General Thought

The idea of this forum is to get your ideas as players. What are you looking for in a Dynasty/Salary Cap League. Not one owner in the league has had any experience with this type of league so this new to us all. There may be rules out there that do not make the most sense. So please use this discussion board to post your thoughts. I am going to periodically post things to get everyone's take on a particular subject.

I welcome everyone's opinion here.

To make things easier to follow and for everyone to keep comments consistent lets create separate topics for different thoughts.

Thanks

Just to bring up the traded/backloaded cut situation one more time, and more officially per your request, I pose Mrs. Jonathan Stewart as a prime example of why it doesn't make sense that the new owner shouldn't get a cap hit additional PENALTY when they never benefited for one moment of the cheap first year of the contract. Obviously Bear, Keith and myself were very active in trying to figure out how the team signing a guy to a backloaded deal can pay a fair cap hit for getting the benefit of a player below his auction price and then cut him before the contract evens out down the road. This was mainly to prevent the possibility of an owner "loading up" on backloaded guys and trying to buy a championship, then cutting some of these players at 20% of the remaining contract. It didn't seem right where another owner bid 1k less than the auction price and could've had every intention of signing him for 3yrs. It's my opinion that nobody should sign a guy to a contract to anything longer than he intends to keep him for, like when Keith said it'd be currently possible to sign Tony Gonzo for 3 yrs when you know he's not playing that long. Without further adieu (probably mispelled, oh well), I gave up a 3rd rounder this offseason for J Stew hoping Deangelo's time was up and Stew would return from ankle inj and FINALLY be the bellcow rb. I was wrong, so I pissed away a draft pick. Stew has 2yrs and 46k remaining (19, then 26), so if I cut him under traditional 20% rules it'd be a large 9.2k cap hit and if that penalty applies I'd owe him 18k, which again is almost 100% of his price this year. That works out to 39% of his remaining contract and a bigger cap hit then Brady's 81k got this year (the most expensive contract in league history vs an 18k guy). Clearly that doesn't make sense, when I never even got him for less than his auction price. Did I know the rule when I traded for him? Yes, although I didn't think it applied to secondary owners AND I did so assuming he'd be worth 19 and 26k. As a reminder, this league voted that bumping the cap hits to 25 or 30% were higher than you deemed fair. Why should I pay a PENALTY for a guy I would never pay lower than auction price?! Am I biased, yes, but I really am trying to see this through the eyes of a member of the competition committee, and from the perspective as just another of the obsessed 12 members that want to see the league continue as the best I've ever played in. 9.2 makes sense. I swung and missed on a player. 18k just doesn't make sense, doesn't sit well, and doesn't FEEL fair. I'm just trying to follow my large nose on this one and the current math smells wrong. I'm trying to establish the precedent so we can know who we can cut and determine how much we can give up for backloaded guys because they're not going anywhere. If the penalty applies here then clearly he has no trade value, and certainly more expensive backloaded guys will never be tradeable, which isn't good for the league. When we as a league voted against a 25 or 30% cap hit, we voted that we should be able to overcome mistakes and maintain flexibility so we can continue to enjoy the league.

I know I go out of my way to be a dickhead in this league, or to be the heel to go pro wrestling lingo on yo azz, but I'm really trying to see what the fair hit would be, where next time it'll be another team going through the same situation, and very possibly, with much more money at stake.

I read your dissertation. I agree that an added hit should not go against new owner if he is owner of a backloaded player STRICTLY in time at which said backloaded player is earning a salary above his average (bid price) salary. The new owner should get the standard cap hit on 20% cap hit, but unless I hear a strong "for added penalty" argument, I agree no added penalties should be LEVIED(ya I dropped that in) against a dude that signed a snatch like Jon Stewart.

lol, if people agree with you and bear (and me), then i think those times when the middle year (of3k backload) ends up being JUST below auction price may warrant a small adjustment but, again, I defer to the feelings/logic of others on this. And again, JStew doesn't fit this mold where his upcoming season is actually 1k above his initial auction price.

Here is my reasons for disagreeing:

1. You can't use the Brady cut as an example. That was before loop-hole was closed and obviously he lucked out. BUT you had up until the auction to drop J-Stew under old penalty and you didn't. So in my mind you clearly still thought he had value and due to your own TERRIBLE judgement you want some relief.

2. You act as though an owner who acquires a back-loaded deal doesn't get any sort of discount. Why? Just because you do not own him in the 1st yr at 15 or 35%? That is true but how quickly you forget you traded for the back-loaded player at a SIGNIFICANT DISCOUNT. (Maybe not in your case but that's your bad). Again I'll refer to Stevie Johnson I would never ever trade for him. Why??? Because that contract blows. Not because of the player but because his contract is rubbish. So if I am the Stevie owner if someone me LITERALLY nothing. Simply a Stevie J for nothing but cap relief I would take that in a heartbeat. So what is this for the owner who acquires the player?????? It is called a DISCOUNT. Not in terms of 1st yr salary. But in terms of what it cost you to acquire the player.

So where is the risk for you???? There isn't any risk if you can cut at normal 20% rate. So why then should you get the discount of the trade. Would you trade a 3rd round pick for Stevie??? No you ABSOLUTELY would not. But if his contract was straight line would you??? Maybe not now given your salary cap but if you had the space and were making a run sure it wouldn't be such a terrible offer.

So the discount you get is in terms of what you give up to acquire the player...not so much in the salary.

Now I will say this, given that the trade occurred before we fixed loop-hole I might have some sympathy for you because you could say that you acquired the player without understanding of loop-hole. BUT BUT BUT I clearly said any player cut in this off-season would be subject to the old rules. So you had a few months to drop his ass knowing full well that he was injured and that to cut him after the fact would cost you a shit load. But you waited because it was in your best interest to hang onto him in case he was healthy. But now that he is on PUP you want to cry foul??

Here is a scenario I can paint for you as well. Let's say you and I have 2 shitty back-loaded deals what's to stop us from trading them to one another just to turn around and cut the player to avoid the extra cap hit???

Like I said J-Stew could of and should of been cut in July and you wouldve just had the 20% hit. And for future incidents I think that the contract is ACQUIRED at a discount and therefore you don't deserve cap relief. And anyone who says that they would pay same price for back-loaded player that they would for straight line is ABSOLUTELY full of shit. Would you trade for a back-loaded player sure? But for same value? Gimme a break.

For example Witten 1 yr $17K if it was straight line or $22K because it was back-loaded. At $22K it is not debilitating but it is still $5K more, $5K less for auction, also means 1 less front or back load on your roster. To say you would pay the same price for the 2 is simply ignorance or stupidity. Because clearly their values ARE COMPLETELY different.

We can put all of these new topics to vote later this week. Want some more discussion.

I used Brady as an example to show how exorbitant the total cap hit is, not because I thought it was the same situation. To help everyone wrap their heads around how big this is, this cap hit is worse than cutting a guy at 81k...and this is a "cheap" backloaded guy. I don't think I had until the auction to cut under old rules.  I'll double check that timeline, but right after Brady was cut, the old rules went away.

the auction price was the guy's market value, you were the only one that got him at a discount, i took him on with tons of risk and nobody sane would disagree with that

the risk is that i hope he improves and his number of carries increases to warrant an increased salary next year

i didn't wait til he was on pup, i've been talking about this to you for a couple weeks atleast

you're the one that tried to orchestrate a deal a couple years ago between two owners that had two breakout players that were on 1yr deals yet were past their two week window to extend...because doing so would allow both guys to extend someone. in your scenario, people could do this, but we're pretending we're talking about equal shit backloaded contracts here...not bloody likely. you're coming up with scenarios but you're still ignoring the original reason for the penalty, and it doesn't apply here because you're the only one that had j stew under his market value/auction price

he's worthless, therefore i should be able to cut him, yet 18k for one transaction is crippling. that's big for a season's worth of cuts. so yes, i'm going to say that i feel that it's way too punitive for someone that's paying above auction price. let's see the guys who have under 10k in cap hits for the year disagree that 18k is a huge figure...especially when the guy only gets 19k this year. it's fucked

39%. say it with me, 39%, the next time you bitch that someone may want to leave the league because we raised cap hits to 25% remember this moment.

you got my worst pick, a 3rd, and you weren't getting anything more than that from me if he was straightline

just because that wasn't smart doesn't mean the cap hit and cap penalty is fair or logical

you wasted a 3rd on hernandez when all signs pointed to extended jailtime. smart? no, but cap hit, no per the rules and the intent of the rule

all i know is the guy that first noticed that backload contagion could become a problem for the league, where it opened up the door to buy a title (me) and the brain that came up with the proposal that passed (bear) are both saying it doesn't make sense to apply the cap penalty here.

1) My point on Brady is tha you can't even bring it up...because the cap hit would've been $31K.

2) I did originally say the loop-hole was done, but then sent out an email (after speaking with you via text which you agreed too) that it should extend through the entire off-season because not-fair that one guy gets to reap benefits of back-load while others can't. Nobody took advantage of this. Perhaps you misunderstood me. Yes you have been talking for weeks...but for weeks since it became apparent he wasn't going to play

3) You miss the point of the discount. YES I GOT A DISCOUNT IN SALARY. You SHOULD OF got a discount in trade value. But you didn't because you made a terrible offer and hence why I accepted it within seconds. But I would of traded him for a 5thbut straightline yea a 3rd would of sufficed.

Again I will use Witten as an example because it is a GOOD back-loaded contract. $22 for this year is still good market value. But to say it is the same as a straight line is borderline idiotic. For 1 you have 1 less front-back load at your disposal AND $5K less odf Cap. So NO IT IS NOT THE SAME. And as such should be at a cost less then what it would be for a straightline. Might be minor in terms of asking price but something that needs to be considered.

I am merely stating my reason for disagreement. Others (Bear yourself and Steve agree with you). I am willing to go whatever way the league decides. But I DISAGREE completely with the fact you say that your not getting a backloaded guy at a discount. Sure you take on risk but isn't that what it is all about. You take on the risk that the player turns out to be a stud? As such you make an offer to me and I am risking that he continues to suck but given those factors I will trade him at a smaller price because he has a shitty contract. Pretty simple stuff. Like I said I would have taken a 5th. You offered a 3rd and I accepted within seconds.

As far as the orchestrating guys to make a trade to extend, yea hell yea I was trying to get people excited about what the league could possibly be. But yea I do fear that 2 owners could trade 2 shitty contracts to avoid this extra fee.

I think you need to take a chill pill my friend. If other people agree with your reasoning then you can cut JStew and take your 20% cap hit.

Wetter than Dutch Dikes wrote:all i know is the guy that first noticed that backload contagion could become a problem for the league, where it opened up the door to buy a title (me) and the brain that came up with the proposal that passed (bear) are both saying it doesn't make sense to apply the cap penalty here.

Actually it was my brain that came up with the proposal.

Check yo facts Mufucka!

Lol. Despite the heated pissy misst attitude I stil love ya Boosq

Believe it or not i wasn't even pissed on that one. it didn't approach my 2012 draft fiasco. This one i was frustrated, that's evident, because apparently i look at this like it really is thousands of dollars, but we have different viewpoints of course...that's pretty much a rule...it'd be great radio. Maybe I'll give you credit for being a visionary, but Bear's still a brain haha

The novel didn't work so i went quick hitters, point for point of your long retort. Lastly, I can use any example I want needledick (needledick), and when my cap hit for a rbbc member would currently be larger than the biggest one year contract in league history, then it's a solid comparison. you think an ELIte qb's not worth 18, but I can't compare to a guy who was 81? I didn't even care that Brady WAS backloaded when I made that comparison. With that said, I digress...how was your weekend at Camp Lenox at the end of August?

And I really don't recall your phone comment about making the end of the offseason the deadline for cutting at 20%, which means you're approached wife status for my selective hearing hahahahaha. Let's just go with I misunderstood.

Seriously though, if I had heard your comment, I would've just cut last week on top of bringing the scenario up for discussion/vote.

Wetter than Dutch Dikes wrote:Seriously though, if I had heard your comment, I would've just cut last week on top of bringing the scenario up for discussion/vote.

Well you would of had to cut before auction...since after auction any cut gets allocated to 2014. Prior to the auction J.Stew's status was still up in the air and not a CLEAR CUT drop candidate.