IMPORTANT: Your opinion needed

Okay stumps finally logged in and looked at the forum and brought up a good point:

FROM STUMPS

Quote:

---

I think it also needs to be emphasised that if you put a guy with a contract greater than 0 years on the DL, and sign somebody to replace his salary, if you sign that replacement for any longer than 0 years you will not be able to adhere to the rules once your original player is healthy and must be either reactivated or released, unless you have equivalent salary worth of 0 year (ie droppable) guys. Everybody needs to be very careful of this, because it can create a situation where owners are forced to break one rule or another. How would we handle that?

---

<font size="2" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">FIRST A couple people may be confused about the issue of a player on more than 0 years of a contract being traded and staying on a team.

If you trade for a player with 1 or more years you will then have to keep that player just as if you signed him off the FA market.

SECOND On to what Stumps said ... what can we do about this issue. Is this all on the HONESTY of each GM.

1. Do we trust each GM that he knows the guy on the DL is only their due to injury and is still a team player so the guy off the FA MARKET to take his place will only be signed to 0YEAR so he can be released when the injured becomes un-injured.

2. Or what?

....... this is hard because its hard to monitor and control if a GM does it wrong or on purpose. However i think the group of guys we have right now is a good core of honest players that understand what the league is trying to do.

....... with that said does anyone else have an opinion on this

Injury Replacements need only be signed to zero year deals... the equivalent of the NBAs 10 day contracts. It will be tricky though and I imagine a few people will get caught out initially.

Replacement players should be signed to 0 year contracts. We will just have to be sure as teams begin to rollover that all the new owners are aware of all the "rules" that we have all agreed to...

well we shouldnt see any new teams for about a year and a half [img]smile.gif[/img]

Replacement FAs should only be signed to 0 year contracts, unless the GM plans on keeping both players if there is room.

I do think it will easy to inadvertently violiate one of these rules. We will just have to see how it goes. I have had a case in league 1 where I picked up a replacement player who played so well I kept him and he is now a starter. I think with the new rules, I would sign replacements to 0 yr and leave cap room in case I decide to keep one

Awareness to the scenario needs to be paid attention to. It would be nice to see a "press-release" when someone moves a player to the DL, with the basic scenario of how they intend to deal with it mentioned:

Jack Spratt is going to the DL for 8 days. The Horse Thieves will persue hiring a FA for the duration of the healing.

Frank Cutter will be placed on the Dl list. The Frogmeisters will be hiring a FA, and intend to drop sam PLanks, when Cutter heals.

I like the press release idea.

i do as well but it would take the effort of all GMs to make it work

the big thing about this league and the rules we are trying to use is mass and complete participation

well, my feeling -- it's better to have people willingly giving head's up press reales type info about moves. Rather then peopel policing.

and Policing is sure to happen regardless. But I am sure we all would like to keep things very very gentleman.

If you take the 5min to address your intentions in a quick press release, it's going to be appreciated by everyone in the league, as well as increase activity. Not to mention it may help you sort out what you need to do. Peopel that make team threads know exactly what I'm tlaking about there.

it's funny this was brought up...i was going to bring it up, myself after it hit me about the potential problem. i guess we'll have to keep an eye on it.

what happens if someone violates the rules or makes a mistake?? how do we correct and/or penalize the team?

you know, we wouldn't have this damn problem if we didn't have guaranteed contracts =)

are more complications what we really want/need since we're just starting up and especially if it's not written into the game code? i'm just bitchy over the guaranteed contract issue, i guess...

I don't think that this is likely to be a huge issue since it only occurs when all the following occur simultaneously:

A. Player is on the DL.
B. Owner signs a FA to more than a 0-year deal that puts the total salary over the cap.
C. There are not enough 0-year players on the roster to release to get team salary back under the cap.

In my opinion, as soon as someone recognizes that all that has occurred, the offending owner should be required to immediately cut the newly-signed player. This would undo the problem as much as possible, and the only real penalty would be losing the player while the guy being replaced is still injured. The only people getting hurt in the scenario are anyone else who bid on the FA and anyone who played the team who signed the illegal FA before the error was caught.

I do think that whatever is decided should be a hard and fast rule -- if you accidently sign a FA to a multi-year deal that puts you over the cap and the only 0-year player that can be cut is your best guy: too bad, he has to be cut since it's the only legal option.

it's funny this was brought up...i was going to bring it up, myself after it hit me about the potential problem. i guess we'll have to keep an eye on it.

what happens if someone violates the rules or makes a mistake?? how do we correct and/or penalize the team?

you know, we wouldn't have this damn problem if we didn't have guaranteed contracts =)

are more complications what we really want/need since we're just starting up and especially if it's not written into the game code? i'm just bitchy over the guaranteed contract issue, i guess...

this is gonna get sticky, i think. there should be a rule for everyone but i have a feeling someone's gonna screw up the salary numbers or make an honest mistake and then things'll get ugly if someone is forced to drop a player of consequence.

remember, this is a new rule that's not even written in the code. if it's not written in the code...should it even be a rule?? i see the potential for too many problems.

You cant go over the cap

As per one of the changes everyone wanted (or 97% wanted) no team can go over the cap except when new draft picks are added to their team by the computer at the start of the season

Scott changed the 0.10% over the cap to 0.00% ... so now you cant go over for any reason. this will affect GMs when they need a FA for an injured player and when they want to make a trade

wait, so do guys on the IR still count against the cap? is that what you're saying? i'm sooo confused...

So you cant make a trade that involves a 0 year player to make a trade even out and it puts one of the teams over the cap and then drop him? Sometimes a player needs to be put in a trade like that so the "commish" wont say "try making a trade that is more even", we all have had to do that at 1 time or another. If thats the case then maybe trade restrictions should be taken out of this league because sometimes if you want a player or want to get rid of a player your willing to give/get less to do it.

HARDCAP.

Treat anything over $60mil as your saftey cushion and you'll be fine. if you keep yourself tight to the hardcap you will not be able to make moves very easily.