the ropes.
|
|
|
Post by vsamuels1218 on Jan 13, 2010 13:16:11 GMT -5
$100 seems to be working fine
|
|
|
Post by Waddling Mummies GM on Jan 13, 2010 13:49:18 GMT -5
also take into consideration a suiper tight cap, which $100 will be after rookie signings and re-signings is trading will be greatly reduced. you will have less trade partners because they dont have aenough cap to trade. almost everyone was new to this format last year so there were some mistakes made. i think this year we need to loosen the cap a little. Heros i know you dont want to see random cap increases but i think thats how we need to do it til we find the equlibrium. maybe it doesnt need to be done for 3 years after this maybe once more (which i doubt)
|
|