KRFL - a football simulation league
Forums
KRFL :: Forums :: KRFL Forums :: 2020 League Business
Possible trade deadline proposal << Previous thread | Next thread >>
Moderators: noodles, MarkB
Author Post
Jimbo0121712000
Sun Mar 29 2020, 06:52p.m.
Registered Member #21
Joined: Fri Sep 05 2008, 01:10a.m.

Posts: 388
I wasn't sure if you would want another trade deadline and max cap topic up for proposal, so i just wanted to get thoughts. A few years back we were at the 8 week deadline as well as a 93 mill max cap. Members voted that out as the thought was to many teams were cleaning house. That was changed to the current 4 week and 88 million. i think the majority think that is to soon. What about a meet in the middle to see how that go's? Maybe week 6 for deadline and 90 million for max cap?
Back to top
mark
Sun Mar 29 2020, 07:11p.m.
Registered Member #45
Joined: Wed May 05 2010, 11:29p.m.

Posts: 670
I’m ok with week 6.
Do you think 88 mill is too restrictive?
Will changing the rookie rule on signing help our overall salaries and create more value with rookies in helping and building a team?
Back to top
noodles
Tue Mar 31 2020, 04:52a.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1187
One easily overlooked consequence of the current proposal to delay rookie contract options by a year is the extra money it puts in the bank for each team. Because the rookie salary cost is frozen for an extra year, money is freed up to spend elsewhere. Example: Suppose I draft seven rookies in year one and keep five in year two when their drafted salary counts against the cap. As things stand today, in year three when I have to make a contract decision, their salaries are incremented by $1m each. If I sign all five, that's an additional $5m in cost. With the new rule proposal, their salary doesn't increase until year four saving that $5m for other uses. If we pass that amendment AND we pass the proposed amendment to increase the in-season salary cap an additional $5m (from $88m to $93m), that would effectively add $10m in extra cap space. I could accept a later season trade deadline, but (for all the reasons I've argued before), I oppose increasing the cap in any amount ESPECIALLY, as this post points out, considering the additional money freed up by the rookie amendment that is likely to go through. I favor passing the rookie amendment and rejecting the increased salary cap. In a year or two we can revisit the proposal by Tampa Bay to increase salary costs for the top rookie draft picks if we find things getting out of balance.
Back to top
MarkB
Tue Mar 31 2020, 09:28p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1287
noodles wrote ...

One easily overlooked consequence of the current proposal to delay rookie contract options by a year is the extra money it puts in the bank for each team. Because the rookie salary cost is frozen for an extra year, money is freed up to spend elsewhere. Example: Suppose I draft seven rookies in year one and keep five in year two when their drafted salary counts against the cap. As things stand today, in year three when I have to make a contract decision, their salaries are incremented by $1m each. If I sign all five, that's an additional $5m in cost. With the new rule proposal, their salary doesn't increase until year four saving that $5m for other uses. If we pass that amendment AND we pass the proposed amendment to increase the in-season salary cap an additional $5m (from $88m to $93m), that would effectively add $10m in extra cap space. I could accept a later season trade deadline, but (for all the reasons I've argued before), I oppose increasing the cap in any amount ESPECIALLY, as this post points out, considering the additional money freed up by the rookie amendment that is likely to go through. I favor passing the rookie amendment and rejecting the increased salary cap. In a year or two we can revisit the proposal by Tampa Bay to increase salary costs for the top rookie draft picks if we find things getting out of balance.




I agree.
I would support an extension of the trade deadline, but not with the increase in the salary cap.
Back to top
MarkB
Tue Mar 31 2020, 10:42p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1287
At this point this is a "discussion" and not a proposal. For this to be a proposal it needs to be re-posted as such.
Back to top
 

Jump:     Back to top

Syndicate this thread: rss 0.92 Syndicate this thread: rss 2.0 Syndicate this thread: RDF
Powered by e107 Forum System