Discussion on Garunteed Contracts and associated items:

[GrendelKhan]

Agreed. But what about the horde of players who will be KEPT at 0 years?

we should have a shot at them, or owners should ahve to negotiate them into a deal.

[hornetjohn]

That would make the situation much more complicated than necessary.

[GrendelKhan]

How?

next season we won't be seing garunteed contracts. We will be seieng owners moving/cutting players at will due to keeping them at 0 year contracts. opening bidding on 0 year players will just help to keep garunteed contracts be a factor past the first season.

[TuringComplete]

Hey, I agree it's a problem. I'd just like to see more of an incentive to sign longer term deals as the way to fix it.

[GrendelKhan]

yes.

Having to protect your players that you have at 0 years, or having all zero year players cut at the end of the season - as you suggested ( and players who will go to 0 years), is a good way to do that.

Garunteed contracts will mean 0 , zip, nothing as we have it now. this will be the only season that it will be a factor. Because we all have some players on 1 year contracts.

Next season we won't have those constraints - and we'll have no incentive to do anything about it, effectively bypasisng the Garunteed contracts.

I like garunteed contracts a lot. It is one of the things that brought me here, but let's go all the way and do it right.

Next season as it stand THIS LEAGUE will be no different then any other le4ague, except for maybe 10% of the players will have to be held.

wow, what an affect that Garunteed contract has...

[hornetjohn]

Got to give it time - we are about half way through the season, no way to change that now - besides 0 Year contracts are in fact 1 year contracts. If we say that all players at 0 year can be bid on - then guys will keep there players at 1 year, but tell me how we renegotiate with our players on 1 year deals - we can't. It is certainly true though that players usually give discounts to the team they are on to resign them - so I have no problem with guys resigning there stars

[DaFreak]

I agree with HornetJohn, you have to give it time. I am not going to sign a guy to a long term contract when his gaps arent that great. All of my teams have guys with long term contracts but I am very selective with them. With a few seasons players gaps will increase and you will see more long term contracts. Likewise though I also have players who I refuse to sign for more then a 1 year deal because they are a backup or it doesnt do me that much good to overtrain someone at a position my coach doesnt suit.

[GrendelKhan]

Then why have Garunteed Contracts, if they won't have an impact on anything after the first season?

IF a 0 year contract is a 1 year contract then we shouldn't be able to cut them. ANY conttrract we sign should be honored with that concept.

And the reason to bid on those 0 year contracts is to Force n owner to decide the Value of their players. IF they want that plpaeyr they will have to lock them in. IS it supopsed to be easy? are we only going to survive through discounts?

So the full look at Garunteed contracts you have a problem with because it makes you work at your contracts...


HMMM what was garunteed contracts SUPPOSED to do? Open up bidding on 0 year contracts. Simple and it wil make the garunteed contracts have teeth. IF we let players hang out at 0 year contracts and play a full seaosn the garunteed contract means SQUAT. The two posts in front of this both pointed out ways they'd liek to avoid dealing with contracts. That is what this league will be, side-steping garunteed contracts.

[hornetjohn]

I am totally confused - First you wanted the ability to cut 1 year players -but now you are proposing ideas that would force owners to sign up to 1 year contracts (or else face bidding by other owners). But if both your ideas were in effect - then guys would reneg to 1 year and cut them if they wanted to - which is exactly what you hate about 0 year deals.

[TuringComplete]

Actually, what guaranteed contracts were supposed to do was eliminate outlandish bids on FA's. And for that I believe they are working.

I'd like to see guaranteed contracts go beyond that, but I can't fault how the rule addresses the main problem, nor can I fault people who don't want guaranteed contracts to do more than that.

I'd really like to see some incentive to sign longer term contracts such as no renegotiating with 0-year guys or letting everyone bid on 0-year guys if there's a way to make that feasible.