Buyouts
Moderators: UOducksTK1, Zyme, lukeyrid13, Oregon Ownage
- dennocj
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 7:32 pm
- GM: Indiana Pacers
Buyouts
I know that Buyouts are not something that have been in this league. Being that this is my first sim league I may not be looking at buyouts from all the necessary angles so if y'all feel differently than I do just reply and let me know what y'all think. I feel that if we incorporate buyouts and allow them, even if it's only like one player every two seasons or so, would allow for more competition in the league. New GM's who inherit rosters with players they don't want would be given an opportunity to rid themselves of those players and start over earlier. I would assume that the salary owed would count toward current year cap room which wouldn't just allow anyone to cut anyone. I'm not even entirely sure if the operating system of the game can perform a function such as this, I just thought I'd bring it up and see what everyone else thinks about it
- GoNy
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 201
- Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 11:28 am
- GM: Portland Trail Blazers
Re: Buyouts
I love that Idea....if it can work
- Oregon Ownage
- All-American
- Posts: 15300
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
- GM: Dallas Mavericks
- Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia
Re: Buyouts
I am not against buyouts but I am also not for them.
I would prefer a stretch provision as that would be easier than a buyout (from my side of things). A buyout is also not straight forward. Since there is no negotiating, each deal would have to be the same for the buyout (player making $5 mil over 3 years would have to have the same buyout criteria of a player making $45 mil over 3 years). Thats where I feel it is tough to decide on what the "penalty" is.
In real life when a new GM takes over, they inherit the old GM's mess (if that's the case) and have to work to remake their roster. It shouldnt be different for our league when a new GM joins, he is stuck with what he inherited.
Now stretching is another story as depending on the criteria (Example: once every 10 years), would be easy to control and implement while still having a "penalty" associated with using it.
I would prefer a stretch provision as that would be easier than a buyout (from my side of things). A buyout is also not straight forward. Since there is no negotiating, each deal would have to be the same for the buyout (player making $5 mil over 3 years would have to have the same buyout criteria of a player making $45 mil over 3 years). Thats where I feel it is tough to decide on what the "penalty" is.
In real life when a new GM takes over, they inherit the old GM's mess (if that's the case) and have to work to remake their roster. It shouldnt be different for our league when a new GM joins, he is stuck with what he inherited.
Now stretching is another story as depending on the criteria (Example: once every 10 years), would be easy to control and implement while still having a "penalty" associated with using it.
- UOducksTK1
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37688
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
- GM: Boston Celtics GM
- Location: Portland, Oregon
Re: Buyouts
I miss the CBA days where you could frontload a contract. I always thought that was fun.
Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
- dennocj
- Five Star Recruit
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 7:32 pm
- GM: Indiana Pacers
Re: Buyouts
How does a stretch provision work exactly? And I definitely see your point on the real life situation as well. Especially since I'm always clamoring as to how I like this to be as close to real life as possible. I don't think anyone recently has inherited anything that bad anyways, I just think it might be a decent option that could create more competition in the league.Oregon Ownage wrote:I am not against buyouts but I am also not for them.
I would prefer a stretch provision as that would be easier than a buyout (from my side of things). A buyout is also not straight forward. Since there is no negotiating, each deal would have to be the same for the buyout (player making $5 mil over 3 years would have to have the same buyout criteria of a player making $45 mil over 3 years). Thats where I feel it is tough to decide on what the "penalty" is.
In real life when a new GM takes over, they inherit the old GM's mess (if that's the case) and have to work to remake their roster. It shouldnt be different for our league when a new GM joins, he is stuck with what he inherited.
Now stretching is another story as depending on the criteria (Example: once every 10 years), would be easy to control and implement while still having a "penalty" associated with using it.
- FlDuckFan
- All Pac-12
- Posts: 5068
- Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:45 am
- GM: Orlando Magic GM
- Location: Florida
Re: Buyouts
I'm not against it if we can as a group come up with a valid way of doing it.
I've always been for things to keep the GM's active and giving us as a group a little more flexibility on contracts could do that. I think someone in the past suggested something similar but I could be wrong.
I've always been for things to keep the GM's active and giving us as a group a little more flexibility on contracts could do that. I think someone in the past suggested something similar but I could be wrong.
- Oregon Ownage
- All-American
- Posts: 15300
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
- GM: Dallas Mavericks
- Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia
Re: Buyouts
Per wikipediadennocj wrote:How does a stretch provision work exactly?
I can show examples when I am in the software tonight but here is a quick example:When a team waives a player, it can spread the remaining guaranteed salary (and its accompanying cap hit) over twice the remaining length of the contract, plus one year.
Kyrie Irving will have one more year on his deal and will make 21 mil next season. If I stretch him, my cap hit for the next 3 seasons would be 7 mil.
Year 1 - 7 mil
Year 2 - 7 mil
Year 3 - 7 mil
Total of 21 mil stretched over three years (1x2+1=3)
The earliest you could stretch a player in our system would be 3 years remaining b/c we cant go past 7 years with contracts.
You also can not reacquire the player once he has been stretched for x period of time (TBD)
The time to stretch a player would also have TBD (during draft, during playoffs, etc.)
- nray30
- Four Star Recruit
- Posts: 884
- Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:14 am
- GM: Los Angeles Clippers
Re: Buyouts
Thanks for starting this thread Larry Bird! Mark Cuban brings up an excellent alternative with the “stretch” scenario. Very interesting and it truly would make more teams competitive
- stylesofpunk
- Three Star Recruit
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 10:28 am
Re: Buyouts
I like the idea I say by day 60 half way through the season.
also what about the Allen Houston rule is that something we have done or considered
also what about the Allen Houston rule is that something we have done or considered
- Oregon Ownage
- All-American
- Posts: 15300
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
- GM: Dallas Mavericks
- Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia
Re: Buyouts
We do not have a luxury tax so this couldn't applystylesofpunk wrote:also what about the Allen Houston rule is that something we have done or considered
- Oregon Ownage
- All-American
- Posts: 15300
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
- GM: Dallas Mavericks
- Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia
Re: Buyouts
This is what a stretched players contract would look like
You get the savings during the years on the current deal but have to then carry it forward which sucks and is your penalty.
You get the savings during the years on the current deal but have to then carry it forward which sucks and is your penalty.
- The Bean Regime
- Senior
- Posts: 2644
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:57 pm
- GM: Minnesota Timberwolves GM
Re: Buyouts
Isn't the point that you lose (waive) the player as well? So wouldn't that contract just be moved to the cut salaries?Oregon Ownage wrote:This is what a stretched players contract would look like
You get the savings during the years on the current deal but have to then carry it forward which sucks and is your penalty.
Also, I believe the first year's salary remains the same if done during the regular season, which would be nice to include. So it shows as your example if they want cap space immediately for FA or something in the offseason, or if your salary is fine for that season, you can wait until the regular season and do a 12, and then 4.5 for the other 6 for future savings.
- Oregon Ownage
- All-American
- Posts: 15300
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
- GM: Dallas Mavericks
- Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia
Re: Buyouts
Yes, you would lose the player but I cant screen grab the cut salaries screen (this was a work around).The Bean Regime wrote:Isn't the point that you lose (waive) the player as well? So wouldn't that contract just be moved to the cut salaries?Oregon Ownage wrote:This is what a stretched players contract would look like
You get the savings during the years on the current deal but have to then carry it forward which sucks and is your penalty.
Also, I believe the first year's salary remains the same if done during the regular season, which would be nice to include. So it shows as your example if they want cap space immediately for FA or something in the offseason, or if your salary is fine for that season, you can wait until the regular season and do a 12, and then 4.5 for the other 6 for future savings.
The second question is what we would debate if we agree to this. Many moving parts
- The Bean Regime
- Senior
- Posts: 2644
- Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:57 pm
- GM: Minnesota Timberwolves GM
Re: Buyouts
And of course deciding how to work out the players situation. The player being stretched could be quite good.Oregon Ownage wrote:Yes, you would lose the player but I cant screen grab the cut salaries screen (this was a work around).The Bean Regime wrote:Isn't the point that you lose (waive) the player as well? So wouldn't that contract just be moved to the cut salaries?Oregon Ownage wrote:This is what a stretched players contract would look like
You get the savings during the years on the current deal but have to then carry it forward which sucks and is your penalty.
Also, I believe the first year's salary remains the same if done during the regular season, which would be nice to include. So it shows as your example if they want cap space immediately for FA or something in the offseason, or if your salary is fine for that season, you can wait until the regular season and do a 12, and then 4.5 for the other 6 for future savings.
The second question is what we would debate if we agree to this. Many moving parts
Many parts indeed.
- pistolpetejr
- Senior
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 2:48 pm
- GM: Los Angeles Clippers
Re: Buyouts
Man this is messy.
If the whole reason this is being brought up is for the sake of new GMs dealing with someone else's mess, I think that it should resemble real life: at times, you run into good situations, and at others, bad ones.
That said, if the league thinks we ought to implement something to encourage competition and to help them out, perhaps something small.
If the whole reason this is being brought up is for the sake of new GMs dealing with someone else's mess, I think that it should resemble real life: at times, you run into good situations, and at others, bad ones.
That said, if the league thinks we ought to implement something to encourage competition and to help them out, perhaps something small.
---
PistolPeteJR
PistolPeteJR