Post by OTown Hodors on Nov 23, 2016 10:57:41 GMT -5
I propose that the when a buyout for hockey contract happens, the hit be for 2 years, not just the current one year. Maybe we could do something like the 2nd year being a value that is half the current year hit. (though I personally would like a full value for both years)
At present I as a manager could have 20 extra players on my roster and just stash them on waivers, accepting the risk that someone could claim them (salary allowing). As the weeks progress I could stream these players on a daily or weekly basis avoiding the highest bid for 24 hours hassle.
Now I don't actually think streaming or having players on waivers to be a bad thing, I quite enjoy the idea of waivers and trying to snap up a good player that a real good team doesn't have space for, however I do feel the opportunity cost to me as a Manager is negligible. I could have 20 players for one dollar each signed for one year on waivers and have no problem buying them out to more players.
And in having it be so easy to buyout players removes one of the more interesting aspects this league could have, managing players and their contracts. If I sign someone to a real bad contract for multiple years, I should feel more pain if I choose to get rid of it. There should be something that makes it just as likely that I trade that bad contract to a team with tons of cap space as I will buyout the player. The team with the cap space should be able to come to the team in trouble and say I can help you with that bad contract if you throw in that prospect/player. At present their is zero reason for a team to do it, they can just buyout the player at the end of the year and leave the consequences of the contract in the past having gotten a full year of that player.
Now I know there is a lot of people who like the status quo and fear how this would affect their method. All I can say is the change isn't as big as you think, salaries would come down on ridiculous contracts as people would be more aware of a consequence to their action and maybe you may lose a few dollars in the following year.
But the benefits would far out way the cons, we would have an vastly more interesting league with real life tactics to actually manage players and the cap, we would start seeing more motivated trading happening and basically I think we would have a deeper league with more thinking active managers that love managing their teams.
Have a think about it and remember to be nice in the feed back.
Hodor
At present I as a manager could have 20 extra players on my roster and just stash them on waivers, accepting the risk that someone could claim them (salary allowing). As the weeks progress I could stream these players on a daily or weekly basis avoiding the highest bid for 24 hours hassle.
Now I don't actually think streaming or having players on waivers to be a bad thing, I quite enjoy the idea of waivers and trying to snap up a good player that a real good team doesn't have space for, however I do feel the opportunity cost to me as a Manager is negligible. I could have 20 players for one dollar each signed for one year on waivers and have no problem buying them out to more players.
And in having it be so easy to buyout players removes one of the more interesting aspects this league could have, managing players and their contracts. If I sign someone to a real bad contract for multiple years, I should feel more pain if I choose to get rid of it. There should be something that makes it just as likely that I trade that bad contract to a team with tons of cap space as I will buyout the player. The team with the cap space should be able to come to the team in trouble and say I can help you with that bad contract if you throw in that prospect/player. At present their is zero reason for a team to do it, they can just buyout the player at the end of the year and leave the consequences of the contract in the past having gotten a full year of that player.
Now I know there is a lot of people who like the status quo and fear how this would affect their method. All I can say is the change isn't as big as you think, salaries would come down on ridiculous contracts as people would be more aware of a consequence to their action and maybe you may lose a few dollars in the following year.
But the benefits would far out way the cons, we would have an vastly more interesting league with real life tactics to actually manage players and the cap, we would start seeing more motivated trading happening and basically I think we would have a deeper league with more thinking active managers that love managing their teams.
Have a think about it and remember to be nice in the feed back.
Hodor
