|
Post by Miege22 on Jul 30, 2015 21:36:17 GMT -5
There would obviously be allowed roster cuts with salary forgiveness no other way to do it if we decide to cut Yes. It would be another wave of amnesties, if necessary.
|
|
Sir Poopy, Duke of Poop
Owner
Chief Justice Sir Poopy
I am the ruler of chaos and I am here to disobey rules!!!
Posts: 1,360
|
Post by Sir Poopy, Duke of Poop on Jul 30, 2015 22:37:43 GMT -5
I think that we should increase the roster to 20 and raise the cap too 100 million. This way we can own every player in the league and spend money at will. Win win for everyone!
|
|
|
Post by MemphisGM on Jul 30, 2015 23:51:03 GMT -5
Why is the cap too high? It,'s all relative, no functional change will happen besides all contract numbers dropping a bit. Also owners will have to adjust their evaluation, which can lead to some disparity, but for what?
|
|
|
Post by HawkEye on Jul 31, 2015 8:25:43 GMT -5
Since we have only 3 resigns, could we have it for 4 years instead of 5?
|
|
Tampa Bay Bull Sharks
Moderator
2012 NBA Champions, 2015 NBA Champions, 2016 NBA Champions, 2024 GM League Cup Champions
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Tampa Bay Bull Sharks on Jul 31, 2015 8:27:17 GMT -5
Why is the cap too high? It,'s all relative, no functional change will happen besides all contract numbers dropping a bit. Also owners will have to adjust their evaluation, which can lead to some disparity, but for what? You're correct in saying this if you drop cap but not roster size, but that is not something that should be done. However, if you are saying that dropping cap and roster size ($60M and 12) reduces contract numbers, that is not correct. Inevitably, if you reduce the cap, you have to reduce roster sizes. The inverse may not be true (drop roster size, don't necessarily have to drop cap). If you have 14 roster spaces and a $65M salary cap, that translates into $4.64M/ player. Reduce your roster size to 12 and a $65M salary cap and you're looking at $5.42M/ player Reduce your roster to 12 and a $60M salary cap and you're looking at $5M/ player. Now, if you drop the cap to $60M and leave the roster size at 14 players, you're looking at $4.29M/ player. Personally, I think 14 roster spots is overkill, but democracy.
|
|
|
Post by fernans (MIAMI HEAT) on Jul 31, 2015 8:36:08 GMT -5
Could another option be to kill the D-League roster spot and the IR spot?
That way there still is a max of 14, and using one of those spots for a d-league type player would be up to the discretion of the GM and if a player gets injured then he still counts for the 14, but leaving a roster spot open would help in these situations if that were to occur.
|
|
|
Post by MemphisGM on Jul 31, 2015 8:37:50 GMT -5
I still don't get what effect it will have. Numbers might change, but how does it effect how we manage our teams or balance the league? Or is it purely to keep contract values around the same with lesser roster spots?
And maybe it's because I'm in another league with 30 teams and 16 roster spots, but I've come to like hunting for prospects. But I guess it's personal preference, but I think a deeper league provides a way to differentiate from other managers, if you spot players that might improve at a later point. Also it might give more incentive to build deep teams instead of star power.
In any case, I'm fine either way, don't really see a need for a change but I'm not opposed to it either.
|
|
|
Post by fernans (MIAMI HEAT) on Jul 31, 2015 8:59:41 GMT -5
Im throwing ideas around but I initially thought it would be a great idea to limit roster size. But after this discussion and really thinking about it I think a change might not even be necessary. I think the 3 resigns might already be the solution.
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on Jul 31, 2015 20:07:28 GMT -5
Does this mean we are doing nothing but dropping d-league?
|
|
|
Post by moltreszwarriors on Aug 1, 2015 2:23:38 GMT -5
Should we maybe first discuss and then perhaps vote on dropping the D-League spot? It doesn't really do a lot to keep free agents off the market (you could always just outbid a D-League bid) and it rewards smart owners who invest in a player other teams are unwilling to invest in.
|
|
|
Post by Miege22 on Aug 1, 2015 2:30:17 GMT -5
Does this mean we are doing nothing but dropping d-league? No. It means nothing is donw, period. Everything stays as is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 7:33:14 GMT -5
I think we should have a 60 mill cap with a 10 player active roster and 2 dleague spot
|
|
Tampa Bay Bull Sharks
Moderator
2012 NBA Champions, 2015 NBA Champions, 2016 NBA Champions, 2024 GM League Cup Champions
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Tampa Bay Bull Sharks on Aug 1, 2015 10:08:59 GMT -5
I think we should have a 60 mill cap with a 10 player active roster and 2 dleague spot I'm of the same logic, but two IR spots instead of d-league.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 13:49:04 GMT -5
I think we should have a 60 mill cap with a 10 player active roster and 2 dleague spot I'm of the same logic, but two IR spots instead of d-league. I like this idea
|
|
Tampa Bay Bull Sharks
Moderator
2012 NBA Champions, 2015 NBA Champions, 2016 NBA Champions, 2024 GM League Cup Champions
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Tampa Bay Bull Sharks on Aug 1, 2015 13:53:21 GMT -5
I'm of the same logic, but two IR spots instead of d-league. I like this idea This is the 3 year progression plan in the poll.
|
|