Build a Franchise Discussion Thread (Season 5) Announcement on page 95 (Boston is on the clock until 8AM)

[NewEra]

Bam Adebayo, Jamal Murray, Zach Lavine all available in Sign and trades.. hit me up!

Ooohh I like Mr. Adebayo. Just bad timing for our franchise. Love when GMs aren’t afraid to switch things up. Even if you don’t end up moving them, at-least you’re willing to think out the box. Even after success, you can’t get comfortable in this game. Gotta be committed to finding ways to improve.

[Capn'O]

It's an interesting idea. I would also consider putting the initial bidding number higher to reduce the scope of included players.

Bish's feedback on any proposed FA rule is really the most important factor. This needs to be manageable for him.

[mpharris36]

It's an interesting idea. I would also consider putting the initial bidding number higher.

Bish's feedback on any proposed FA rule is really the most important factor. This needs to be manageable for him.

yes ultimately comes down to what Bish can manage since this is the closest offseason to our initial FA bidding period (in terms of volume). I think if he is up front with us on what he can manage without adjusting our FA process the most would be ideal for everyone is my guess because our system is currently solid. But the sheer volume will obviously be something he needs to be able to let us know what he can and can't handle.

Basically what I'm saying if something has to adjust I would rather go the route similarly to what that person just proposed (with potential tweaks) rather than go back to a tiered layout where we only get a small crop of the FA's at once. Would much rather have the entire FA crop at our disposal with higher initial bids early on where we can pick our direction which I think would mimic more real life FA then say only certain players are up to be bid on now.

[Capn'O]

There are better ways to reduce the commissioners workload, some of which have been mentioned previously. This will only artificially drive up the price of stars and give a bigger advantage to teams with great FA ratings and bird rights.

The idea makes sense if you want to eliminate $1 bids, but with all the cash available- just like when we started BAF, good role players will be getting paid. So it’s solving a non-existent problem and artificially driving up the prices of stars.

I don't see how it drives up the price of stars. In the higher tiers people have their numbers, I would think. I think it will actually drive up the price of role players. You'll see a guy sitting on waivers and know you have to bid $25 to get them.




EDIT: Oh - I see - there's a tiered minimum bid. I don't like that approach - don't see a reason for changing the bid based on ranking. I'd be more interested in a flatline minimum bid and one greater than $25. I think that organically limits the scope of players without arbitrary rulings of who is in and out. And also without further hindering lower ranked teams.

[Deeeez Knicks]

It's an interesting idea. I would also consider putting the initial bidding number higher.

Bish's feedback on any proposed FA rule is really the most important factor. This needs to be manageable for him.

yes ultimately comes down to what Bish can manage since this is the closest offseason to our initial FA bidding period (in terms of volume). I think if he is up front with us on what he can manage without adjusting our FA process the most would be ideal for everyone is my guess because our system is currently solid. But the sheer volume will obviously be something he needs to be able to let us know what he can and can't handle.

Basically what I'm saying if something has to adjust I would rather go the route similarly to what that person just proposed (with potential tweaks) rather than go back to a tiered layout where we only get a small crop of the FA's at once. Would much rather have the entire FA crop at our disposal with higher initial bids early on where we can pick our direction which I think would mimic more real life FA then say only certain players are up to be bid on now.

I like that proposal or a similar idea to stagger free agents. Overall i am in favor of some type of staggered approach. It just seems like too much to manage in a short period if it's all at once and also feels rushed. But ultimately a lot depends on how Bish feels he can handle it too

[TerrenceClarke]

When FA Starts.

GMs who have Bird Rights on studs watching the action.



Opposing GMs who dont care and want those players for themselves adding poison pills.....



Bird Right GMs thinking what to do now after they see the amount they was offered....

[mpharris36]

When FA Starts.

GMs who have Bird Rights on studs watching the action.



Opposing GMs who dont care and want those players for themselves adding poison pills.....



Bird Right GMs thinking what to do now after they see the amount they was offered....

[mpharris36]

It's an interesting idea. I would also consider putting the initial bidding number higher.

Bish's feedback on any proposed FA rule is really the most important factor. This needs to be manageable for him.

yes ultimately comes down to what Bish can manage since this is the closest offseason to our initial FA bidding period (in terms of volume). I think if he is up front with us on what he can manage without adjusting our FA process the most would be ideal for everyone is my guess because our system is currently solid. But the sheer volume will obviously be something he needs to be able to let us know what he can and can't handle.

Basically what I'm saying if something has to adjust I would rather go the route similarly to what that person just proposed (with potential tweaks) rather than go back to a tiered layout where we only get a small crop of the FA's at once. Would much rather have the entire FA crop at our disposal with higher initial bids early on where we can pick our direction which I think would mimic more real life FA then say only certain players are up to be bid on now.

I like that proposal or a similar idea to stagger free agents. Overall i am in favor of some type of staggered approach. It just seems like too much to manage in a short period if it's all at once and also feels rushed. But ultimately a lot depends on how Bish feels he can handle it too

I'm not sure the best way to stagger free agents though. Its pretty odd and unrealistic to just have 30 teams bidding on a certain smaller group (you run the risk of people just artificially up bidding guys) because they are the first ones available to bid on. Conversely if you are in the last group and have a few teams with money it totally changes the approach to make sure you land a player. It totally changes the dynamic of each FA depending on when they show up on the staggered list. When I believe every FA should be treated the same. If you have the entire FA class you can't f*ck around and waste time.

[Capn'O]

yes ultimately comes down to what Bish can manage since this is the closest offseason to our initial FA bidding period (in terms of volume). I think if he is up front with us on what he can manage without adjusting our FA process the most would be ideal for everyone is my guess because our system is currently solid. But the sheer volume will obviously be something he needs to be able to let us know what he can and can't handle.

Basically what I'm saying if something has to adjust I would rather go the route similarly to what that person just proposed (with potential tweaks) rather than go back to a tiered layout where we only get a small crop of the FA's at once. Would much rather have the entire FA crop at our disposal with higher initial bids early on where we can pick our direction which I think would mimic more real life FA then say only certain players are up to be bid on now.

I like that proposal or a similar idea to stagger free agents. Overall i am in favor of some type of staggered approach. It just seems like too much to manage in a short period if it's all at once and also feels rushed. But ultimately a lot depends on how Bish feels he can handle it too

I'm not sure the best way to stagger free agents though. Its pretty odd and unrealistic to just have 30 teams bidding on a certain smaller group (you run the risk of people just artificially up bidding guys) because they are the first ones available to bid on. Conversely if you are in the last group and have a few teams with money it totally changes the approach to make sure you land a player. It totally changes the dynamic of each FA depending on when they show up on the staggered list. When I believe every FA should be treated the same. If you have the entire FA class you can't f*ck around and waste time.

Yeah - minimum bids stagger the list organically, which is preferable, in my view. As I said above - my interest would be in a flat minimum bid. Not staggered by tiers.

[TerrenceClarke]

Melo realizing how much he had to spend to keep Tatum....

[mpharris36]

I like that proposal or a similar idea to stagger free agents. Overall i am in favor of some type of staggered approach. It just seems like too much to manage in a short period if it's all at once and also feels rushed. But ultimately a lot depends on how Bish feels he can handle it too

I'm not sure the best way to stagger free agents though. Its pretty odd and unrealistic to just have 30 teams bidding on a certain smaller group (you run the risk of people just artificially up bidding guys) because they are the first ones available to bid on. Conversely if you are in the last group and have a few teams with money it totally changes the approach to make sure you land a player. It totally changes the dynamic of each FA depending on when they show up on the staggered list. When I believe every FA should be treated the same. If you have the entire FA class you can't f*ck around and waste time.

Yeah - minimum bids stagger the list organically, which is preferable, in my view. As I said above - my interest would be in a flat minimum bid. Not staggered by tiers.

I'm not a fan of any staggered list and would hope the minimum bid does it job at the start to limit the amount of bids bish has to manage. I think Bish brought this to our attention because he feels he can maybe manage a full FA class if he doesn't have to worry about the little small role players in the outset and its more you better be serious with a minimum bid instead of a minimum bid at $1.

Flat minimum bid I agree with as well. I feel once you get to a certain level it doesn't need to be bid in increments...just whatever your FA rating allows you to beat the next offer. But at least this should focus on the bigger fish and starter type players in the outset.

I feel even if you organically "stagger". The dynamic of which big guy hits early completely is different if another player doesn't pop in the the organic stagger until later.

[Capn'O]

I'm not sure the best way to stagger free agents though. Its pretty odd and unrealistic to just have 30 teams bidding on a certain smaller group (you run the risk of people just artificially up bidding guys) because they are the first ones available to bid on. Conversely if you are in the last group and have a few teams with money it totally changes the approach to make sure you land a player. It totally changes the dynamic of each FA depending on when they show up on the staggered list. When I believe every FA should be treated the same. If you have the entire FA class you can't f*ck around and waste time.

Yeah - minimum bids stagger the list organically, which is preferable, in my view. As I said above - my interest would be in a flat minimum bid. Not staggered by tiers.

I'm not a fan of any staggered list and would hope the minimum bid does it job at the start to limit the amount of bids bish has to manage. I think Bish brought this to our attention because he feels he can maybe manage a full FA class if he doesn't have to worry about the little small role players in the outset and its more you better be serious with a minimum bid instead of a minimum bid at $1.

Flat minimum bid I agree with as well. I feel once you get to a certain level it doesn't need to be bid in increments...just whatever your FA rating allows you to beat the next offer. But at least this should focus on the bigger fish and starter type players in the outset.

I feel even if you organically "stagger". The dynamic of which big guy hits early completely is different if another player doesn't pop in the the organic stagger until later.

To be clear, I'm saying the minimum bid itself "staggers" the bidding. Lists seem like a clumsy/arbitrary way to do it and I think this approach puts lists out of consideration.

[Fat]

I can see a lot of Duo star combos

if anyone pulls off a big 3 in this free agency Their a magician

[Capn'O]

I can see a lot of Duo star combos

if anyone pulls off a big 3 in this free agency Their a magician

[mpharris36]

Yeah - minimum bids stagger the list organically, which is preferable, in my view. As I said above - my interest would be in a flat minimum bid. Not staggered by tiers.

I'm not a fan of any staggered list and would hope the minimum bid does it job at the start to limit the amount of bids bish has to manage. I think Bish brought this to our attention because he feels he can maybe manage a full FA class if he doesn't have to worry about the little small role players in the outset and its more you better be serious with a minimum bid instead of a minimum bid at $1.

Flat minimum bid I agree with as well. I feel once you get to a certain level it doesn't need to be bid in increments...just whatever your FA rating allows you to beat the next offer. But at least this should focus on the bigger fish and starter type players in the outset.

I feel even if you organically "stagger". The dynamic of which big guy hits early completely is different if another player doesn't pop in the the organic stagger until later.

To be clear, I'm saying the minimum bid itself "staggers" the bidding. Lists seem like a clumsy/arbitrary way to do it and I think this approach puts lists out of consideration.

Oh gotcha yeah I misunderstood. Yeah I just wanted to avoid our initial bid process where we just got random lists and it was blind luck...but at least at that point we didn't have any bird rights or players on certain teams so everyone was on the same playing field I just think avoiding the advantage of when certain players show up makes no sense because its not how any FA works.

I think S&T would be clunky with different lists. You basically have to sit on your hands the entire FA class if your bird rights guys doesn't show up till the last day...or vice versa you got everyone going after a guy if he shows up on day 1....at that point there is no process its just luck of the draw.

[mpharris36]

I can see a lot of Duo star combos

if anyone pulls off a big 3 in this free agency Their a magician

maybe depending on age and such. But there are way too many teams with money that wont be sitting on there hands. And a lot of you guys are wild cards because we don't know your approach. Should make for a lot of fun.

[NewEra]

When FA Starts.

GMs who have Bird Rights on studs watching the action.



Opposing GMs who dont care and want those players for themselves adding poison pills.....



Bird Right GMs thinking what to do now after they see the amount they was offered....

Well damn! Who taught you this evil approach TC? Tread lightly though or you may get stuck with a $600 player and a bunch of Jared Jeffries

Welcome to BaF btw

[mpharris36]

When FA Starts.

GMs who have Bird Rights on studs watching the action.



Opposing GMs who dont care and want those players for themselves adding poison pills.....



Bird Right GMs thinking what to do now after they see the amount they was offered....

Well damn! Who taught you this evil approach TC? Tread lightly though or you may get stuck with a $600 player and a bunch of Jared Jeffries

Welcome to BaF btw

some of these young bucks coming for our old heads

we'll be ready!

[NewEra]

If we’re saying no more $1 players, I’m not in favor of that. Imo, if you’re a 2 star rated player or less then a minimum bid of $25 for example shouldn’t apply to you. If you’re 2.5 and up then maybe we can talk. Getting players on bargain deals have always been a great strategic and fun part of BaF. Some GMs sleep, while others put in the work. Those who strategize and plan well should be rewarded. However, even with all that said I’m willing to bypass my personal preference if it makes life easier for Bish.

[mpharris36]

If we’re saying no more $1 players, I’m not in favor of that. Imo, if you’re a 2 star rated player or less then a minimum bid of $25 for example shouldn’t apply to you. If you’re 2.5 and up then maybe we can talk. Getting players on bargain deals have always been a great strategic and fun part of BaF. Some GMs sleep, while others put in the work. Those who strategize and plan well should be rewarded. However, even with all that said I’m willing to bypass my personal preference if it makes life easier for Bish.


However, I’m also willing to bypass my personal preference if if makes things easier for Bish.

no I don't think that was the approach from whoever prosposed the rule which I agree needs some tweaks but idea wise not bad. Just the initial few days would be higher initial bids. Then as bish was able to weed through the list a certain amount of FA went do and his day to day. Then when it got down more manageable maybe the initial bid would shrink. And then shrink again. ANd then get to a point where you could bid $1 where bish can manage the amount of bids during his freeze periods.

$1 players are key to the success of the league finding those targets. It just would be a little later in the process if I am understanding what bish posted.