Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 22:03:11 GMT -5
I think the 1 year max has is a major flaw of the free agent system.
A guy can offer 4 year deal at 6 mil with increases and a player will always choose a 1 yr max over something like that. This places fear into GMs and they are overpaying for role players which puts them too close to the hardcap which handcuffs them from really building a team.
I am proposing you can only 1 yr max a player if you have bird rights on him.
I think this will allow teams to have a better chance at retaining role players but also allow teams to keep hefty expiring deals on their roster for trade bait.
Thoughts?
|
|
Jay
Starter
Ex-GM
Bang...Bang...
Posts: 3,220
|
Post by Jay on Sept 30, 2008 22:04:42 GMT -5
I approve of this message.
|
|
|
Post by dj on Sept 30, 2008 22:07:45 GMT -5
... agree.
|
|
Outlawz
All-League
New York Knicks
Going back to basics
Posts: 7,853
|
Post by Outlawz on Sept 30, 2008 22:09:35 GMT -5
nah
|
|
|
Post by Gossip Girl on Sept 30, 2008 22:10:04 GMT -5
Tough to say really. FBB works in weird ways.
|
|
|
Post by Sheryl Yoast on Sept 30, 2008 22:19:23 GMT -5
I think the 1 year max has is a major flaw of the free agent system. A guy can offer 4 year deal at 6 mil with increases and a player will always choose a 1 yr max over something like that. This places fear into GMs and they are overpaying for role players which puts them too close to the hardcap which handcuffs them from really building a team. I am proposing you can only 1 yr max a player if you have bird rights on him. I think this will allow teams to have a better chance at retaining role players but also allow teams to keep hefty expiring deals on their roster for trade bait. Thoughts? If I have the cap space I should be able to do whatever I want with my money.
|
|
James
Scrub
Ex-GM
Posts: 2,398
|
Post by James on Sept 30, 2008 22:42:09 GMT -5
Agree.
|
|
|
Post by DB on Sept 30, 2008 23:01:31 GMT -5
no do not like this idea at all. It does suck when a team takes your player for a 1 year max, but tough shit.
|
|
Play
All-Star
Los Angeles Clippers
Posts: 5,702
|
Post by Play on Sept 30, 2008 23:07:41 GMT -5
I like it
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:10:18 GMT -5
Yea but its a glitch, a flaw, in the game. We put rules in place so people don't circumvent the rules. When people are offering 40 mil deals over 6 years it should be considered over a one year 10 mil deal but it isn't. It ruins the integrity of free agency.
Pig is definitely one of those people who finds the one play he can run in madden over and over again and it will always works.
I think making it so that you can only offer a 1 yr max to a player you own the bird rights still upholds giving your guys big salary expiring deals but also allows teams to make sensible offers to players.
People should offer a 3 year 8 mil deal instead they have to offer at least a 1 year max. Sometimes in some cases GMs have to offer players 2-3 year max just to have a better offer then other teams that will offer a 1 yr max. Like I said we'll see less bad deals and it will be more realistic.
|
|
|
Post by Funky George! on Sept 30, 2008 23:22:17 GMT -5
First off, Andrew, don't chime in if you have no idea what to say.
Second, there is no reason to allow teams with bird rights to do this. Either get rid of it entirely or keep it. Silly to think bird rights should entitle a team to doing this if you object to the concept.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 30, 2008 23:23:57 GMT -5
Dont like it.
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:24:26 GMT -5
First off, Andrew, don't chime in if you have no idea what to say. Second, there is no reason to allow teams with bird rights to do this. Either get rid of it entirely or keep it. Silly to think bird rights should entitle a team to doing this if you object to the concept. Well I think there is a large difference between giving a player a large contract to use as a spare piece to trade and offering a guy a large one year deal to steal him and just keep signing him to large 1 yr deals until he has birds. Lets be open minded to this idea
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:26:03 GMT -5
Of course you don't its more work for you keeping track of who is making offers to who. However its very practical.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 30, 2008 23:26:14 GMT -5
Why would a player be more likely to sign a big 1 year deal with his former team then he would with another team? Just one of the many flaws to this idea.
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:27:40 GMT -5
Why would a player be more likely to sign a big 1 year deal with his former team then he would with another team? Just one of the many flaws to this idea. I'm saying he isn't which is why teams are forced to offer guys 2 and 3 year maxes to avoid losing their guys. If we eliminated other teams being able to offer guys 1 yr deals then we could put an end to this.
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:28:42 GMT -5
What a guy should get...... 7 mil over 4 years
What does he get offered by opposing teams? 1 year max
What offer would the player accept? 1 yr max
So
What does it require for his team to keep him? 2 yr max or more
|
|
|
Post by Speed Racer on Sept 30, 2008 23:29:06 GMT -5
Why would a player be more likely to sign a big 1 year deal with his former team then he would with another team? Just one of the many flaws to this idea. That's my thought.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 30, 2008 23:31:12 GMT -5
So you cant offer a 1 year contract?
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:34:58 GMT -5
Even still the player isn't deserving of the 1 yr max to begin with. Now teams are forced to waste 4 or more million dollars? Look at how many max deals there are around the league and look how many are actually deserving.
|
|
|
Post by dj on Sept 30, 2008 23:35:31 GMT -5
Instead of a 1 year max, you can just offer a 1 year 95% of max type deal. Massive 1 year contracts are stupid and unrealistic but unavoidable... well, with the current hard cap anyways.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 30, 2008 23:41:07 GMT -5
Wow me with an idea and Ill think about it. Mostly Im hearing WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHH!
|
|
|
Post by youngstabullz on Sept 30, 2008 23:43:07 GMT -5
No, this helps shitty teams who are real close to the hard cap which should disbenefit the crappier teams below or around the cap.
|
|
Dave
All-Star
Ex-GM
Posts: 7,222
|
Post by Dave on Sept 30, 2008 23:43:35 GMT -5
Wow me with an idea and Ill think about it. Mostly Im hearing WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHH! you're cranky tonight. Come back tomorrow with a clear head and actually review what I'm saying. There is a lot of valid truth to what I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 30, 2008 23:43:40 GMT -5
No, this helps shitty teams who are real close to the hard cap which should disbenefit the crappier teams below or around the cap. I dont know what this means.
|
|