What do you guys think of this new offseason idea?

[San Antonio Spurs]

Tell me what you think about this idea...

At the end of the season and playoffs, ever single salary goes back to real life salaries, as they are today. Diaw is signed to his extension. Chris Webber makes the minimum like he does on the Pistons. Swift makes $5 million or so, not $19 million. We don't have a free agency where we bid for people and argue about who gets them if they have the same bids, we don't make up our own salaries. We have a veteran draft of all free agents. Worst record picks first, their choice of any free agents, and this continues until every team has 15 people or are content with their rosters. It will slowly even out the playing field. Utah Jazz might be able to add Chauncey Billups with their veteran 1st round pick and become a playoff team. Each offseason would be like that, a draft of free agents. But not restricted ones, you are allowed to hang on to your youth, and will simply extend them to the offers they receive in real life.. After you take them, you will take on the salaries they make in real life, or the ones they end up making if they arent signed yet. And salaries still matter, because at a certain limit, say $75,000,000 (just throwing it out there, we would agree on something later) you lose all vet draft picks, so teams under the cap get more quality picks.

The vet picks might be tradeable, or might not, I'm not sure yet. It depends on how it works the first time, we can see how many rounds there are, etc.

There would still be a rookie draft on here. If you don't have roster space, you can retain their rights.

That would change our board dramatically, but it would even out the teams over time, get rid of stupid salaries, keep our same teams and GMs together. It won't be fun to lose your Free Agents, but it will be fun to increase competition and give everyone a chance at at! Don't forget, that under current rules, you lose your Unrestricted Free Agents if you are over the cap, but can keep your Restricted ones. This will put everyone in a draft where they can go after any free agents.

If you like the idea, but not all of the details, still vote YES and we can agree on new details later

[Utah Jazz]

I don't like it personally, people should live with what they've done. I like having our own contracts. Of course it is true that this would hurt me more than most people as I can just as easily max out a star with my cap room.

Edit- I'll probably add even more but I'm still at work. So

my main concern is that it makes it so that a team that makes the playoffs gets to sign a top 20 FA when they would otherwise ( regualr cap) be unable to, it undermines people who free up cap room to sign free agents, and gives advantages to teams over the cap.

As I said on the last FA thread, let's try one off season with the system we voted to have, voted to have twice in fact, before we chnge it again.

[San Antonio Spurs]

Look around though at how many people can offer that same max contract, you will be surprised. There is no guarantee that you are going to add anyone to your roster this offseason.

[Utah Jazz]

admin said:

Look around though at how many people can offer that same max contract, you will be surprised. There is no guarantee that you are going to add anyone to your roster this offseason.

true, but the point is I worked hard to make trades to get that cap space as did other teams, there should be a reward for being under the cap, under your new system there isn't

edit- it will also encourage tanking. I mean you get the best draft pick and the best free agent? no matter how you handled your team? You can run a 70 million dollar team into the dirt knowing you'd get say.. Oden and Dirk?

edit- there should be about 5 teams capable of the max, maybe less once draft picks are signed

[San Antonio Spurs]

menelmcar18 said:

admin said:

Look around though at how many people can offer that same max contract, you will be surprised. There is no guarantee that you are going to add anyone to your roster this offseason.

true, but the point is I worked hard to make trades to get that cap space as did other teams, there should be a reward for being under the cap, under your new system there isn't

edit- it will also encourage tanking. I mean you get the best draft pick and the best free agent? no matter how you handled your team? You can run a 70 million dollar team into the dirt knowing you'd get say.. Oden and Dirk?

Like I said, we could figure out details more. Right now you are rewarded with having picks in the vet draft, those over the cap wouldn't get one. There could be others as well. I don't think it would encourage tanking any more than the system we have in place now. A lot of people are giving up better talent for cap space, tanking this season and preparing for next. Maybe we need to find a new way to encourage winning. If you miss the playoffs, you have a better chance at getting rookies, but if you make it you have a better chance at signing vets?

[San Antonio Spurs]

I urge you guys to think about the welfare of the league when considering this, not your own teams needs.

[Orlando Magic]

i'm not really sold on the idea, maybe if its just veterans and not people coming off rookie contracts (restricted)

[Milwaukee Bucks]

im for it, just because i like the idea of going to old contracts a lot. i think people should be forgiven for their obvious mistakes, and even though i based my entire team around young guys and expiring contracts, i like the idea of adding people with their real contracts instead of having to overpay everyone

[Memphis Grizzlies]

im for it because of the old contracts and the fact that there is no free agency which is the reason why we have rediculous contracts in the first place.

[Charlotte Bobcats]

yeah the rule we all voted on was restricted free agents can be matched but unrestricted can't be match unless the team has the cap room to match it. That is why I built my team for that rule we previously voted on 2 teams. I have also not dealt okafor felton and gasol mainly because I am ready for the free agency that was supposed to be in place because I will have loads of cap to sign players.

[New Orleans Hornets]

I agree with orlando. I think the idea would be fine but not with RFA

[Utah Jazz]

wow I didn't even read that about RFAs that's absurd there is no way people should be forced to lose an RFA. I don't like the idea for UFAs, but for RFAs its a really bad idea.

[San Antonio Spurs]

You guys are right. I edited out the proposal. You should be able to keep on to your RFA, they are your youth and building blocks.

I added this part: "But not restricted ones, you are allowed to hang on to your youth, and will simply extend them to the offers they receive in real life"

[Toronto Raptors]

I don't know, I havan't voted yet, but it just sounds like a double-edge sword.

instead of promoting competition for FA, you are just having a free for all.

so basically a team can have Oden and Carter on the same team, which is outrageous team, which will make the GM who worked so hard to build a great team mad.

So basically it isn't fair for everyone who worked hard to make their team.

I thing it's better to keep the thing then change it, that's why sometime prefer a Player Agent, who isn't as biased as teh rest of us.

[Orlando Magic]

lakers81 said:

I don't know, I havan't voted yet, but it just sounds like a double-edge sword.

instead of promoting competition for FA, you are just having a free for all.

so basically a team can have Oden and Carter on the same team, which is outrageous team, which will make the GM who worked so hard to build a great team mad.

So basically it isn't fair for everyone who worked hard to make their team.

I thing it's better to keep the thing then change it, that's why sometime prefer a Player Agent, who isn't as biased as teh rest of us.

just Oden and Carter isn't that great. LeBron, Wade, and Duncan is outrageous. over time, there won't be any teams like that. no more kobe, garnett, artest, hinrich, and diaw. over time, they will be lost to free agency, breaking up the best team and helping the worst. taking from the rich and giving to the poor. each team will have their chance to shine. this year could be miamis chance. he might win it all with bosh harrington wallace ginobli and chauncey. or after this season he could lose chauncey and have to make a run at it with parker starting at pg, or he could trade one piece of his amazing bench. the big teams will slowly be chipped away from, while the bad ones will add big pieces. the more i think about this idea the more i like it.

[Detroit Pistons]

I havent voted yet...Im not sold on this idea. If anything we should probably put this into affect next season if we vote it in because many teams have planned according to rules previously decided on.

[New Orleans Hornets]

Not every team made their team how they are. I came into this league and took over this team. No way would i have taken on mobley's contract at 16mil. Yes i know people have put tons of time in to get their team where they are and i am sure from some of the super teams that there were probably deals made that shouldnt have passed. So whats the problem with trying to even the playing field some. Something should be done to even things out some. Yes it may hurt some of those super teams but it will help some of those teams that are in the basement. From some of the things i have heard people care more about their own team and not the league. WE dont know who votes for what but i guarantee that 90% of the gms that vote-vote for the best interest of their team and not in the best interest of the league

[San Antonio Spurs]

those "super teams" could argue that you are only looking out for the best interest in your team when you want this rule passed, so you have a better shot at getting better players

no i agree, i think this is for the best of the league, and the earlier we agree to it the better.

another idea that was proposed would be to combine the drafts. if you have first pick, who do you take? vince carter or greg oden? then again, that would hurt teams who have been trading for draft picks and help those who traded theirs away in order to seal a deal

[Miami Heat]

we are evening the playing field with what we had already decided on. teams can keep their young players if they want to, but if they are over the cap, then they have to lose their vets, and replace them somehow. this plan is basicly the same, but it involves a draft, and im not liking that. so i voted no, and i think that if this was implemented it would help my team, considering i would only have the MLE to offer to someone if we kept the rules we previously agreed on.

[Orlando Magic]

the draft isnt the only difference, the main point is switching to real life salaries, getting rid of the stupid contracts that we make on here. the vet draft is a way to keep real life salaries and favor the worse teams to even out the field.