|
MLE
Sept 14, 2014 12:36:05 GMT
Post by Lakers GM (Renato) on Sept 14, 2014 12:36:05 GMT
I believe that the MLE is currently too easy to use.
As it stands now, a team can only offer the MLE once per season if it doesn't have anyone already signed for the MLE. While this rule restricts the signing of multiple players using the MLE, it doesn't restrict the usage of two years right from the start to get a higher OCV. Let me use an example:
Let's imagine that I can only offer the MLE and I want to sign Steve Nash, who most likely won't be playing next season. I can offer the full MLE (2 years) because I can simply waive him on the second season without salary cap penalty. This gives me no consequences for signing a player beyond the first year. So, what's the point in offering only 1 year of MLE?
I propose that if a player under the full MLE is waived then a cap penalty of $2.50 is enforced for the remainder of his contract. This will make people reconsider giving 2 years of MLE for a fringe rotation player. To counter this, I propose that if a player signed for the MLE is traded, then his salary becomes $3.00 for the team that trades for him, making them a more appealing trade target.
|
|
|
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Sept 14, 2014 12:56:02 GMT
If you sign a player to a two year MLE you can't use the MLE for two years, even if you waive him.
That's the downside of using the two year MLE.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2014 18:07:15 GMT
Yeah I was gonna say the same thing. Makes perfect sense as is.
|
|
|
MLE
Sept 15, 2014 10:23:46 GMT
Post by Lakers GM (Renato) on Sept 15, 2014 10:23:46 GMT
But is that in the rules? I believe that it isn't or I simply missed it... If it is, then please ignore the above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
MLE
Sept 15, 2014 18:55:35 GMT
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2014 18:55:35 GMT
I just feel that if it isnt word for word that its just how its interpreted. I mean if the rules say that you are allowed one MLE per year, and you denote an MLE for 2 years then youve used it for 2 years. Just like if you have an MLE for one year and you cut him, just because you cut him doesnt mean you can use another for that year, same applies for next year.
|
|
|
MLE
Sept 15, 2014 21:12:22 GMT
Post by Thunder GM (Tiago) on Sept 15, 2014 21:12:22 GMT
I just feel that if it isnt word for word that its just how its interpreted. I mean if the rules say that you are allowed one MLE per year, and you denote an MLE for 2 years then youve used it for 2 years. Just like if you have an MLE for one year and you cut him, just because you cut him doesnt mean you can use another for that year, same applies for next year. Exactly. But if it's raising some doubts, we will re-write that part of the rules. Thanks
|
|