Login

Sleepy · 10-26-2019, 11:15 AM

10-26-2019, 03:11 AMSegi Wrote:
10-25-2019, 10:36 PMWannabeFinn Wrote: First season of the salary cap and already issues with getting actives on teams

Hmm

There have been draftable free agents going unsigned in the season before their draft before the budget was implemented. Most teams don't get stronger now with a player who'll be at 165 tpe when the play offs start.

its almost like the J shouldn't care about strength of roster and just play actives regardless of tpe...hm. weird. hm.

***WannabeFinn*** · 10-26-2019, 11:54 AM

Maybe define a standard DFA contract that doesn’t count against the cap. 1 or 2m. Standard across the board.

Just an idea. Just gonna.... throw it out there.

[Image: 200.gif]

JNH · 10-26-2019, 12:50 PM

10-25-2019, 11:36 PMto12143 Wrote: I mean, it seems like having actives without a team is a bad idea for retention

I’d sign you but I already have 6 active defensemen :(

But I do agree we should be doing something more about this than just “sorry better luck when things aren’t mostly full!!”

SlashACM · 10-26-2019, 12:53 PM

Smjhl expansion, bring back montreal

Samsung virtual assistant · 10-26-2019, 04:26 PM

10-26-2019, 11:54 AMWannabeFinn Wrote: Maybe define a standard DFA contract that doesn’t count against the cap. 1 or 2m. Standard across the board.

Just an idea. Just gonna.... throw it out there.

Hard disagree tbh.

***WannabeFinn*** · 10-26-2019, 04:27 PM

10-26-2019, 04:26 PMスウェグキング Wrote:
10-26-2019, 11:54 AMWannabeFinn Wrote: Maybe define a standard DFA contract that doesn’t count against the cap. 1 or 2m. Standard across the board.

Just an idea. Just gonna.... throw it out there.

Hard disagree tbh.

u gonna say why or nah

Samsung virtual assistant · 10-26-2019, 07:05 PM

10-26-2019, 04:27 PMWannabeFinn Wrote:
10-26-2019, 04:26 PMスウェグキング Wrote: Hard disagree tbh.
u gonna say why or nah

They have a budget its the GMs fault that this is happening, dont reward them with a free player because they cant count. They definitely shouldnt be paying rookies 8 mil. And if they dont have room for them they wont play anyway.

Id rather see a rookie be able to claim welfare.

***Acsolap*** · 10-27-2019, 01:35 AM

10-26-2019, 07:05 PMスウェグキング Wrote:
10-26-2019, 04:27 PMWannabeFinn Wrote: u gonna say why or nah

They have a budget its the GMs fault that this is happening, dont reward them with a free player because they cant count. They definitely shouldnt be paying rookies 8 mil. And if they dont have room for them they wont play anyway.

Id rather see a rookie be able to claim welfare.

Or people have relatively full rosters and don't see the point in leaving money lying around when they could be paying rookies (especially first gens) a better contract that helps them cover equipment.

Credit to Ml002, King, Wasty, Carpy, Bruins10, Rum_Ham, Turd Ferguson, Ragnar and Enigmatic for the sigs.
Forge

Player page | Player updates

Samsung virtual assistant · 10-27-2019, 10:51 AM

10-27-2019, 01:35 AMAcsolap Wrote:
10-26-2019, 07:05 PMスウェグキング Wrote: They have a budget its the GMs fault that this is happening, dont reward them with a free player because they cant count. They definitely shouldnt be paying rookies 8 mil. And if they dont have room for them they wont play anyway.

Id rather see a rookie be able to claim welfare.

Or people have relatively full rosters and don't see the point in leaving money lying around when they could be paying rookies (especially first gens) a better contract that helps them cover equipment.

Maybe they SHOULD see a point in leaving some money around in case there are late sign-ups. Especially if they're "relatively" full, which implies there are still spots for new, active players. If a team has a full roster of active players then i can't say anything about it.

So either late sign-ups will sit out, do nothing and get nothing, or with WBF idea GMs will be rewarded a free player. None of these options are good or fair IMO.

First gens has never needed contracts over 4 million before, this is just the next step in the "Hey i made X as a rookie in the SMJHL but i earn half that in the SHL. WTF?" dilemma.

Also, none of the teams have an IFA?

Code:
7. IFA’s can be released from the roster to make way for an active player and receive the salary cap relief from the released IFA

Where is the SMJHL budget link? i'm arguing on the assumption that all teams have used up all their money, seeing how he still hasn't been signed. I might as well be wrong in that assumption seeing how i cant find the budget anywhere(Shouldn't it be under the budget sub-forum?). I don't know how many big contracts has been given out or by who.

Im guessing this problem was overlooked when the budget change was made, either way it definitely needs to be looked over. There could be a couple solutions just off the top of my head

1. Welfare money for any rookie that signs up after all the teams has hit the cap.

2. Let the teams sign them and get a penalty to their salary cap for next season in some form. 50% of the contract or something like that.

3. Put a maximum contract in again.

@Eggy216 i like tagging you because you're cute and all, @Winter is Coming is kinda cute too. But also you're Comissioners, so you decide if you need to investigate if this is a problem or if you think it's fine.

***hhh81*** · 10-27-2019, 11:12 AM

I've reached out to a few of the post TDL FAs about signing. I haven't heard back.

I'm happy to cut some IAs (and planned on it the entire season), but I can't sign people if I dont hear back :shrug:

I haven't reached out to everyone because, well, i dont like making more offers than I'm able to and having to rescind later.

Samsung virtual assistant · 10-27-2019, 11:19 AM

10-27-2019, 11:12 AMhhh81 Wrote: I've reached out to a few of the post TDL FAs about signing. I haven't heard back.

I'm happy to cut some IAs (and planned on it the entire season), but I can't sign people if I dont hear back :shrug:

I haven't reached out to everyone because, well, i dont like making more offers than I'm able to and having to rescind later.

Understandable.

***Acsolap*** · 10-27-2019, 12:25 PM

10-27-2019, 10:51 AMスウェグキング Wrote:
10-27-2019, 01:35 AMAcsolap Wrote: Or people have relatively full rosters and don't see the point in leaving money lying around when they could be paying rookies (especially first gens) a better contract that helps them cover equipment.

Maybe they SHOULD see a point in leaving some money around in case there are late sign-ups. Especially if they're "relatively" full, which implies there are still spots for new, active players. If a team has a full roster of active players then i can't say anything about it.

So either late sign-ups will sit out, do nothing and get nothing, or with WBF idea GMs will be rewarded a free player. None of these options are good or fair IMO.

First gens has never needed contracts over 4 million before, this is just the next step in the "Hey i made X as a rookie in the SMJHL but i earn half that in the SHL. WTF?" dilemma.

Also, none of the teams have an IFA?

Code:
7. IFA’s can be released from the roster to make way for an active player and receive the salary cap relief from the released IFA

Where is the SMJHL budget link? i'm arguing on the assumption that all teams have used up all their money, seeing how he still hasn't been signed. I might as well be wrong in that assumption seeing how i cant find the budget anywhere(Shouldn't it be under the budget sub-forum?). I don't know how many big contracts has been given out or by who.

Im guessing this problem was overlooked when the budget change was made, either way it definitely needs to be looked over. There could be a couple solutions just off the top of my head

1. Welfare money for any rookie that signs up after all the teams has hit the cap.

2. Let the teams sign them and get a penalty to their salary cap for next season in some form. 50% of the contract or something like that.

3. Put a maximum contract in again.

@Eggy216 i like tagging you because you're cute and all, @Winter is Coming is kinda cute too. But also you're Comissioners, so you decide if you need to investigate if this is a problem or if you think it's fine.

Most if not all teams had money up until the TDL. Some teams made trades, some teams added FAs but I am hardly going to prioritise signing guys that could be on my roster for 10 games over financially helping the guys that will be on my roster for 2-4 seasons.

I don't think there should be the expectation that a team will sign you if you sign up after the TDL. If you believe that everyone should be snapped up then I don't see the problem with implementing fins idea for post TDL sign ups.

Credit to Ml002, King, Wasty, Carpy, Bruins10, Rum_Ham, Turd Ferguson, Ragnar and Enigmatic for the sigs.
Forge

Player page | Player updates

grok · 10-27-2019, 02:27 PM

I've had multiple conversations on exactly this front, and my answer was always the same. Head office has two options: Incentivize the behaviors they like, or deter the behaviors they dislike. I've always thought the former was more effective--encouraging someone to comply with a reward is the most effective way to increase compliance.

There were ongoing conversations about how to value IFAs prior to rolling out the budget back in S48. Doing a soft rollout to show how teams were affected by budgets, and adjusting player prices accordingly. Idk where they went but apparently the budget is live now. Not privvy to that information.

GMs will inevitably value competition over growth. I'm sure people will line up to tell me "we're not like that," but you are. It's head office's job to ensure successful teams are promoting the league's values--in this case playing actives, creating a good locker room, feeding quality first-gens into SHL teams, maintaining engagement. HO needs initiatives that reward teams for doing that with competitive advantages, so GM and HO objectives are aligned.

But I'm not commissioner lol. Not my job.

Samsung virtual assistant · 10-27-2019, 03:20 PM

10-27-2019, 12:25 PMAcsolap Wrote:
10-27-2019, 10:51 AMスウェグキング Wrote: Maybe they SHOULD see a point in leaving some money around in case there are late sign-ups. Especially if they're "relatively" full, which implies there are still spots for new, active players. If a team has a full roster of active players then i can't say anything about it.

So either late sign-ups will sit out, do nothing and get nothing, or with WBF idea GMs will be rewarded a free player. None of these options are good or fair IMO.

First gens has never needed contracts over 4 million before, this is just the next step in the "Hey i made X as a rookie in the SMJHL but i earn half that in the SHL. WTF?" dilemma.

Also, none of the teams have an IFA?

Code:
7. IFA’s can be released from the roster to make way for an active player and receive the salary cap relief from the released IFA

Where is the SMJHL budget link? i'm arguing on the assumption that all teams have used up all their money, seeing how he still hasn't been signed. I might as well be wrong in that assumption seeing how i cant find the budget anywhere(Shouldn't it be under the budget sub-forum?). I don't know how many big contracts has been given out or by who.

Im guessing this problem was overlooked when the budget change was made, either way it definitely needs to be looked over. There could be a couple solutions just off the top of my head

1. Welfare money for any rookie that signs up after all the teams has hit the cap.

2. Let the teams sign them and get a penalty to their salary cap for next season in some form. 50% of the contract or something like that.

3. Put a maximum contract in again.

@Eggy216 i like tagging you because you're cute and all, @Winter is Coming is kinda cute too. But also you're Comissioners, so you decide if you need to investigate if this is a problem or if you think it's fine.

Most if not all teams had money up until the TDL. Some teams made trades, some teams added FAs but I am hardly going to prioritise signing guys that could be on my roster for 10 games over financially helping the guys that will be on my roster for 2-4 seasons.

I don't think there should be the expectation that a team will sign you if you sign up after the TDL. If you believe that everyone should be snapped up then I don't see the problem with implementing fins idea for post TDL sign ups.

Of course as a GM you dont have a problem with an idea which means you could be getting a player without having to pay for him, lol.

But then again this is basically the same discussion as the one about GMs not drafting fighting heavy enforcers. We have different opinions on what the J is supposed to be is all.

***Acsolap*** · 10-27-2019, 03:40 PM

10-27-2019, 03:20 PMスウェグキング Wrote:
10-27-2019, 12:25 PMAcsolap Wrote: Most if not all teams had money up until the TDL. Some teams made trades, some teams added FAs but I am hardly going to prioritise signing guys that could be on my roster for 10 games over financially helping the guys that will be on my roster for 2-4 seasons.

I don't think there should be the expectation that a team will sign you if you sign up after the TDL. If you believe that everyone should be snapped up then I don't see the problem with implementing fins idea for post TDL sign ups.

Of course as a GM you dont have a problem with an idea which means you could be getting a player without having to pay for him, lol.

But then again this is basically the same discussion as the one about GMs not drafting fighting heavy enforcers. We have different opinions on what the J is supposed to be is all.

Outside of alumni I'm not going to sign people after the TDL unless my roster is threadbare. Its neither here nor there if a player is free or not.

Credit to Ml002, King, Wasty, Carpy, Bruins10, Rum_Ham, Turd Ferguson, Ragnar and Enigmatic for the sigs.
Forge

Player page | Player updates

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us