Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 0:14:14 GMT
My ideas for sign and trades in this league:
A) You must have the cap to sign the player in order to complete a sign and trade.
B) So basically my idea is this. The league can create a deadline to DECLARE YOUR INTENT to discuss a sign and trade. To stop teams from declaring every RFA to be signed and traded you must also give the Lms a list of a maximum of 3 teams you might work a sign and trade with. These are the ONLY 3 teams you can sign and trade the player to. This forces teams to be in trade talks BEFORE the deadline.
C) The players contract is whatever the winning contract is(whether you're matching or are the winning bidder already, and as stated you must have the cap in any case).
D) Since as stated before you have to submit a list of only 3 teams you wish to negotiate with, you should already be deep in negotiations by the time your player is up so trades must be posted ASAP after winning or matching the player(you will have 24 hours to post and accept the trade).
E) Even if you declare your intent to discuss a sign and trade, you have the right not to trade(but the usual 6 month no trade clause will be put into affect).
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 0:19:34 GMT
I agree with David except that I believe we should make it only 1 team can work out a sign and trade with the original owner. If I have the highest bid, it's like I'm the one who's the RFA sign the offer sheet with. And the original team then can only work out the sign and trade deal with that team. I would hate to lose the right to sign the RFA if I'm the highest bidder.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Jul 21, 2014 0:21:49 GMT
I like the idea, that has been talked by some of us for some time now.
If we include sign and trades in this league that A) is guaranteed.
About the others, there were some other interesting options being discussed in the chat and I ask Landon, Matthew and Joe to post them in here.
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 0:27:46 GMT
another thing I was talking about the RFA. My suggestion would be after the opening bidding, the highest bidder and the original owner can have 1 day to neogiate. If the original owner decide to match, then that's fine. Nothing will change. But maybe the original owner doesn't want to match, I think with this process, the original owner will be able to get something in return. For example, like last year, with Ty Lawson. I bid 15+ M and then Ze comes and talk with me, if he gives up the right to match, then he will get something from me, either player, cash or picks. Another reason why I make this suggestion is from last year, not many original owner can take advantage of being the original owner of RFA, in which the only reason they get the RFA back is because they overpay, this is definitely not healthy for RFA. With my suggestion, instead people won't go crazy and gives owner a chance to either get something back or match with much lower contract. Because if you look, RFA contract are very bad compare to UFA contracts. We have to find a way to close the gap, and I think my suggestion can do just that.
this is from an email I sent to Ze and he posted in another post.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Jul 21, 2014 0:37:44 GMT
But if the owner doesn't want to match, why would the highest bidder give him anything?
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 0:41:00 GMT
that's what the neogiation is all about. If I'm the high bidder, I have 24 hours talk to original owner, you figure your bid is high enough that there's no way the original owner would even consider to match, then you can do nothing, and wait for 24 hours to pass, and you still get the RFA if the original owner really decide not to match.
But if there's a chance the original owner may match, then a sign and trade may work out fine for both team.
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 0:44:28 GMT
and you may ask, if the original owner have the cap and want the RFA back, why he would not just match. Well, let's say he wants that RFA at 15M, but the highest bid is 17M, now he can match it, but if he can get something back, he may consider just let him go because 17M is not really the price that he wants to pay for that RFA. Hope that make it easier for people to understand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 0:51:11 GMT
You can combine Joes idea into mine in that being the highest bidder on a player automatically wins you the right to discuss a sign and trade. So the List of 3 teams to discuss a sign and trade with will grow to 4 should there be a high bidder.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Jul 21, 2014 0:56:25 GMT
I like the sign and trade.
Joe, in the other scenario, if I'm the owner I'm always saying I'm interested in matching, so you can do a sign and trade with me.
No way I'm saying, "ok, I won't match and you give me a small player/money/pick"
I'm always saying "yes, I will match. Wanna do a sign and trade you have to give me something bigger".
Even if it's not true...
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 1:00:34 GMT
well, it's the risk both parties have to consider, and that's what make this process fun. You don't know if the original owner will really match, but by looking at their team, you may see somehow if they sign this player, they will be in a black hole with no cap to fill the roster, the fact that the signed RFA cannot be traded until Dec makes it difficult for that original owner to match.
Sorry my english is not as good too, but hope my explaination is clear enough for you guys to understand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 1:08:32 GMT
Having the list of three other teams will help the team who has the player immensely and be better IMO. In yalls suggestion if the highest bidder offers a contract that would cripple the players owner, then he is in no way inclined to give the owner the best possible trade. Give the owner a chance to trade talk with 3 other teams and you create much better options for the players owner and their franchise.
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 1:12:50 GMT
well, I believe 2 is a better number, given that only 24 hours is allow to get his sign and trade done.
Also, will this sign and trade need to be approved by TC? If not, it may create some what a problem for players try to use this as another way to make trades without approval need by TC.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 21, 2014 2:15:53 GMT
I first mentioned this idea in the Suggestion Box and I stand by it. I am in full support of whatever Sign & Trade system that is implemented, as long as one is implemented
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Jul 21, 2014 13:39:44 GMT
If we advance with it yes, the sign and trade needs to be voted by the TC, which should understand the specifics is these trades.
The big difference about allowing owner to discuss the sign and trade with just the higher bidder or with 3 is who do we want to benefit?
Because I understand Joe's argument that it's a bummer if you win the bid and then lose the player.
But I believe the main idea here is to give something more to the owners that already have the RFA player.
And if that's the point, allowing them to deal with more than one team is big.
Becaus the team that won is many cases knows they don't need to give much because the original owner will most likely accept any offer, rather than losing the player plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by Nuggets GM (Joe) on Jul 21, 2014 13:54:09 GMT
I still stand by my point of view where only the original owner can work out a sign and trade with the highest bidder. I understand that this sign and trade is to give a chance for the original owner to get something back. However, we cannot forget the purpose of the original RFA bidding. I think it's crazy to think that I win the bid, but I lose a player for nothing. So now you have compensate the original owner, but no compensation for the highest bidder. This sign and trade doesn't work in every case, so I don't think we need to maximaze the chance at all.
We move from original owner either match or get nothing in return to original owner can match or work out a sign and trade deal with highest bidder or get nothing in return. I think this already a big step forward.
|
|