Issue with Extensions

[djmyte]

Yes, they are nice and add more realism to the sim but I think for instances in which players aren't getting a max extension or arent clearly being offered a deal well above potential market value we need to be alot more "picky" about what we are willing to accept.

Perhaps the opinion of 5-7 GM's reflects what most would be willing to do in the sim but it doesn't reflect all possibilities. A team with poor overall talent that hasnt made the playoffs in 2 or 3 seasons might be willing to shell out substantially more money for a player than some people might think.

Plus, allowing FA's, especially younger ones with high potential, to resign for "acceptable" amounts robs them of the main benefit of FA...competition between teams for their services. It also severely depletes the FA pool making it nearly impossible to immediately improve one's team in the offseason, unless you have the #1 pick or can find a sucker in a trade.

I just feel the process needs to be alot more resistant to handing out contracts because they're "good" enough.

And btw, I have a pretty solid team with soon to be FA's that id probably like to keep, so this comlpaint(for lack of a better word) isn't being made in order to benefit myself.

Dj we've already talked about this issue in the council forum. We have decided extensions shouldnt be given "easily" and I dont really understand why you need to bring this issue into a regular forum. Every extension for this season is still pending except for a MAX extension that we easily accespted. In most cases I like input from all owners, but the extensions can be dealt with in house.

After talking to Dj I better understand his point. Having said that its true, it will be more difficult to extend players in season. We want their to be a free agency period, and extending people to questionable salary offers doesnt allow that. Come good with your offers, or let them walk, no half ass offers.

[manasrai]

The point is definately valid, but as Spencer points out, I feel we have definately been more critical of all extensions, and it is also something we have brought up in the council this season. Furthermore, we have a rule changes area to post about this in...

[rommie]

I think that it should be harder for us to sign players to extensions. I think that you have to take there loyalty, greed, and play for a winner when deciding extensions.

Also, I think that the cost for extensions is hurting the league. I mean for example Andreis Bierdinis was offered 8 million per year, it was declined because it wasn't enough??? He averageds 10 and 8. Josh Smith and Telfair haven't done much but they are getting offers for 5 million plus. I just think that it is ridiculous to just give the cap space to players who haven't done much. [i'm not knocking any GMs either, so do not take this personal please. just giving examples.]

lol.

Its funny cause one person in this thread is arguing that we need to make sure extensions are higher, and another person thinks extensions are already too high for certain players.

[SpursGM]

Everything has it's pros and cons, but the in-season extension thing has more cons then pros in my honest opinion.

Since in-season extensions were implemented while we already had this league up and running, the already good teams were able to keep all the stars.

FA isn't really how it should be either... yeah, Yao and AI were available two seasons ago, but the season before that and last season the biggest names were like Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy etc.

It's to late to go back now I guess, but I think there should have been alot more restrictions towards in-season extensions.

SpursGM said:

It's to late to go back now I guess, but I think there should have been alot more restrictions towards in-season extensions.

Examples?

[SpursGM]

Instead of 5 offers, 3.

Only one to two extensions.

There should have been a list based on the previous season's player stats... these players would automatically be accepted for a max contract, the others would have to be voted on.

etc.

SpursGM said:

Instead of 5 offers, 3.

Right now we have unlimited offers.

SpursGM said:

Only one to two extensions.

Not sure what this means.

SpursGM said:

There should have been a list based on the previous season's player stats... these players would automatically be accepted for a max contract, the others would have to be voted on.
.

So some stars are automatic MAX's, others would need to be voted on?

[SoonerfanTU]

I agree, that IMO, the contracts are getting out of hand. You have too many GM's that want a certain player, and be damned what it costs, or how it affects his team, he is going to sign that player.

One thing to consider, "alot" of real players except lesser offers to play for contending teams, teams closer to home, or teams that have been loyal to them. $'s aren't the end all to a player accepting.

Ok, this is interesting to me. We(as the league council) have been struggling with making sure offers are more then fair in looking at extensions. We have come to the conclusion that in order for us to accept in season extensions, it has to be a without a doubt, great offer. Otherwise the player would just test free agency. And this seems to be best for the league as a whole. If we are more careful in accepting offers, we will have more players left in free agency. This is something that we want to try and continue having parity in the BBS, that is a bad team with cap room actually having players they want to spend their money on.

Now two GM's, Jeremy and Adam, have said they think offers are too high. This makes me happy, cause it means we are doing our jobs when it comes to listening to, and accepting extensions. We are accepting offers that are without a doubt, great offers. When teams with cap room are saying extended players are getting too much, that makes me feel as though those teams with cap room, wouldnt offer the given player as much as we as a council got for them. This is good.

Every offseason during free agency there is only so much money to be spent. Every in season extensions affects that money waiting to be spent. So teams that maintain their cap room, should actually want teams to overpay for in season free agents, because it makes the teams with cap room's money more valuable. Hopefully this makes sense.

We are still discussing different ideas for in season extensions. I like the feature of being able to sign guys you want without having them face free agency, but I also want teams to have good players to bid on during free agency.

[djmyte]

SoonerfanTU said:

I agree, that IMO, the contracts are getting out of hand. You have too many GM's that want a certain player, and be damned what it costs, or how it affects his team, he is going to sign that player.

One thing to consider, "alot" of real players except lesser offers to play for contending teams, teams closer to home, or teams that have been loyal to them. $'s aren't the end all to a player accepting.

I disagree with the assessment that "alot" of players accept lesser salaries in place of situational preferences. I think to most players getting the most $$ they can is first and foremost considering how long professional sports careers last. I have yet to see a top flight player accept a substantial decrease in pay in order to remain at home. Ideally, that's what should happen but it really isnt the case.

Players often want to and are urged(by agents) to enter FA because teams will compete with each other for there services and therefore offers escalate. This is why a player should go to FA if he doesn't receive a "best case scenario" type offer. Again, teams can still offer their own FA's contracts in FA. At least this way we get to see what the true value really is.

[manasrai]

I find it humorous that sometimes (even in the same post) some GM's say that it should be harder to get extensions, and then later say some people are overpaid theough in season extensions. I dont think everyone in the league understands the level of effort put into extensions...I feel it only makes sense that a player will only accept an inseason extention if he does not feel he will get a better offer in FA.

Regardless, the council is working on a method to simplify the extensions process, so that there is a better understanding of how to use it, and more free agents at the same time.

[The Pink Panther]

Tough subject to give a definite answer to.

I agree with the idea that on th whole in season offers need to be great offers.

I also think the point about some players accepting lower offers to play for contenders should be taken into account but should not be the be all and end all to decide whether an offer is accepted.

As a council member i feel like a little more is required than for me to just sit on the fence, which is ideally what id like to do on this subject, and would've done, had i not been forced to reply by spencer [j/k....to an extent]

But i do feel that extensions should be strict. I feel that free agency isnt what it could and should be, and teams arent bothered about being way over the cap and having just their mle, lle and minimum to work with and poor teams with cap room are having to try and get by with mediocre players due to all the stars being locked up during the season.

The main problem is the fact that most teams have 1 max offer per season, and usually have only 1 max player in a contract year. So that player gets maxed.

Now we, as a council, cant really refuse a max, making it impossible for the GM to resign his player. I know if i wanted t resign KMart and i offered max which was refused, then Manas extended Darko for the max, id be pissed.

My point being we cant refuse some max and not others and we obviously cant reject them all. This is the main reason for the lack of talent getting to free agency,

Its really a moot point. Not a great deal we can do about it except be stricter on the lesser players, but it still means very few, if any, STAR players get to free agency

[SoonerfanTU]

djmyte said:

I disagree with the assessment that "alot" of players accept lesser salaries in place of situational preferences. I think to most players getting the most $$ they can is first and foremost considering how long professional sports careers last. I have yet to see a top flight player accept a substantial decrease in pay in order to remain at home. Ideally, that's what should happen but it really isnt the case.

Players often want to and are urged(by agents) to enter FA because teams will compete with each other for there services and therefore offers escalate. This is why a player should go to FA if he doesn't receive a "best case scenario" type offer. Again, teams can still offer their own FA's contracts in FA. At least this way we get to see what the true value really is.

I disagree with that. Alot of players sign for less than what they could potentially make. Nobody is saying take a "pay cut". But if "Sam" played for Boston last year and made $7M that year, and Boston offers him $9M for the next year, if Sam wants to stay in Boston, he'd probably accept that offer unless it was a major slap in the face. Sam might not care that Portland would offer him $11.5M, cause he doesn't want to play there, or wants to play for Boston more, or doesn't like the left coast, ect.

Happens all the time.

[SoonerfanTU]

BBSOwner said:

Now two GM's, Jeremy and Adam, have said they think offers are too high. This makes me happy, cause it means we are doing our jobs when it comes to listening to, and accepting extensions. We are accepting offers that are without a doubt, great offers. When teams with cap room are saying extended players are getting too much, that makes me feel as though those teams with cap room, wouldnt offer the given player as much as we as a council got for them. This is good.

I'm not just talking about extensions though. Even players in FA are getting too much. All it takes is one or two GM's that either "don't get it", or whatever, and they can mess up the financing of an entire league. Every sim league I've ever been in that "tanked", was pretty much due to salaries getting out of hand, and as such, having multiple teams that were in major financial trouble.

I agree that the offers should be good ones, but just b/c some fool would offer player "x" more in FA doesn't mean my extension offer should be way above that.

JMO.