Build a Franchise (Season 6)- Discussion Thread continued

[3toheadmelo]

Cleveland not playing Bam is interesting. A very strong win against Boston with him sitting.

Injured

[mpharris36]

Cleveland not playing Bam is interesting. A very strong win against Boston with him sitting.

Injured

if you want to keep him on the bench vs me I would allow that

[Capn'O]

Meanwhile, the Hawks I suddenly like. Hiring the Gobert Whisperer to help nurture Capela is a boss franchise move.

Read on Twitter

I also have three Hawks, oddly.

[Buzzard]

Meanwhile, the Hawks I suddenly like. Hiring the Gobert Whisperer to help nurture Capela is a boss franchise move.

Read on Twitter

I also have three Hawks, oddly.

Kind of off topic but the Hawks got a good one. Snyder is a firm believer in 3D ball and should fit this Hawks team like a new tux. I can't wait to see what he does with these Hawks.

[3toheadmelo]

Cleveland not playing Bam is interesting. A very strong win against Boston with him sitting.

Injured

if you want to keep him on the bench vs me I would allow that

No

[NewEra]

Made certain to up my players minutes as that game vs Denver could impact HCA in the playoffs. Gobert with 24 pts and 18 Rebs while Zion continues to lead the way.

Gg Hez.

[NewEra]

Just saw that we’re now the #1 defensive team in the league. Love it.

[NewEra]

Dame saw that 3.5 rating and took it personally

Took a hit for this season choosing to sell Dejounte at his peak sim value and buying Dame at his lowest sim value. Gambling that stepping back from fighting for third in the East this year will help bring closer to fighting for a title in the future. If he's not 4.5 or 5 next season, the game is defective. Definitely miss Dejounte and didn't think I'd ever part with him. Hopefully the gamble pays off in the next few years.

Definitely 4.5 at the least for Dame next season. He’s 32 so I think you’re possibly looking at a 3-4 year window for your goal of contending in the East which isn’t terrible.

[br7knicks]

A nice bounce back game against a talented Bucks team. All the Pacers major players had a part in this one. Its extremely promising to see DeRozan with a good outing. Brook with 5 blocks made his presence felt on the defensive end.

Good game BR/Bucks

Despite trading Dray; and DeRozan missing multiple games, Pacers are holding steady with the 6th ranked defense and 10th ranked offense.

you're always so nice in your games, win or lose.

[Buzzard]

A nice bounce back game against a talented Bucks team. All the Pacers major players had a part in this one. Its promising to see DeRozan with a good outing. Brook with 5 blocks made his presence felt on the defensive end.

Good game BR/Bucks

Despite trading Dray; and DeRozan missing multiple games, Pacers are holding steady with the 6th ranked defense and 10th ranked offense.

you're always so nice in your games, win or lose.

[2010]

SPENCER DINWIDDIE

Watch on YouTube

[Buzzard]

I have been thinking about a new trade rule for next season that would be like the trade rule in the CBA.

A - Trades must be within 20% of the cap spent.
B - Teams are still not allowed to go $100 over the cap.

Simple examples:
$1000 for $800 or more.
$500 for $400 or more.
$200 for $160 or more.
$100 for $80 or more.
$20 for $16 or more.

We would still apply the hard and fast rule that teams cannot exceed $1150; but they would be allowed to go as high as $1150. It would be a little more math for Bish; but I do think it would make processing trades, especially the big ones, much easier in the long run.

If I messed up the examples, please feel free to correct my math. It is late

[E-Balla]

I have been thinking about a new trade rule for next season that would be like the trade rule in the CBA.

A - Trades must be within 20% of the cap spent.
B - Teams are still not allowed to go $100 over the cap.

Simple examples:
$1000 for $800 or more.
$500 for $400 or more.
$200 for $160 or more.
$100 for $80 or more.
$20 for $16 or more.

We would still apply the hard and fast rule that teams cannot exceed $1150; but they would be allowed to go as high as $1150. It would be a little more math for Bish; but I do think it would make processing trades, especially the big ones, much easier in the long run.

If I messed up the examples, please feel free to correct my math. It is late

How does this trade add anything? Unless I'm misreading any trade under this rule would already be legal under the current league rules. Or are you trying to limit teams dumping salary because I don't think anyone would agree to that.

[Context]

I have been thinking about a new trade rule for next season that would be like the trade rule in the CBA.

A - Trades must be within 20% of the cap spent.
B - Teams are still not allowed to go $100 over the cap.

Simple examples:
$1000 for $800 or more.
$500 for $400 or more.
$200 for $160 or more.
$100 for $80 or more.
$20 for $16 or more.

We would still apply the hard and fast rule that teams cannot exceed $1150; but they would be allowed to go as high as $1150. It would be a little more math for Bish; but I do think it would make processing trades, especially the big ones, much easier in the long run.

If I messed up the examples, please feel free to correct my math. It is late

How does this trade add anything? Unless I'm misreading any trade under this rule would already be legal under the current league rules. Or are you trying to limit teams dumping salary because I don't think anyone would agree to that.

Yeah I agree...

I would like us to have a "franchise tag" or ability to resign any one player at any amount regardless of cap space...
What are your thoughts on that one E?

[E-Balla]

I have been thinking about a new trade rule for next season that would be like the trade rule in the CBA.

A - Trades must be within 20% of the cap spent.
B - Teams are still not allowed to go $100 over the cap.

Simple examples:
$1000 for $800 or more.
$500 for $400 or more.
$200 for $160 or more.
$100 for $80 or more.
$20 for $16 or more.

We would still apply the hard and fast rule that teams cannot exceed $1150; but they would be allowed to go as high as $1150. It would be a little more math for Bish; but I do think it would make processing trades, especially the big ones, much easier in the long run.

If I messed up the examples, please feel free to correct my math. It is late

How does this trade add anything? Unless I'm misreading any trade under this rule would already be legal under the current league rules. Or are you trying to limit teams dumping salary because I don't think anyone would agree to that.

Yeah I agree...

I would like us to have a "franchise tag" or ability to resign any one player at any amount regardless of cap space...
What are your thoughts on that one E?

I'm a strong proponent of the hard cap we have. This would basically make it so that teams never lose stars. The bottom teams would have only one legitimate strategy, tanking.

[mpharris36]

I have been thinking about a new trade rule for next season that would be like the trade rule in the CBA.

A - Trades must be within 20% of the cap spent.
B - Teams are still not allowed to go $100 over the cap.

Simple examples:
$1000 for $800 or more.
$500 for $400 or more.
$200 for $160 or more.
$100 for $80 or more.
$20 for $16 or more.

We would still apply the hard and fast rule that teams cannot exceed $1150; but they would be allowed to go as high as $1150. It would be a little more math for Bish; but I do think it would make processing trades, especially the big ones, much easier in the long run.

If I messed up the examples, please feel free to correct my math. It is late

How does this trade add anything? Unless I'm misreading any trade under this rule would already be legal under the current league rules. Or are you trying to limit teams dumping salary because I don't think anyone would agree to that.

I think he is suggesting if you are over the soft cap but still under the hard cap you can acquire up to 120% on a trade.

Right now if you are over the soft cap in a trade you can only either match salary or lose salary. From what I'm gathering he is suggesting say you are currently sitting at $1100 in salary and are $55 south of hard cap. If you have a trade where you are sending out $40 and bringing in $45. Adding $5 of salary to get you to $1105...that currently is not allowed.

What I think he is saying he is proposing allowing that move as long as you stay under the hard cap of $1155.

Right now the only way to increase your soft cap # up to the hard cap is Bird Rights FA and draft picks as long as you stay within hard cap. I think the simple breakdown he wants to add trades to an ability to increase your soft cap # as long as you stay within 20% of the individual trade. Like you can trade a $1 player and bring a $50 dollar player with the hard cap. It would have to be a 120% rule.

[2010]

I have been thinking about a new trade rule for next season that would be like the trade rule in the CBA.

A - Trades must be within 20% of the cap spent.
B - Teams are still not allowed to go $100 over the cap.

Simple examples:
$1000 for $800 or more.
$500 for $400 or more.
$200 for $160 or more.
$100 for $80 or more.
$20 for $16 or more.

We would still apply the hard and fast rule that teams cannot exceed $1150; but they would be allowed to go as high as $1150. It would be a little more math for Bish; but I do think it would make processing trades, especially the big ones, much easier in the long run.

If I messed up the examples, please feel free to correct my math. It is late

How does this trade add anything? Unless I'm misreading any trade under this rule would already be legal under the current league rules. Or are you trying to limit teams dumping salary because I don't think anyone would agree to that.

I think he is suggesting if you are over the soft cap but still under the hard cap you can acquire up to 120% on a trade.

Right now if you are over the soft cap in a trade you can only either match salary or lose salary. From what I'm gathering he is suggesting say you are currently sitting at $1100 in salary and are $55 south of hard cap. If you have a trade where you are sending out $40 and bringing in $45. Adding $5 of salary to get you to $1105...that currently is not allowed.

What I think he is saying he is proposing allowing that move as long as you stay under the hard cap of $1155.

Right now the only way to increase your soft cap # up to the hard cap is Bird Rights FA and draft picks as long as you stay within hard cap. I think the simple breakdown he wants to add trades to an ability to increase your soft cap # as long as you stay within 20% of the individual trade. Like you can trade a $1 player and bring a $50 dollar player with the hard cap. It would have to be a 120% rule.

Added mathematical responsibility for bish who is already shorter on time than what he used to have available to run this league. At this point we should be decreasing his workload, not increasing it (if we want this great run to continue).

Making it easier for teams over the soft cap to complete trades would also increase the sheer volume of deals and amount of PMs sent to bish, which are already at an insane amount. That’s not even mentioning all the trades that have wrong math that bish would have to declare illegal or tell the GMs to re-work it.

It would also devalue cap space for non-contending teams with subpar free agent ratings. Those teams use cap space and the ability to facilitate deals as a means to further or accelerate their rebuild. Giving contenders who are over the soft cap even more flexibility would make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

I also don’t think it’s fair to the GMs who’ve had to historically match deals dollar for dollar or reduce salary when trading while over the soft cap.

I’d vote against this and the franchise tag suggestion.

[mpharris36]

Added mathematical responsibility for bish who is already shorter on time than what he used to have available to run this league. At this point we should be lessening his workload, not adding to it (if we want this great run to continue).

Making it easier for teams over the soft cap to complete trades would also increase the volume of deals and amount of PMs to bish, which are already at an insane amount. That’s not even mentioning all the trades that would have the math wrong that bish would have to declare illegal or tell the GMs to re-work.

I also don’t think it’s fair to the GMs who’ve had to historically match deals dollar for dollar or reduce salary when trading while over the soft cap.

I’d vote against this and the franchise tag suggestion.

Yeah I was just trying to explain what Buzz was suggesting...but with just one commish and especially in multi team trades that is just another layer bish will have to calc.

If you want to work above the cap then you just have to deal with some trade restrictions. I think most people have been able to be creative enough, and its not like there are a lack of trades in this league . I know it sucks if a deal falls through for a couple dollars...but sometimes that is just the way the cookie crumbles

[3toheadmelo]

Darvin ham the most hated coach right now

Read on Twitter

[Strick]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=ukh0DDshwplXyXec8AzKWQ