Change Contraction Disbursement to FA (1,100 views)

[jhb]

We've now had issues with tanking arise from the current method of contraction disbursement and in response we changed the year we use for standings for waivers. Now people are upset about that because the prior year's standings include a team that was in the midst of expansion.

With all the issues, would simply moving the contracted players to FA regardless of contract status like an off-season amnesty/buyout be the most simple method moving forward? This gives every team in the league a season to try to prepare to acquire them and the acquisition comes down to FA luck rather than being not good, which in a wheel league mostly comes down to inactive GMs or people who have dumped all their assets to acquire draft capital and will likely try to do the same with anyone they acquire on contraction waivers.

[Handsome Pete]

I don't see a need for a change except that a few Warriors players died last offseason. As long as we can avoid that, I support contraction waivers as is

[Majic]

I dont know that I like them all moving over to FA.

My main suggestion would be to just keep the contracting roster as is until the end of the year. I could be wrong but I thought that is how we did it in 5.0.

[jhb]

Jun 29, 2021 8:57:54 GMT -5 Majic said:

I dont know that I like them all moving over to FA.

My main suggestion would be to just keep the contracting roster as is until the end of the year. I could be wrong but I thought that is how we did it in 5.0.

It was but that was because if someone simultaneously expanded there was an empty slot for them

[jhb]

Jun 29, 2021 8:57:54 GMT -5 Majic said:

I dont know that I like them all moving over to FA.

My main suggestion would be to just keep the contracting roster as is until the end of the year. I could be wrong but I thought that is how we did it in 5.0.

This solution wouldn’t put the players into in-season FA, it would contract the team like we did this year, add players to end of rosters so they don’t get deleted then they become available like regular FAs the next offseason

[Majic]

Jun 29, 2021 9:00:31 GMT -5 jhb said:

Jun 29, 2021 8:57:54 GMT -5 Majic said:

I dont know that I like them all moving over to FA.

My main suggestion would be to just keep the contracting roster as is until the end of the year. I could be wrong but I thought that is how we did it in 5.0.

This solution wouldn’t put the players into in-season FA, it would contract the team like we did this year, add players to end of rosters so they don’t get deleted then they become available like regular FAs the next offseason

Yea, I understand that part. I have generally liked the idea of contraction drafts as it gets good players to bad teams. 

I would prefer we just keep the team as is until the end of the season, then do contraction. 

[skrouse]

Generally we're talking about 5 or so players, normally only 2 or 3 that really even matter. Just send them to FA.

[jhb]

Jun 29, 2021 9:03:37 GMT -5 Majic said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:00:31 GMT -5 jhb said:

This solution wouldn’t put the players into in-season FA, it would contract the team like we did this year, add players to end of rosters so they don’t get deleted then they become available like regular FAs the next offseason

Yea, I understand that part. I have generally liked the idea of contraction drafts as it gets good players to bad teams. 

I would prefer we just keep the team as is until the end of the season, then do contraction. 

And yet you’re arguing for a methodology to keep contraction waivers but be punitive to expansion teams with little assets?

[Handsome Pete]

Jun 29, 2021 9:05:19 GMT -5 skrouse said:

Generally we're talking about 5 or so players, normally only 2 or 3 that really even matter. Just send them to FA.

Ultimately this is why I don't think anything needs to change either. These aren't balance of power shifting transactions or anything.

But at the same time, moving to FA does eliminate one of the few remaining incentives for someone to purposefully tank, so maybe it's not so bad.

[Sapular]

Jun 29, 2021 9:13:26 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:05:19 GMT -5 skrouse said:

Generally we're talking about 5 or so players, normally only 2 or 3 that really even matter. Just send them to FA.

Ultimately this is why I don't think anything needs to change either. These aren't balance of power shifting transactions or anything.

But at the same time, moving to FA does eliminate one of the few remaining incentives for someone to purposefully tank, so maybe it's not so bad.

I mean being "gifted" Rodney McCray can change the balance of power as he can and will fetch some very powerful assets.  While we are in odd times as this situation probably may not happen again, IMO players should stay on current teams till the end of the season, the team then get contracted and all players go to FA.  It is the most balanced way to do it.  This way new teams have the most cap room and can make a play at one of the elite players and have the ability to offer them the highest or one of the highest contracts.  The real issue is that this is being done mid-season.  It should go off of the rankings at the end of the season. 

[skrouse]

Jun 29, 2021 9:13:26 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:05:19 GMT -5 skrouse said:

Generally we're talking about 5 or so players, normally only 2 or 3 that really even matter. Just send them to FA.

Ultimately this is why I don't think anything needs to change either. These aren't balance of power shifting transactions or anything.

But at the same time, moving to FA does eliminate one of the few remaining incentives for someone to purposefully tank, so maybe it's not so bad.

I think they can shift the balance of power in some scenarios, look at Oden to the Cougs. He's not the only piece that has made them better this year, Perry has been great, but he's had a significant impact. 

[Handsome Pete]

Jun 29, 2021 9:22:20 GMT -5 skrouse said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:13:26 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

Ultimately this is why I don't think anything needs to change either. These aren't balance of power shifting transactions or anything.

But at the same time, moving to FA does eliminate one of the few remaining incentives for someone to purposefully tank, so maybe it's not so bad.

I think they can shift the balance of power in some scenarios, look at Oden to the Cougs. He's not the only piece that has made them better this year, Perry has been great, but he's had a significant impact. 

I think that's a sign that contraction is not currently as much of an issue. Oden went to the team with the 15th worst record in the league. Odin tried to auction off his priority to claim him and clearly didn't get much interest

I guess I'm not opposed to having one avenue where bad teams have more of a priority to add talent than good teams, considering the draft is now pegged to the wheel

[Sapular]

Jun 29, 2021 9:29:32 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:22:20 GMT -5 skrouse said:

I think they can shift the balance of power in some scenarios, look at Oden to the Cougs. He's not the only piece that has made them better this year, Perry has been great, but he's had a significant impact. 

I think that's a sign that contraction is not currently as much of an issue. Oden went to the team with the 15th worst record in the league. Odin tried to auction off his priority to claim him and clearly didn't get much interest

I guess I'm not opposed to having one avenue where bad teams have more of a priority to add talent than good teams, considering the draft is now pegged to the wheel

and why do you think he was doing it?  He knew the value in it.  He knows how much that claim can and will be so he is looking for an arm and a leg.  The fact that he is demanding such a high price for it shows you just how valuable it is.  

[20s]

Jun 29, 2021 9:22:20 GMT -5 skrouse said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:13:26 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

Ultimately this is why I don't think anything needs to change either. These aren't balance of power shifting transactions or anything.

But at the same time, moving to FA does eliminate one of the few remaining incentives for someone to purposefully tank, so maybe it's not so bad.

I think they can shift the balance of power in some scenarios, look at Oden to the Cougs. He's not the only piece that has made them better this year, Perry has been great, but he's had a significant impact. 

Isn’t that a bad example though since I was a playoff team and landed Oden? Any of the teams who missed the playoffs could have claimed him before me. 

[20s]

For the record, I voted that they should be FAs. I hate anything that incentivizes losing thus causing people to tank.

[skrouse]

Jun 29, 2021 10:05:07 GMT -5 20s said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:22:20 GMT -5 skrouse said:

I think they can shift the balance of power in some scenarios, look at Oden to the Cougs. He's not the only piece that has made them better this year, Perry has been great, but he's had a significant impact. 

Isn’t that a bad example though since I was a playoff team and landed Oden? Any of the teams who missed the playoffs could have claimed him before me. 

I was simply pointing out that contraction acquisitions can somewhat shift the balance of power in the league. That's all.

[bankz]

Why not treat them like buyouts/amnesty and run a waiver bid.

[Odin]

as ive said before, putting them in fa just trades one problem for another

[Majic]

Jun 29, 2021 11:38:13 GMT -5 Odin said:

as ive said before, putting them in fa just trades one problem for another

probably missed it, but what is the other problem?

[Odin]

Jun 29, 2021 11:42:52 GMT -5 Majic said:

Jun 29, 2021 11:38:13 GMT -5 Odin said:

as ive said before, putting them in fa just trades one problem for another

probably missed it, but what is the other problem?

excessive amnesties. which we already have.

[jhb]

So we shouldn't solve one problem because another separate problem we already have will continue to exist without being addressed either way.

[Odin]

"problem" but yes

[Ankly]

it's a smaller problem. Trading a bigger problem for a smaller problem is a win.

[eric]

the reason we let a gm take over right away is because that's what the league wanted to happen back when we introduced expansion

Jun 29, 2021 9:19:31 GMT -5 Sapular said:

Jun 29, 2021 9:13:26 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

Ultimately this is why I don't think anything needs to change either. These aren't balance of power shifting transactions or anything.

But at the same time, moving to FA does eliminate one of the few remaining incentives for someone to purposefully tank, so maybe it's not so bad.

I mean being "gifted" Rodney McCray can change the balance of power as he can and will fetch some very powerful assets.  While we are in odd times as this situation probably may not happen again, IMO players should stay on current teams till the end of the season, the team then get contracted and all players go to FA.  It is the most balanced way to do it.  This way new teams have the most cap room and can make a play at one of the elite players and have the ability to offer them the highest or one of the highest contracts.  The real issue is that this is being done mid-season.  It should go off of the rankings at the end of the season. 

it doesn't go off mid season rankings

Jun 29, 2021 8:13:59 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

I don't see a need for a change except that a few Warriors players died last offseason. As long as we can avoid that, I support contraction waivers as is

i would expect some stags to disappear this year too, they're still treated like any other fa

[Sapular]

So had I chosen expansion when I joined I would not have had to wait like I did?

[eric]

Jun 29, 2021 14:47:09 GMT -5 Sapular said:

So had I chosen expansion when I joined I would not have had to wait like I did?

you had to wait for the previous gm to be timered out. whether you chose expansion or takeover was irrelevant

[Odin]

Jun 29, 2021 14:19:30 GMT -5 eric said:

the reason we let a gm take over right away is because that's what the league wanted to happen back when we introduced expansion

Jun 29, 2021 9:19:31 GMT -5 Sapular said:

I mean being "gifted" Rodney McCray can change the balance of power as he can and will fetch some very powerful assets.  While we are in odd times as this situation probably may not happen again, IMO players should stay on current teams till the end of the season, the team then get contracted and all players go to FA.  It is the most balanced way to do it.  This way new teams have the most cap room and can make a play at one of the elite players and have the ability to offer them the highest or one of the highest contracts.  The real issue is that this is being done mid-season.  It should go off of the rankings at the end of the season. 

it doesn't go off mid season rankings

Jun 29, 2021 8:13:59 GMT -5 Handsome Pete said:

I don't see a need for a change except that a few Warriors players died last offseason. As long as we can avoid that, I support contraction waivers as is

i would expect some stags to disappear this year too, they're still treated like any other fa

can you not re: letting stags players disappear

[bankz]

If they die... they die

[20s]

[bankz]

the lulz if McCray, JBC and Ibaka went the route of Bass and Riva...