Small changes to the CBA

[rh0xxy]

Sounds good. I like the #2, in particular.

[Silogical]

forcing raises is a bad idea. The NBA has raises because the cap goes up, ours doesnt. Flat contracts are good for CSL. Max number of years is a good rule and it could be more restrictive than just 3m.

something like this
Under 4M - 2 years
4 - 7M - 3 years

[mgtr81]

While I agree with both decisions, I'd like to point out that something should be done about max players signing for way less than max contracts. It's easier said than done, though. One option would be to restrict those to one-year deals, similar to a RFA accepting a QO and looking for another team the year after.

Edit: my point here is it seems we're penalizing teams which take advantage of using DDS FA in the lower salary range but we are allowing teams who do the same at the higher range to continue to do so.

[Marcos_Beck]

forcing raises is a bad idea. The NBA has raises because the cap goes up, ours doesnt. Flat contracts are good for CSL. Max number of years is a good rule and it could be more restrictive than just 3m.

something like this
Under 4M - 2 years
4 - 7M - 3 years

You ABSOLUTELY have a point here with the raises. Makes no sense indeed.

As for maximum years, it makes no sense to make 5.5M deals be 3 years max as it's MLE value, and MLE deals can go up to 4 years. That's why I suggested my values.

[OneNole]

While I agree with both decisions, I'd like to point out that something should be done about max players signing for way less than max contracts. It's easier said than done, though. One option would be to restrict those to one-year deals, similar to a RFA accepting a QO and looking for another team the year after.

Edit: my point here is it seems we're penalizing teams which take advantage of using DDS FA in the lower salary range but we are allowing teams who do the same at the higher range to continue to do so.

How do you distinguish who is worth a max? The real issue with this is the engines refusal of allowing teams with mac cap space of having multiple offers out. If teams were allowed to have multiple bids itb would force other teams to raise their offer. They're are ways of doing this while still using the game for free agency, but it would just prolong the offseason and I think a lot of members believe the offseason is already long enough.

[wms02a]

While I agree with both decisions, I'd like to point out that something should be done about max players signing for way less than max contracts. It's easier said than done, though. One option would be to restrict those to one-year deals, similar to a RFA accepting a QO and looking for another team the year after.

Edit: my point here is it seems we're penalizing teams which take advantage of using DDS FA in the lower salary range but we are allowing teams who do the same at the higher range to continue to do so.

How do you distinguish who is worth a max? The real issue with this is the engines refusal of allowing teams with mac cap space of having multiple offers out. If teams were allowed to have multiple bids itb would force other teams to raise their offer. They're are ways of doing this while still using the game for free agency, but it would just prolong the offseason and I think a lot of members believe the offseason is already long enough.

Easiest way is buy awards like the NBA does for the Super Max.... maybe for a max it would be All Star and above? Just a thought

[mgtr81]

While I agree with both decisions, I'd like to point out that something should be done about max players signing for way less than max contracts. It's easier said than done, though. One option would be to restrict those to one-year deals, similar to a RFA accepting a QO and looking for another team the year after.

Edit: my point here is it seems we're penalizing teams which take advantage of using DDS FA in the lower salary range but we are allowing teams who do the same at the higher range to continue to do so.

How do you distinguish who is worth a max? The real issue with this is the engines refusal of allowing teams with mac cap space of having multiple offers out. If teams were allowed to have multiple bids itb would force other teams to raise their offer. They're are ways of doing this while still using the game for free agency, but it would just prolong the offseason and I think a lot of members believe the offseason is already long enough.

Not an easy answer, because it would have to be as objective as possible. Maybe based that on awards? Like those making All-CSL teams are automatically max players.

[mgtr81]

We just posted the same at the same time, Billy

[Silogical]

stats can be manipulated it would have to be a ratings formula. rating formula spits out a minimum and a player wont sign for less than the min unless its a 1 yr deal.

[Marcos_Beck]

If we have more CAP, we would have more competition in FA. Besides, game does a good job with asking price, barring a few players.
It's too much work to set minimums for players to sign, not worth for the admins. We just gotta have more cap space overall available, reduce the gap between HC and cap space, and more teams will be competitive in FA.

[Silogical]

If we have more CAP, we would have more competition in FA. Besides, game does a good job with asking price, barring a few players.
It's too much work to set minimums for players to sign, not worth for the admins. We just gotta have more cap space overall available, reduce the gap between HC and cap space, and more teams will be competitive in FA.

reducing the gap between the soft and hard cap is the 1st step. We should do this 2 years ago.

a formula wouldnt be that tough, copy > paste > copy > paste

i dont mind small bargains on max players but one day we could get a 20m guy get 10m and it might cause us to go back to the dreaded player agents. So all steps to avoid it before it happens are good steps.

[Marcos_Beck]

NBA currently:

Salary cap: $136 million (100%)
Luxury tax: $165 million (121,3%)
First apron: $172 million (126,5%)
Second apron: $182.5 million (134,2%)

CSL currently

Salary Cap: $63,700,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax: $76,900,000 (120,7%)
Luxury Tax – Penalty Level 1: $81,300,000 (127,6%)
Luxury Tax – Penalty Level 2: $85,600,000 (134,4%)
Hard Salary Cap: $90,000,000 (141,3%)


There aren't any HC rules in NBA which means there are teams spending over 165% of the salary cap. NBA allows it because it creates more competition during FA, more teams to spend = more competition = better for players.

We need a HC of course, but our HC should be around the 2nd appron. 90M is a fair amount overall, you can have around 4 players with max salaries, that's already a lot but doable.
Therefore, to allow more competition, we could do this:

Salary Cap: $67,000,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax: $80,500,000 (around 120%)
Penalty Appron (loss of MLE, LLE): $84,500,000 (around 126%)
Hard Salary Cap: $90,000,000 (around 134%)

And, why not, since we would be changing Salary Cap, if it's easy to do in game, just double salary cap, max contracts and minimum contracts, and modernize CSL numbers compared to NBA......

Salary Cap: $134,000,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax: $161,000,000 (around 120%)
Penalty Appron (loss of MLE, LLE): $169,000,000 (around 126%)
Hard Salary Cap: $180,000,000 (around 134%)

[wms02a]

I am aligned to this!

Salary Cap: $67,000,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax: $80,500,000 (around 120%)
Penalty Appron (loss of MLE, LLE): $84,500,000 (around 126%)
Hard Salary Cap: $90,000,000 (around 134%)

[Silogical]

I am aligned to this!

Salary Cap: $67,000,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax: $80,500,000 (around 120%)
Penalty Appron (loss of MLE, LLE): $84,500,000 (around 126%)
Hard Salary Cap: $90,000,000 (around 134%)

the apron penalty is pretty steep in the NBA, so our penalty could be steeper like the loss of a 1st instead of a loss of a useless MLE we cant use because we are at 90M

either way this structure is great combine it with no mandatory raise would improve FA.

[wms02a]

I am aligned to this!

Salary Cap: $67,000,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax: $80,500,000 (around 120%)
Penalty Appron (loss of MLE, LLE): $84,500,000 (around 126%)
Hard Salary Cap: $90,000,000 (around 134%)

the apron penalty is pretty steep in the NBA, so our penalty could be steeper like the loss of a 1st instead of a loss of a useless MLE we cant use because we are at 90M

either way this structure is great combine it with no mandatory raise would improve FA.

I like the loss of a 1st idea!

[Marcos_Beck]

Loss of a first was already in place once and it was really bad. MLE is sometimes the only option for a team to improve, losing that exception (along with LLE) should be enough.

[wms02a]

Loss of a first was already in place once and it was really bad. MLE is sometimes the only option for a team to improve, losing that exception (along with LLE) should be enough.

what do you mean by bad?

[Silogical]

Loss of a first was already in place once and it was really bad. MLE is sometimes the only option for a team to improve, losing that exception (along with LLE) should be enough.

are you saying it was bad because gms would lose their 1st than bail on the team? if thats the case then you could make it to go over the apron you need a 1st in the upcoming draft to forfeit.

MLE is not really a penalty. I cant see anyone caring about the apron with that penalty.

[Marcos_Beck]

Hurts the franchise more than the GM, that's what I meant. Completely unecessary.
New idea..

Salary Cap: $67,000,000 (100%)
Luxury Tax (loss of LLE, tax-payer MLE): $80,500,000 (around 120%)
Penalty Appron (loss of MLE, 2nd round pick): $84,500,000 (around 126%)
Hard Salary Cap: $90,000,000 (around 134%)

[TheTwoWallaces]

I dig it. Doubling all salaries also makes sense just to get with the times.