|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Nov 30, 2009 19:47:08 GMT -5
I don't think we are currently allowed to buy out people. Is there a chance this gets changed? Can we change it ASAP so people can use their cap from this season if they want to?
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Nov 30, 2009 19:54:36 GMT -5
I would love this rule as well.. My team, if any team, needs more cap space to be able to even remotely compete. Buyouts would be fantastic.
I need to be able to bring in SOME guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oklahoma City Thunder on Nov 30, 2009 22:40:41 GMT -5
Ehh...It gets sticky. Id prefer not having it. But then again, I am not totally closing the door on the idea. If enough people want it, id consider having it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Nov 30, 2009 22:43:52 GMT -5
yes that would be a sick idea i got some people on my team who have no business playing in the nba.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oklahoma City Thunder on Nov 30, 2009 23:04:49 GMT -5
yes that would be a sick idea i got some people on my team who have no business playing in the nba. That's the thing. I think if a team signs or takes on a player with a bad contract + bad rating, I want them to suffer somewhat for making a bad deal. Plus, then you run into fishy trades. A team trades for a guy, then buys him out, and the inital team signs him again. Also, deciding on the cap hit gets sticky too. What should the number be? A set percent of a player contract? Or does it matter on the player and his credentials (years in the league, wants to win, wants to start, etc..) IDK, I have never been a fan of the rule in sim leagues, but I can be convinced. |
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Nov 30, 2009 23:32:44 GMT -5
How about this. If you want to buy someone out they have to have been on your team for at least a full season (gets rid of trading then buying out and the trading team resigning for less). The buyout would have to be at least the current year's salary plus 1/2 of the next season. This would be negotiated with a player agent. The cap hit would be for one year but the team MUST have the cap room to buyout the player and the cap hit isn't tradable.
Is that restrictive enough to keep those who look for loopholes at bay but still advantageous enough for GMs to make it worth it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sacramento Kings on Dec 1, 2009 0:37:24 GMT -5
How about this. If you want to buy someone out they have to have been on your team for at least a full season (gets rid of trading then buying out and the trading team resigning for less). The buyout would have to be at least the current year's salary plus 1/2 of the next season. This would be negotiated with a player agent. The cap hit would be for one year but the team MUST have the cap room to buyout the player and the cap hit isn't tradable. Is that restrictive enough to keep those who look for loopholes at bay but still advantageous enough for GMs to make it worth it? I completely agree with this idea...I think also for players with longer contracts that the same 1/2 for each year after the 1st year and as has been stated by Atl, the team MUST have the cap room to do the entire buyout. i.e. Lebron James 25,000,000 25,500,000 27,000,000 25 + 12.75 + 13.5 = 51.25 So a team would need to have 51.25 mil in cap space to do this buyout. |
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Dec 1, 2009 1:06:27 GMT -5
I'd agree to the rules of buying out a player like Gadzuric being like 13 Million for this year, Easily enough to do that so I have some more cap space for this upcoming offseason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Lakers on Dec 1, 2009 12:09:33 GMT -5
I don't like it, we already have a lot of problems in other leagues and this one with ratings, FA, and trade rules. The last thing we need is another debacle like this causing problems everywhere, I understand where everyone's coming from but all this will do is make things confusing and make everyone more pissed off about the rules then they already.
|
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Dec 1, 2009 15:38:12 GMT -5
I think we could deal with this without having TOO many problems with it. Especially since most of us are up for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Dec 1, 2009 15:41:26 GMT -5
Who is mad about the rules of this league? I'm a big fan of all the rest of the rules of Legends, I really like how it is run. A buyout is possible in the NBA, so I was just bringing it up here, since we are pretty much taking most of the other rules of the NBA...as this is a SIM league where we SIMulate the real NBA.
Anyway, Atlanta's ideas are pretty good with me. Sac's is alright too. Here is a set of rules I wrote out for a league I was in, that unfortunately died out because of lack of a simmer, basically. I think the rules are pretty straight forward, it's just a long post to pretty much answer any questions there may be, and give examples.
If you would like to buy out a player, these are the rules.
You must pay 100% of the players' first year salary, plus 50% of his 2nd year salary, plus 25% of any remaining years of salary for the player.
You must have enough cap space in the current year to cover the whole buyout.
Example:
Player A: $7,000,000 | $8,000,000 | $9,000,000 | $10,000,000
I have player A, and now I've decided to buy him out. Let's figure out how much it costs to buy him out.
100% of year 1 = $7,000,000
plus
50% of year 2 ($8,000,000 x .5) = $4,000,000
plus
25% of year 3 ($9,000,000 x .25) = $2,250,000
plus
25% of year 4 ($10,000,000 x .25) = $2,500,000
So, add them all up...
$7,000,000 + $4,000,000 + $2,250,000 + $2,500,000
and you get
$15,750,000
So, that's how much it would cost me to buy that player out. This does NOT mean you need to currently have $15,750,000 in cap space to buy the player out. You get to subtract the players' current salary, since you were already paying that amount to him. You don't want to count that twice. Get it?
So, $15,750,000 - $7,000,000 = $8,750,000. You need to have at least an additional $8,750,000 in cap space currently, to buy out a player with this contract.
I hope this was in detail enough for everyone, and that it is clearly understood.
These could be modified slightly, but that's basically the rule written out that others are talking about here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Dec 1, 2009 15:45:48 GMT -5
I'm really not positive about the part about subtracting his current years' salary from the buyout...it's kind of reduntant in the rules actually. Hmm, I gotta go check the NBA rules on that. It seems silly you'd have to pay him his current year twice, doesn't it? Anyway, like I said, these can be modified, it was just an example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte Bobcats on Dec 1, 2009 15:57:49 GMT -5
I don't like the buy rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Dec 1, 2009 22:47:47 GMT -5
I don't like the buy rule. why? |
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte Bobcats on Dec 2, 2009 17:00:02 GMT -5
I agree with what OKC said, it makes taking bad contracts more desirable and what is a fair amount?
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Dec 2, 2009 17:22:22 GMT -5
I also agree 100% with what OKC said, and wouldn't really be a fan of the buyout rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Dec 2, 2009 18:53:46 GMT -5
Not only am I in favor of it as previously stated but think in a sim league that has been run a few years it could be vital to some teams. Take for example in RimRockers. I have Bonzi Wells on my roster. I traded for him but he is currently in Europe. Let's say he retires after this season. I'd still have to pay him $27,500,000 for four more years. How realistic is that? It is just an example but one that could easily be found in other sim leagues and in some cases get the players that have just retired or even been retired for years out of the player pool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Dec 2, 2009 20:22:07 GMT -5
I dunno guys. I think the nature of our league, actually makes buyouts more necessary than IRL. If a team signs a player or trades for a player, they have control over his playing time. That is obvious. If he is struggling, they can still play him and try to get him to come out of it...OR, they could decide they don't want to play him, and want to play a younger/different player instead. Soon, maybe they buy him out.
As a sim league GM, we have ZERO control of the real life playing time a player gets. If he's struggling, we still want that player to get some PT and snap out of it. But, if that RL owner/GM decides to buy out the player, we're left out to dry.
I'll just use myself as an example. Stromile Swift. When he was a FA last offseason in this league, he got a few teams interested in him. He seemed like a solid enough player that OKC, the player agent, asked for a Player Option to be put in year 3, in case he was playing so well that he would want MORE money.
Somehow, he is now not even on a team IRL, and hasn't played for anyone this season. If I were a real life team, I could start playing him...but as a GM in a sim league, I have no control over his PT. A real life team could also buy him out if he has regressed this much unexpectedly.
It's just not all that fair. If you make the rule the right way, especially the part ATL said about the player being on your team for an entire season, or something similar, it eliminates those trades you are concerned about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Dec 2, 2009 22:36:55 GMT -5
I here your arguments, but I disagree that we should have a buyout for those reasons. Bonzi Wells hasn't been a relevant player in the NBA for awhile, if you are willing to trade for him and that salary, then you should be stuck with it. Having a buyout means that GM's don't have to really give long-term consideration to signings or trades, and that isn't fair to GM's who do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Dec 2, 2009 22:46:31 GMT -5
I dunno guys. I think the nature of our league, actually makes buyouts more necessary than IRL. If a team signs a player or trades for a player, they have control over his playing time. That is obvious. If he is struggling, they can still play him and try to get him to come out of it...OR, they could decide they don't want to play him, and want to play a younger/different player instead. Soon, maybe they buy him out. As a sim league GM, we have ZERO control of the real life playing time a player gets. If he's struggling, we still want that player to get some PT and snap out of it. But, if that RL owner/GM decides to buy out the player, we're left out to dry. I'll just use myself as an example. Stromile Swift. When he was a FA last offseason in this league, he got a few teams interested in him. He seemed like a solid enough player that OKC, the player agent, asked for a Player Option to be put in year 3, in case he was playing so well that he would want MORE money. Somehow, he is now not even on a team IRL, and hasn't played for anyone this season. If I were a real life team, I could start playing him...but as a GM in a sim league, I have no control over his PT. A real life team could also buy him out if he has regressed this much unexpectedly. It's just not all that fair. If you make the rule the right way, especially the part ATL said about the player being on your team for an entire season, or something similar, it eliminates those trades you are concerned about. This is the risk though to signing players like Stromile Swift. He has been a bust in the NBA, he has career averages of 8.5 points and 4.5 rebounds per game. If you want to take a chance on a guy like that, it's your choice, but to say you had no control over his lack of RL playing time isn't true. You had the choice not to sign a fringe NBA player to the contract you did. You offered the contract and you should be stuck with it. |
|
