RFA Notes

[Thunder GM (Tiago)]

The account for sending a PM with your bids is RFA2013.

Tie Breakers – If the owner of a RFA player decides not to match the better offer, and there are two or more offers with the same overall contract value (OCV), there will be a another round of close bidding between those owners until a single offer wins the bid.

OCV - Overall Contract Value – As discussed we are changing the way to bid on a player, from the average salary to a formula we call OCV (Overall Contract Value). As always, when talking about open bidding (UFA) the minimum increase is 0.5.

For multiyear contracts, OCV is calculated like this:

OCV = 1.X*Avg Salary
Where X=2*Years of Salary

For 1 Year contracts – OCV = Avg Salary
For 2 Year contracts – OCV = 1.4*Avg Salary
For 3 Year contracts – OCV = 1.6*Avg Salary
For 4 Year contracts – OCV = 1.8*Avg Salary

There’s a new Salary Calculator online (link in League Tools), in which you have 3 options:

- Years of Salary and Average Salary

- Years of Salary and Year 1 Salary

- Years of Salary and Overall Contract Value

And the file gives you all the remaining info in all 3 cases.

Some Examples:


1 Year – Avg Salary 5M – OCV = 5
2 Year – Avg Salary 4M – OCV = 5.6
3 Year – Avg Salary 3.5M – OCV = 5.6
4 Year – Avg Salary 3M – OCV = 5.4

1 Year – Avg Salary 8M – OCV = 8
2 Year – Avg Salary 6.M – OCV = 8.4
3 Year – Avg Salary 5M – OCV = 8
4 Year – Avg Salary 4.5M – OCV = 8.1

1 Year – Avg Salary 15M – OCV = 15
2 Year – Avg Salary 11M – OCV = 15.4
3 Year – Avg Salary 9.5M – OCV = 15.2
4 Year – Avg Salary 8.5M – OCV = 15.3

1 Year – Avg Salary 20M – OCV = 20
2 Year – Avg Salary 14.5M – OCV = 20.3
3 Year – Avg Salary 12.5M – OCV = 20
4 Year – Avg Salary 11.5M – OCV = 20.7

[Deleted]

In regards to the 20% threshold for RFA's - since we are using this new OCV formula (which I think is interesting, curious to see how this goes; is a 4 yr/$4.5M really more valuable to a FA than a 1 yr/$8M where they could strike another big contract?) will the 20% apply to the AAS value or the OCV value.

Thanks

[Thunder GM (Tiago)]

The 20% will be considered using the OCV.

[Celtics GM (Jose)]

Also, the 20% treshold only applies in RFA when you are only allowed to offer contracts for 3 and 4 years, so that kind of comparison between offers for 1 year and 4 years doesn't apply.

[Deleted]

Love the new ovc implement y'all.

[Deleted]

@tiago, Thanks for answering that. Just for a tad more clarification... If I made an offer to an RFA player of 4 Yr/$15.0M = 27 OCV... then another GM would have to submit an offer with an OCV GREATER THAN 32.4 OCV... and if not I would get to keep my RFA at my offer of 4 Yr/$15.0M AAS = 27 OCV. Correct sir?

@jose, I'm not sure at all what you're trying to say. The 20% threshold obviously applies here to RFA's as we've been discussing it for quite some time. The comparison between a 1 and 4 year contract has absolutely nothing to do with the 20% threshold item. All I was saying was is a contract such as 4 Yr/$4.5M AAS = 8.1 OCV really a better contract for a free agent (as in would a real life Free Agent choose this contract over) than a 1 Yr/$8.0M = 8.0 OCV.

All in all, I like the OCV system and I think it should be quite interesting...

[Thunder GM (Tiago)]

what you wrote is true IF that bid was on a player you own.

If not, only, 0.5 increase was necessary.

[Deleted]

Like it

[Former Spurs GM (Adam)]

It's a very nice system, and seems to be working well with RFA bids. Thanks again for installing it.

Regarding open bidding (UFA) and the minimum increase of $0.5 - Would it make sense to eliminate that requirement now that we have the OCV system?

Just thinking about this, if the requirement is both a $0.5 increase in average salary and an increase in OCV value, then all UFA bids will by necessity follow the pattern of the initial bidder if the first bid is a high amount for a single year.

For example:
If someone bids $10/1yr. for a mediocre free agent, no one will want to go to $10.5/multiple years. All subsequent bids will be only 1yr. bids.

In open bidding the $0.5 increase requirement can be used to undermine the OCV system. Would it be better just to set a minimum OCV increase instead? Thanks

[Jay]

I like the idea of increasing the ocv per bid

[Celtics GM (Jose)]

The increments will be linked to OCV and not to $$ as before, since the rules for analyzing offers changed.

[Former Spurs GM (Adam)]

Was it ever decided what the necessary OCV increments will be for each bid?

[Thunder GM (Tiago)]

Jose will post tomorrow all the necessary information about UFA and also all the small changes in the rules based on your input last season (nothing big, dont worry).