Possible rule adjustment.

[John1974]

Ok so with alot of teams in the hardcap and the game rule of trades having to be within 115% salary when both teams are at the cap or over it trading has really slowed.

So there is a way I could get around the 115% in the game although its alot of work I might be willing to do this with league vote and a good trade system in place.

so here is my proposal.

A trade can be made when both teams are near or at the cap without being within 115% as long as .....

1. both teams have a roster spot open for the players being moved. (Meaning if your taking one player back you need to have 14 players or less on the roster counting the player you are trading.)

2. The completed trade does not bring either team over the hardcap.

I believe this would remove the 115% rule to allow for more teams in the cap to make more moves without trying to mix and match to make a trade work. I think this would get trading going more and allow some teams to wheel and deal when the team is out of it or in need of a player.

We could add a 3rd adjustment that both teams must pay 25.00 cash to help get more cash out of the league. I will leave all of this up to you guys. As I said this would create more work for me but I would be willing to do it as long as teams followed the rules we would put into place. or we just go along as we are and make the best of it.

Your thoughts/suggestions.

[Deleted]

A lot of teams are over the hard cap? Isn't being over the hard cap illegal?

I disagree with the rule. Imo it's unfair to teams that don't have cap issues.

Could care less about teams not trading because they can't work it out capwise. That's the downside of a big payrole, all in the game.

[John1974]

Oct 7, 2009 13:42:30 GMT -6 @motown said:

A lot of teams are over the hard cap? Isn't being over the hard cap illegal?

I disagree with the rule. Imo it's unfair to teams that don't have cap issues.

Could care less about teams not trading because they can't work it out capwise. That's the downside of a big payrole, all in the game.

No nobody is over the hardcap, they are in the hardcap.

[mavsgeniousgm]

Wow Trading for me will increase by 3x . I would totally dominate this league, what do you guys think? I like it alot!
Also if we do this, I think we should consider lowering the hard cap.

[John1974]

I do want to put my input into this that I am not for it as I think it awards people for being poor with fianaces. But it was brought to me and I wanted to post it to see what the league goes for.

with that post away.

[yourkers15]

Anything that helps activity I am all for.

[jgray78]

I like the idea but I think the cash should be more like 75 or 100. It would allow the trade, remove cash from the economy of ITP, and should increase article writing.

[New York Knicks]

Kinda ruins the challenge of trading. Finding a trade partner where you can match up contracts, or a team with cap room that can take on a big contract, etc. All of that stuff is realistic things that you see in the NBA, what we would do here is create a PG13 fantasy league. Not a fan of this.

[joshbounds]

I like the idea just to bring in more activity although for me I will always try to win and spend less anyway...

[arrestinu]

I'm against it, as I agree it offers little reason to pay attention to the cap.

Creating activity just for the sake of activity is not a good idea in my opinion. I think we would regret this move. Basically, if you write a few articles and generate some extra cash, you can circumvent your salary issues you created for yourself with this rule.

If you want to know why trading slowed down, look at some of the crappy contracts that were handed out the past few years. Some of those guys are good players, and I've been offered some of them in trades, but want NO part in handicapping my team with the crazy contract. The GM that gave those contracts should have to live with them if they can't find a trade partner within the parameters that were set long before they signed the player to that deal.

In short, it's not the rule that's hurting trading. It's the decisions made by some GM's to go "All-in" on a contract that's now not worth it. THAT is what's slowed trading. Changing the rule completely disregards that.

[legend]

I'm against it too for the above mentioned reasons.

[jlafavor]

i am against the rule adjustment as well.

[gritter13]

I would like for it to stay the way it is now.

[voker84]

Against it, although trading is difficult with the cap situation it closely mimics the actual NBA which improves the authenticity of the sim.

[mavsgeniousgm]

Yeah now that Im thinking about it, it does kinda ruin things a bit. Let's just keep searching for good gm's. I dont think we need to make this BIG change NOW. Let's just wait and if SLOWness continues then maybe consider doing this.

[gritter13]

Maybe it's just me, but one thing that seems to slow down the activity a bit is simming games every day. In the past it was easier to analyze and discuss the league's activities because there was some time between games.

Also, it seems like a bit like having Christmas every day. By having games simmed every day, I'm not as anxious for game day when everyday is game day. What do you guys think?

[arrestinu]

While I like having a sim every day, I think if we were going to look for opportunities to increase activity that going to Mon, Wed, Friday sims might benefit us.

Good point, Gritter.

[New York Knicks]

Agreed Gritter. It's like we're fast forwarding through the movie instead of sitting down and enjoying it.

[joshbounds]

I was one who was stoked about everyday sims but I have since had a change of heart as well.. Mon, Wed, Fri sims would give me more too look forward too... Maybe make it 9 or 10 day sims Mon, Wed, Fri..

[Deleted]

I'll go for M/W/F with 5-day sims daily.