Build a Franchise (Season 8) Discussion Thread- Philadelphia is now on the clock until 4PM

[2010]

I’m just questioning why are we collectively think tanking a rule submission and suggesting amendments in real time and expecting it to pass in the current rule submission cycle?

That is wild to me.

Like y’all are effectively making changes to the rule proposal and offering all types of amendments in progress in efforts to get it to pass immediately.

That’s not nasty work to y’all?

Hey, maybe I’m the one who’s buggin’

[DOT]

Speakin of... still dangling Jarace Walker, Terrance Shannon, Tristan da Silva for very little draft capital, cheap contracts back...

Same, but for Grayson Allen, Malik Beasley, and Keldon Johnson

[mpharris36]

also didn't Ben Simmons just get moved and he's making $260...

[Mecca]

The simple solution in my eyes would just be the re-prepose the rule next offseason for new 1st year GM's in there first offseason. I think you would nearly get 100% on board with that rule. The "newer" vagueness and teams 3-4 years in the league having the ability if you maintained a stagnant contract doesn't make sense to me but I think I have already made my point. As 2010 said Bish in the past says we have to vote for the rule "as is" so we will just have to make a tweak on the wording next year.

I think the premise behind the rule is solid for the 1st time just acquiring team GM's.

Also I legit never thought Brandon Ingram would ever bee traded with a $565 contract.

I think Remi and I both were able to trade Frank Ntilikina at one point and he was making $170 contract. It can be done.

Ingram an all-star in his prime and Frank was a Knick and was young, way different

[mpharris36]

I’m just questioning why are we collectively think tanking a rule submission and suggesting amendments in real time and expecting it to pass in the current rule submission cycle.

That is wild to me. Like y’all are effectively making changes to the rule proposal and offering all types of amendments in progress in efforts to get it to pass immediately.

That’s not nasty work to y’all?

Hey, maybe I’m the one who’s buggin’

There is no problem with positive discourse about a rule being proposed. The meat and bones are there to potentially adjust for next year. Based on how we have always operated we can't adjust after a rule is proposed so we do have to vote "as is". Which I think most are doing, just providing some positive feedback is good though.

But its a good discussion to have for next year (at least that is how I see it).

[Mecca]

also didn't Ben Simmons just get moved and he's making $260...

Ben a former all star & had upside. We talking about Jonas, Smart & DLo

[DOT]

also didn't Ben Simmons just get moved and he's making $260...

Ben a former all star & had upside. We talking about Jonas, Smart & DLo

tbf, isn't Smart a former DPOY?

[2010]

I’m just questioning why are we collectively think tanking a rule submission and suggesting amendments in real time and expecting it to pass in the current rule submission cycle.

That is wild to me. Like y’all are effectively making changes to the rule proposal and offering all types of amendments in progress in efforts to get it to pass immediately.

That’s not nasty work to y’all?

Hey, maybe I’m the one who’s buggin’

There is no problem with positive discourse about a rule being proposed. The meat and bones are there to potentially adjust for next year. Based on how we have always operated we can't adjust after a rule is proposed so we do have to vote "as is". Which I think most are doing, just providing some positive feedback is good though.

But its a good discussion to have for next year (at least that is how I see it).

I’m fine with the discussion and feedback.

As long as it’s understood that any amendments to language and/or terms are subject to a resubmission and voting process for next season’s rule submission cycle (Season 10).

But for this current rule submission cycle (for Season 9), the rule must be voted on based on the terms and language for which it’s currently written.

[Mecca]

Can we propose a rule to stretch a contract? (IE old nba CBA then?)

[mpharris36]

The simple solution in my eyes would just be the re-prepose the rule next offseason for new 1st year GM's in there first offseason. I think you would nearly get 100% on board with that rule. The "newer" vagueness and teams 3-4 years in the league having the ability if you maintained a stagnant contract doesn't make sense to me but I think I have already made my point. As 2010 said Bish in the past says we have to vote for the rule "as is" so we will just have to make a tweak on the wording next year.

I think the premise behind the rule is solid for the 1st time just acquiring team GM's.

Also I legit never thought Brandon Ingram would ever bee traded with a $565 contract.

I think Remi and I both were able to trade Frank Ntilikina at one point and he was making $170 contract. It can be done.

Ingram an all-star in his prime and Frank was a Knick and was young, way different

Ingram hasn't been an all-star in 5 years and it was the largest contract ever given out in BAF history and Frank was a 1-star player in the Sim making nearly 20% the cap no matter what team he was on people moved him. Also as Melo and others said there are countless names that have been moved which were considered bad contracts as the time.

I personally think guys like Harris, Smart, and LeVert are very valuable pieces if someone has the space or bad contracts to add them and that team is trying to win games. Smart was one of the few guards in the entire league with 90 DEF or something really similar to that (even as far as last year). You just have to find an equally bad or worse contract for a less productive player and hopefully get pick(s) to acquire some assets.

Jonathan Isaac was moved with a $200 contract

I think Middelton was just moved this past season with a $260 contract

Lavine has been moved with a $400 contract

Ben Simmons is still being moved with a $260 contract

Andrew Wiggins was moved last season with a $285 contract

I think TC took on Klay Thompson making $300 a year or so ago.

[2010]

Can we propose a rule to stretch a contract? (IE old nba CBA then?)

You are free to propose anything you want, for next season’s rule change submission cycle.

[NewEra]

I don’t think it’s fair to introduce a rule like this now in a way that immediately benefits a new GM, especially when past GMs had to navigate bad contracts without that option or worked hard to clear them. If we want to implement this starting in the 2026–27 season, I’d fully support it. That way, all GMs have equal opportunity moving forward.

[HEZI]

I think everyone just made a case for why this rule change shouldn’t be implemented. What applies to a GM from the last couple years applies to a brand new GM. Bad contracts can be moved so everyone needs to just play the cards they were dealt. Simple

Denver will just keep it simple and vote No on this rule change

[mpharris36]

I’m just questioning why are we collectively think tanking a rule submission and suggesting amendments in real time and expecting it to pass in the current rule submission cycle.

That is wild to me. Like y’all are effectively making changes to the rule proposal and offering all types of amendments in progress in efforts to get it to pass immediately.

That’s not nasty work to y’all?

Hey, maybe I’m the one who’s buggin’

There is no problem with positive discourse about a rule being proposed. The meat and bones are there to potentially adjust for next year. Based on how we have always operated we can't adjust after a rule is proposed so we do have to vote "as is". Which I think most are doing, just providing some positive feedback is good though.

But its a good discussion to have for next year (at least that is how I see it).

I’m fine with the discussion and feedback.

As long as it’s understood that any amendments to language and/or terms are subject to a resubmission and voting process for next season’s rule submission cycle (Season 10).

But for this current rule submission cycle (for Season 9), the rule must be voted on based on the terms and language for which it’s currently written.

I agree, I think this one is being talked about more because people didn't know what "newer" GM meant. It should have been explicit it was for 1st time GM's in there 1st year. But it sounds like it was proposed so that anyone that took over somewhat recently (which again is vague) can use it. But some were clearly confused by the wording since some voted "yes" but also switched to "no".

[Mecca]

Can we propose a rule to stretch a contract? (IE old nba CBA then?)

You are free to propose anything you want, for next season’s rule change submission cycle.

FA hasn't started yet and it's a counter to this current rule vote. I'd like to hear the commish give his POV on if we can propose it

[Capn'O]

I think people are being pedantic a bit with Mecca. Nobody is saying you literally CAN'T make moves, I'm sure if you PMd people everyday for a month straight you could move off of one of those contracts, and maybe get some wiggle room, but nobody was giving real value for any of those guys outside of maybe LeVert. Other GMs have maneuvered out of bad spots, but that was a uniquely **** situation to be in.

There is just an inherent inbalance in taking over teams that could be in great or **** spots. Every team inherited is not a 1:1:1 bad situation. The thing is though in a keeper league, there will be unfairness unless things are wiped clean. This upcoming offseason though will have the most turnover since I joined the league for sure though.

Mecca's situation sucks. The Bucks were just in a tough spot.

That said, I honestly would be more comfortable just wiping Val's contract from his books than codifying an arbitrary rule as written.

[Mecca]

Y'all got what you want. I'll go back to being inactive, i'll make my pick on time and not post in here as I won't have any flexibility

[KnicksGadfly]

also didn't Ben Simmons just get moved and he's making $260...

Ben a former all star & had upside. We talking about Jonas, Smart & DLo

I’ve also moved or traded for:
Jonathan Isaac
Lonzo Ball
Ben Simmons
Norm Powell NTC
Ingram

I put my secret as not demanding a first from someone any time they try to bring up a trade

[Capn'O]

If you're gonna have an amnesty just have an amnesty. This "recent" GMs thing is too muddy. Terrence Clarke inherited some absolute BS but he's (iirc) three years in so he doesn't get one?

It's either for the actual new GMs or for everyone.

Then let's just propose it for everyone

If you take over a team going forward, you get an absolute amnesty to any contract you inherited until the offseason is over

Everyone else gets to void 1 year of a deal of a guy they have on their team 1 time this offseason, let's just say until the draft is over and it can't be someone they trade for after right now.

I could sign off on that one.

[2010]

Can we propose a rule to stretch a contract? (IE old nba CBA then?)

You are free to propose anything you want, for next season’s rule change submission cycle.

FA hasn't started yet and it's a counter to this current rule vote. I'd like to hear the commish give his POV on if we can propose it

The deadline for rule proposals for the current submission cycle has passed. It’s no longer visible on the 1st page of the main BaF stickied thread. I’m certain bish will not allow any new 25th hour proposals to be submitted for the current voting cycle.