|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Aug 21, 2016 15:59:29 GMT -5
I think we should adopt a rule where we can pay a traded player's salary. For example, if I traded Matt Wieters and his 15 mil now, I could offer to pay the 15 mil for the remaining season so the owner getting him wouldn't pay a dime.
Other examples could be like trading a guy like Cervelli and offering to pay his salary for next year.
Stuff like that could really boost returns for expensive players, and since it's already done in real life I figure why not on here.
I figure the one rough edge is if the player is a FA next season, like Wieters is, so you can't offer to pay for that salary since you don't know it, but if you have a lot of cap room and want to maximize the return for a player in Wieters' situation, then I suppose an owner can offer to pay for his salary for the next year, even without knowing what it'll be. No one's forcing that owner to do that, it's his choice.
It's all up to the owner who is trading away the expensive player. They can pay for the player's salary that they're trading away for the remainder of a season, the year after that, and so on if they want to. It's purely their choice.
I'd like to see other people's thoughts on this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 16:03:01 GMT -5
MLB has far more accountants on staff than we do to manage that sort of thing. I don't have an issue with the concept, but maintenance would be killer.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Aug 21, 2016 16:09:24 GMT -5
MLB has far more accountants on staff than we do to manage that sort of thing. I don't have an issue with the concept, but maintenance would be killer. I don't think it'd be that hard. The team who agrees to pay the salary accepts the responsibility of keeping up with a player's salary. EDIT: I now see what you're saying. I'd take on the responsibility of keeping up with it all. Wouldn't be too hard. |
|
|
|
Post by rangers on Aug 21, 2016 16:12:40 GMT -5
So we can't keep straight pick trading straight and you want to add a large layer of complexity? I had an expensive team once, I had to eat it when I couldn't afford players. Seems like a good way to go forward without entangling LMs in unending double checking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 16:13:57 GMT -5
Wasn't there discussion around trading cap for a single year a while ago? I believe that got shot down over the maintenance concern and I see this as more maintenance than that. As long as someone (please not more work for Tim) is picking it up, I don't have a problem with the concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves on Aug 21, 2016 17:08:36 GMT -5
We've had this discussion before and it gets shut down everytime. It's just a hard thing to keep track of. Plus how would you work it if that player is dropped? Would the team paying the salary take the hit and pay half the salary or would the team that dropped him now be on the hook for half for dropping him? Or if the salary is split would the penalty be split? I just think there would be too many issues if we started to do that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 18:35:06 GMT -5
I think we should adopt a rule where we can pay a traded player's salary. For example, if I traded Matt Wieters and his 15 mil now, I could offer to pay the 15 mil for the remaining season so the owner getting him wouldn't pay a dime. Other examples could be like trading a guy like Cervelli and offering to pay his salary for next year. Stuff like that could really boost returns for expensive players, and since it's already done in real life I figure why not on here. I figure the one rough edge is if the player is a FA next season, like Wieters is, so you can't offer to pay for that salary since you don't know it, but if you have a lot of cap room and want to maximize the return for a player in Wieters' situation, then I suppose an owner can offer to pay for his salary for the next year, even without knowing what it'll be. No one's forcing that owner to do that, it's his choice. It's all up to the owner who is trading away the expensive player. They can pay for the player's salary that they're trading away for the remainder of a season, the year after that, and so on if they want to. It's purely their choice. I'd like to see other people's thoughts on this. I like the idea but only for the remainder of the current season. |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Aug 21, 2016 18:38:06 GMT -5
I think we should adopt a rule where we can pay a traded player's salary. For example, if I traded Matt Wieters and his 15 mil now, I could offer to pay the 15 mil for the remaining season so the owner getting him wouldn't pay a dime. Other examples could be like trading a guy like Cervelli and offering to pay his salary for next year. Stuff like that could really boost returns for expensive players, and since it's already done in real life I figure why not on here. I figure the one rough edge is if the player is a FA next season, like Wieters is, so you can't offer to pay for that salary since you don't know it, but if you have a lot of cap room and want to maximize the return for a player in Wieters' situation, then I suppose an owner can offer to pay for his salary for the next year, even without knowing what it'll be. No one's forcing that owner to do that, it's his choice. It's all up to the owner who is trading away the expensive player. They can pay for the player's salary that they're trading away for the remainder of a season, the year after that, and so on if they want to. It's purely their choice. I'd like to see other people's thoughts on this. I like the idea but only for the remainder of the current season. Would make it a lot easier to keep up. Too late to implement it this deadline but I think this is something we should do. I can keep up with it all and document the transactions. Arizona Diamondbacks what say you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 18:38:49 GMT -5
We've had this discussion before and it gets shut down everytime. It's just a hard thing to keep track of. Plus how would you work it if that player is dropped? Would the team paying the salary take the hit and pay half the salary or would the team that dropped him now be on the hook for half for dropping him? Or if the salary is split would the penalty be split? I just think there would be too many issues if we started to do that. If he is dropped in the season he is traded, then the team on the hook for his salary would recoup half of the salary like we do now. |
|
|
|
Post by Arizona Diamondbacks on Aug 21, 2016 21:14:12 GMT -5
BrewCrewGM what's your plan for how to incorporate the documenting into my current official rosters google spreadsheet? I'm not saying it won't work, and I like the idea, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the best way to document it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves on Aug 22, 2016 8:01:53 GMT -5
We've had this discussion before and it gets shut down everytime. It's just a hard thing to keep track of. Plus how would you work it if that player is dropped? Would the team paying the salary take the hit and pay half the salary or would the team that dropped him now be on the hook for half for dropping him? Or if the salary is split would the penalty be split? I just think there would be too many issues if we started to do that. If he is dropped in the season he is traded, then the team on the hook for his salary would recoup half of the salary like we do now. Gotcha.. I was thinking it'd be for the duration of the contract but if it's just for a single year I think it could work. It would basically be treated like a penalty for dropping someone and it'd come off your salary at the end of the year. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2016 8:32:53 GMT -5
Why not simplify this whole thing and allow cap trading for a single season (instead of or in addition to perm cap)? The real overhead comes into the picture when you have to tie the cp to a player contract, then making updates when a player is dropped.
We could basically use the penalty section if we didn't want to create a new section (although I'd suggest a new section) which would have a penalty for the team trading the single season cap, and a credit for the team receiving the single season cap.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Aug 22, 2016 8:35:42 GMT -5
BrewCrewGM what's your plan for how to incorporate the documenting into my current official rosters google spreadsheet? I'm not saying it won't work, and I like the idea, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the best way to document it. Yeah if it's on the Google doc spreadsheet then I think it'd be easy to list this information at the top of each owner's page where their financials are usually listed out. An addendum to this is that the owner paying the salary of the traded player doesn't have to pay it all. Can offer to pay 5 of 10 mil, 3 of 6, etc. Allows for more flexibility and wouldn't make it harder to document. And now that I think about it it should only be allowed for a current season or for an upcoming one if the trade is made during the off-season. Won't skip a year ahead, stays in line with the same principle used for trading future draft picks. |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Aug 22, 2016 8:38:33 GMT -5
Why not simplify this whole thing and allow cap trading for a single season (instead of or in addition to perm cap)? The real overhead comes into the picture when you have to tie the cp to a player contract, then making updates when a player is dropped. We could basically use the penalty section if we didn't want to create a new section (although I'd suggest a new section) which would have a penalty for the team trading the single season cap, and a credit for the team receiving the single season cap. I think that would complicate things, actually. This is all pretty straight forward. If a traded player is dropped by the owner not paying anything then he eats half of the salary. Now if the new owner of the traded player agreed to pay half of the player's salary, like 3 out of 6, then it'll just be a 1 mil penalty. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2016 8:45:28 GMT -5
right, but now you have additional steps for validating rosters, since Cot's wouldn't be source of truth for what a team is responsible for paying a player. You'd basically need to track all guys involved in these deals like TPB's are managed. If you just allowed single season cap trading you wouldn't have that overhead and would still achieve a similar end result for teams (penalty would still be based off the players contract price, so it would be higher under this scenario)
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Aug 22, 2016 8:52:04 GMT -5
right, but now you have additional steps for validating rosters, since Cot's wouldn't be source of truth for what a team is responsible for paying a player. You'd basically need to track all guys involved in these deals like TPB's are managed. If you just allowed single season cap trading you wouldn't have that overhead and would still achieve a similar end result for teams (penalty would still be based off the players contract price, so it would be higher under this scenario) Yeah I'm just not seeing how it'll be hard to track. I look at all of the trades anyway. I can do it. |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Jan 22, 2018 16:23:55 GMT -5
Going to bump this. I think this would be a great element to add to the league and make it even more complex (in a good way). It won't be all that hard to keep track. I can do it on my own plus I can add an addendum to each owner's financial summary on their roster page (if they don't do it) so it'll be on my computer plus on TPB as well. Would be the same thing as listing the penalty for dropping a player on your roster page. And there would be no paying for a player's salary two years from now. Even if they've signed a contract that already has their 2019 salary officially listed, only 2018 salaries can be paid for, until next off-season. Would only be a year-to-year thing. And as for what Barves said above, we'll just use common sense. Even if a player is dropped, the other team still pays the same salary number for the rest of the season. Also: if team X pays the salary of player A and trades to team Y, who pays none of it, but then Team Y trades player A to team Z, team X still pays that salary for the rest of the year until the off-season. Team Y couldn't make some big profit off of his original trade because he already had to give up value because Team X ate the contract. Team Z would give Team Y similar value to what Team Y gave to Team X. Another tidbit: Team X is paying player A's salary, who was just traded to Team Y. Player A blows ass during the season, Team Y can drop him with no penalty (player A will just count as $500K on Team Y's roster if Team X pays the entire salary), but then player A is bid on. We can either make it so Team X pays the same salary no matter what, or Team X can pay whatever the new TPB contract is, as long as it doesn't exceed the original amount that Team X agreed to pay. One or the other is practical IMO. Another edit: I'll take responsibility for double checking each team's financials during audits. Will not be difficult at all. What say you Arizona Diamondbacks St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew) |
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Jan 23, 2018 14:00:57 GMT -5
If nobody wants to chime in then I may set up a poll.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2018 15:03:39 GMT -5
How has anything changed since 2016? This still seems like a bad idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Jan 23, 2018 15:08:58 GMT -5
How has anything changed since 2016? This still seems like a bad idea. Some keep saying this is a bad idea but do not explain why it is. It can be easily kept up with. |
|
