TCMD - Forum Wide GM Mock Draft Discussion

[ny92mike]

Give the guidelines for restructure and extensions a look over and let me know what you think.  I removed the rule that required the original contract to be greater than or equal to the top 10 base salary.

I'm also thinking we should consider the amount of money a team has available rather than just limit it to 3 total.  Not sure what that amount would be just yet, but let me know if we should consider this or if we're good with the no more than 3 rule.

 

Each team will be permitted to restructure or extend no more than 3 total, but are limited to which players based on the following criteria.  This criteria is calculated within the workbook as well as a list of players so that you aren’t sorting this out yourself.  Once the player has been restructured or extended you no longer have the option to trade the player.  The new contract structure will be applied to future years identical to how it is structured.

Restructuring a player’s contract takes the entire base salary (minus Vet. Min.) for the current year and evenly distributes the amount over the length of the contract as signing bonus, not to exceed 5 years. 
 

Player Criteria for Restructure

• The player must be original to the team's roster.
• The original contract cannot have base guarantees.
• Contract Length must be greater than 1.
• Player’s experience must be greater than or equal to 5.

 Extending a player’s contract allows you to increase the length of the contract to a max of 6 years, in addition to changing the base salary amounts and applying additional signing bonuses.  When working out the terms of the new contract, the team must meet or exceed the Player’s Contract Demands. 

Player Criteria for Extension Player List

• The player must be original to the team’s roster or added through trade.
• Original contract length must be less than or equal to 2 years.
• The player’s years of experience must be greater than or equal to 5.  

Extension Criteria for Building Contract

• Base Guarantees from the original contract must carry over to the new contract.
• Extended Signing Bonus must be greater than or equal to the player’s demands
• Extended APY must be greater than or equal to the player’s demands.
• Extended contract length cannot exceed the player’s demands +1.

 

@Forge

@EaglesPeteC

@BringinDaPain

@bcb1213

@BowserBroncos

@Cbrunn

@ChaRisMa

@cortes02

@Counselor

@daineraider

@davidderion

@Deadpulse

@Desperado82

@DTMW78

@Fragafootball

@IDOG_det

@IrishHooligan00

@jch1911

@KingOfTheDot

@LuckyNumber11

@MKnight82

@mountainpd

@NickChowaniec

@One Punch Man

@PurpleMugen

@samsel23

@SirA1

@sparky151

@squire12

@Trojan

@whodatOL

@winitall

[EaglesPeteC]

10 hours ago, squire12 said:

@EaglesPeteC let's start slow

2+2=

Damn it you said you were gonna start slow!!!

[Scoundrel]

The guidelines look good to me Mike

[ny92mike]

On 12/6/2018 at 6:52 PM, ny92mike said:

Ok, I found one that Mknight and I was working on last year.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AO3GAh-WI7q4OiROvWUd-MVwg8v7h8tnhrsD_Ef4fXw/edit?usp=sharing

At the top you'll see the three contracts with the Adj. Contract Offer Amount showing which contract would be awarded the player.

All of these contracts are set up so that you can edit them to play around with the numbers.  

At the top, cell E10 allows you to change the NPV % Rate.  I really had to boost this number to get the one year deal to pull ahead of the 3 year deal, going as high as 60% .  

Personally, I think the NPV% Rate number needs to be less.  When you consider that the player being offered the 3 year deal is getting his signing bonus up front as well as the base salary, he'll make his first year 36 million compared to the one year deal worth the same amount.  Factor in the second year of the deal, with the player making an additional 18 million.  It just hard not to think that this would be the best deal for the player.  He's making 36 million the first year and an additional 18 million in the second and another in the third year.

While it sounded good earlier after really comparing the numbers, the one year deal is sounding weaker.

Give it a look for yourself and remember you can change the contracts around as well as the NPV % Rate number.

Personally, I think a number around 20 to 30% for NPV Rate is a solid number.

20% makes the order 3, 5, 1 where 30 puts the order 3,1,5.

 

 

@squire12

What do you think man?

When it's laid out like this the one year deal doesn't sound as good as it did before.  

[ChaRisMa]

Is have no issues with the changes.

[ny92mike]

4 hours ago, ChaRisMa said:

Is have no issues with the changes.

cool....been awhile.  How you been man?

[cortes02]

The restructure guidelines look good to me.

Peace!!!

[ChaRisMa]

19 hours ago, ny92mike said:

cool....been awhile.  How you been man?

busy in good ways. Barely been on here for a while. just checking things out.

[MKnight82]

On 12/6/2018 at 7:52 PM, ny92mike said:

Ok, I found one that Mknight and I was working on last year.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AO3GAh-WI7q4OiROvWUd-MVwg8v7h8tnhrsD_Ef4fXw/edit?usp=sharing

At the top you'll see the three contracts with the Adj. Contract Offer Amount showing which contract would be awarded the player.

All of these contracts are set up so that you can edit them to play around with the numbers.  

At the top, cell E10 allows you to change the NPV % Rate.  I really had to boost this number to get the one year deal to pull ahead of the 3 year deal, going as high as 60% .  

Personally, I think the NPV% Rate number needs to be less.  When you consider that the player being offered the 3 year deal is getting his signing bonus up front as well as the base salary, he'll make his first year 36 million compared to the one year deal worth the same amount.  Factor in the second year of the deal, with the player making an additional 18 million.  It just hard not to think that this would be the best deal for the player.  He's making 36 million the first year and an additional 18 million in the second and another in the third year.

While it sounded good earlier after really comparing the numbers, the one year deal is sounding weaker.

Give it a look for yourself and remember you can change the contracts around as well as the NPV % Rate number.

Personally, I think a number around 20 to 30% for NPV Rate is a solid number.

20% makes the order 3, 5, 1 where 30 puts the order 3,1,5.

 

 

60% makes no sense, no one uses discount rates that high IRL.  

If someone was comparing these contracts IRL you'd probably only discount them 8-15%, as you're only discounting them on the opportunity cost of not having the money today.  And realistic returns on that money are probably only in the 8-15% range. 

However I think you need to consider the risk involved with the fact that the backend money of these deals aren't guaranteed, and I think we discussed this before, but really you should probably have 3 different discount rates, the 0.0% on the signing bonus because you're getting that all up front (so therefore its already at its NPV) a rate somewhere around 10% on guaranteed money that you receive in future years, and then a higher rate like 30-35% on non-guaranteed money.  I think we toyed around with that but decided it would be too confusing for people when making the contracts.

So taking into account all those risks, if you're just using the two discount rates, the 30% sounds appropriate to me.  

[ny92mike]

3 hours ago, MKnight82 said:

60% makes no sense, no one uses discount rates that high IRL.  

If someone was comparing these contracts IRL you'd probably only discount them 8-15%, as you're only discounting them on the opportunity cost of not having the money today.  And realistic returns on that money are probably only in the 8-15% range. 

However I think you need to consider the risk involved with the fact that the backend money of these deals aren't guaranteed, and I think we discussed this before, but really you should probably have 3 different discount rates, the 0.0% on the signing bonus because you're getting that all up front (so therefore its already at its NPV) a rate somewhere around 10% on guaranteed money that you receive in future years, and then a higher rate like 30-35% on non-guaranteed money.  I think we toyed around with that but decided it would be too confusing for people when making the contracts.

So taking into account all those risks, if you're just using the two discount rates, the 30% sounds appropriate to me.  

I agree 30% +/- 5% is what I'm thinking too.

The comment made by squire had me second guessing myself but after looking at it again I settled back to the original number we discussed last year.

[EaglesPeteC]

When is your target start date?

[EaglesPeteC]

On 12/18/2018 at 12:30 PM, EaglesPeteC said:

When is your target start date?

Good talk 

[mountainpd]

Happy Christmas one and all.

[D82]

So....

[EaglesPeteC]

3 hours ago, D82 said:

So....

Sooooo.............