SirA1 Posted November 13, 2018 Share Posted November 13, 2018 Should be 50% for the base/floor bid. Just didn't make that change after the Owners meeting to update the old 40% amount. It's fixed now. So where is mentions Salary it is referencing the Average Salary for the player from Spotrac. Not the total Contract which most people get mistaken. I'll use David Johnson as an example even though he's not a FA. His Avg RL Salary is $13,000 in BDL $$ and is for 3 years. 1) The minimum BDL FA offer would be 2 years at $6,500 each for a total contract of $13,000. 2) If a team wanted to bid him up then they would need to offer a minimum of $14,000 since the total contract is between $10K and $20K. 3) Say the original team wanted to then add a year to the deal making it a 3 year deal. They would have to add a minimum of 85% of the current $7K in salary or $5,950 in this case. Bringing the total contract to $19,950/3 years ($6,650/yr). This new contract still meets the 50% RL Base Salary requirement and also an increase of at least $1K for the contract so is valid. 4) 2nd bidder then would have to add at least $1K to the contract for the next bid. After that the minimums would be in $2K increments because the total contract would be over $20K. It could then go back and forth until someone decided to bow out. Now the reason we have a 48 Hour rule is because several years in the past with no time limit we would have people sneak in last minute votes and "steal" players that other people were hoping to get to the Shark Tank or thought they had locked up. It's also why we have the no new bids rule after Friday Midnight of the week so that all open bids are clearly visible to the League. It's also because we have owners from all over the globe so need to give everyone time to review things. I don't like the idea of a fixed clock that has basically a poison pill built into any new bid based on how late the bid is. We have FA in June because there is literally nothing else going on during that month of the season. And because we break up the positions available during FA by week it's not a ton of contracts to keep track of. So we have time to process the bids as they come over. We've made some good changes to FA for this coming season that I think will make the number of speculative bids decrease. Removing the 6th year will be huge as contracts will have to be competitive and salaries will rise for the players by not getting that extra year extended to 3Up's only. It will also probable increase the use of 3 Ups to get that 6th year value. The new 50% minimum will also help remove a lot of the initial back and forth low ball bids that usually start each week of FA. I think we should give those a try before we alter things any further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted November 13, 2018 Author Share Posted November 13, 2018 1 hour ago, SirA1 said: Should be 50% for the base/floor bid. Just didn't make that change after the Owners meeting to update the old 40% amount. It's fixed now. So where is mentions Salary it is referencing the Average Salary for the player from Spotrac. Not the total Contract which most people get mistaken. Ok...still think it would be nice to provide so we aren't having to look that up when placing the initial bid. I'll use David Johnson as an example even though he's not a FA. His Avg RL Salary is $13,000 in BDL $$ and is for 3 years. 1) The minimum BDL FA offer would be 2 years at $6,500 each for a total contract of $13,000. 2) If a team wanted to bid him up then they would need to offer a minimum of $14,000 since the total contract is between $10K and $20K. 3) Say the original team wanted to then add a year to the deal making it a 3 year deal. They would have to add a minimum of 85% of the current $7K in salary or $5,950 in this case. Bringing the total contract to $19,950/3 years ($6,650/yr). This new contract still meets the 50% RL Base Salary requirement and also an increase of at least $1K for the contract so is valid. 4) 2nd bidder then would have to add at least $1K to the contract for the next bid. After that the minimums would be in $2K increments because the total contract would be over $20K. It could then go back and forth until someone decided to bow out. Right, maybe I'm getting lazy in my old age, but this just seems like a headache having to chase down the highest bid in the forum and then figuring out how much you've got to bid based on those rules would be easier if it could get sorted out in a workbook. I haven't been involved with a BDL free agency just the shark tank bidding earlier this year and the ffmd shark tank bidding and I've always thought it was a nightmare to keep track of. Now the reason we have a 48 Hour rule is because several years in the past with no time limit we would have people sneak in last minute votes and "steal" players that other people were hoping to get to the Shark Tank or thought they had locked up. It's also why we have the no new bids rule after Friday Midnight of the week so that all open bids are clearly visible to the League. It's also because we have owners from all over the globe so need to give everyone time to review things. I understand the reason for the 48 or 24 hour rule, and believe the proposed percentage increase for delayed bidding would prevent teams from coming in last minute to steal a player, but I completely understand you not wanting to change it up. After all this is your sim and I respect that. I don't like the idea of a fixed clock that has basically a poison pill built into any new bid based on how late the bid is. We have FA in June because there is literally nothing else going on during that month of the season. And because we break up the positions available during FA by week it's not a ton of contracts to keep track of. So we have time to process the bids as they come over. We've made some good changes to FA for this coming season that I think will make the number of speculative bids decrease. Removing the 6th year will be huge as contracts will have to be competitive and salaries will rise for the players by not getting that extra year extended to 3Up's only. It will also probable increase the use of 3 Ups to get that 6th year value. The new 50% minimum will also help remove a lot of the initial back and forth low ball bids that usually start each week of FA. I think we should give those a try before we alter things any further. That's fine man, I know it probably feels like I'm pushing this stuff on you and the others. @TedLavie was asking if I could figure out a way to make the free agent process easier to track and control and while I consider my excel knowledge to be decent, I just haven't been able to figure out a way to make the clock work without it being fixed and have the FA process completely automated. I can create formulas that provide workarounds for most of the fa rules but the clock is the killer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted November 13, 2018 Author Share Posted November 13, 2018 5 hours ago, SirA1 said: His Avg RL Salary is $13,000 in BDL $$ and is for 3 years. 1) The minimum BDL FA offer would be 2 years at $6,500 each for a total contract of $13,000. So I was thinking that since the fa is held in June, teams are still operating out of the 90 man roster so the majority of the players will be assigned to the active rosters, which would make for collecting their APY numbers automated using the spotrac linking. It isn't much, but it would at least make it easier to find what the minimum initial offer is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted November 13, 2018 Author Share Posted November 13, 2018 Experimenting with posting the draft order in the forum from the workbook. Using formulas to hyperlink the drafted players names to youtube highlights. Couldn't do this with the old forum. Note: Can add in time slots. 2018 - BDL Draft Board 1st Rnd / Pick 1 - Berlin Blitzkrieg select Baker Mayfield - RB - Oklahoma 1st Rnd / Pick 2 - Camden Hood Rats select *Sam Darnold - QB - Southern California 1st Rnd / Pick 3 - Orlando Ospreys select *Saquon Barkley - RB - Penn State 1st Rnd / Pick 4 - Gotham Gashslayers select *Denzel Ward - CB - Ohio State 1st Rnd / Pick 5 - Hawaii Nightmarchers select Bradley Chubb - DE - North Carolina State 1st Rnd / Pick 6 - Ivory Coast Black Rhinos select *Quenton Nelson - OG - Notre Dame 1st Rnd / Pick 7 - Long Beach Leprechauns select *Josh Allen - QB - Wyoming 1st Rnd / Pick 8 - Camden Hood Rats 1st Rnd / Pick 9 - Sydney Dingos 1st Rnd / Pick 10 - Camden Hood Rats 1st Rnd / Pick 11 - Louisiana Jazz 1st Rnd / Pick 12 - Rome Eternals 1st Rnd / Pick 13 - Orlando Ospreys 1st Rnd / Pick 14 - Louisiana Jazz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted November 20, 2018 Author Share Posted November 20, 2018 Proposal I did up a quick form, that would provide a set structure for submitting the game plans. I just did a sample so it doesn't house a complete system, but what the form does is reduces the number of offensive formations down to 3 the primary, secondary and subpackage ex. Goalline The game plan has 3 entries Offensive Line - Passing and Rushing with each one having a character count limit of 300. Again, I put this together rather quickly so the layout may not be exactly what we would all agree on but its a start for a discussion. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeoNGkX8Mybpusg-Vrt15CZmKGy5b642T-4vEVeVfHY1CXV2Q/viewform?usp=sf_link The responses can be set up to be viewed either in a workbook or transferred to the forum. Personally, I think the workbook is best so we aren't reliant upon having someone post them each week, if you haven't done this before it does take some time to piece it all together and the formatting from everyone is so different that it always looks like crap visually when its all posted up. Housing this but also using google forms for voting would allow us to manage the voting process much easier. We could easily track which members voted each week, who they voted for, and see their reasoning why they voted how they did. Even if this wasn't done using google forms I think we need some structure to this process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted November 21, 2018 Share Posted November 21, 2018 1 hour ago, ny92mike said: Proposal I did up a quick form, that would provide a set structure for submitting the game plans. I just did a sample so it doesn't house a complete system, but what the form does is reduces the number of offensive formations down to 3 the primary, secondary and subpackage ex. Goalline The game plan has 3 entries Offensive Line - Passing and Rushing with each one having a character count limit of 300. Again, I put this together rather quickly so the layout may not be exactly what we would all agree on but its a start for a discussion. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeoNGkX8Mybpusg-Vrt15CZmKGy5b642T-4vEVeVfHY1CXV2Q/viewform?usp=sf_link The responses can be set up to be viewed either in a workbook or transferred to the forum. Personally, I think the workbook is best so we aren't reliant upon having someone post them each week, if you haven't done this before it does take some time to piece it all together and the formatting from everyone is so different that it always looks like crap visually when its all posted up. Housing this but also using google forms for voting would allow us to manage the voting process much easier. We could easily track which members voted each week, who they voted for, and see their reasoning why they voted how they did. Even if this wasn't done using google forms I think we need some structure to this process. This sounds like a good idea for a BDL preseason trial run next year. I'll take a look later in the week when I have more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted December 10, 2018 Author Share Posted December 10, 2018 Alright guys I've been working on this with @TedLavie helping out where he can. Really hoping to get some feedback on this project from you guys. This is what we're looking at to replace the shark tank and perhaps even the entire FA process, if we can work out the formulas. Basically how it works is we use a google form to submit our bids. Once submitted you'll be able to track each bid using a workbook. The formulas used in this workbook will determine the highest bidder & how much time is left to make an offer on the player. It will also display the team that the player signs with once the time has expired. The formulas also weed out duplicate bids. In addition to the FA Bid Tracker, I've included another sheet, Team FA Tracker. Once completed, each team will have their own tracker sheet, which will also include the current salary cap of each team, so we can easily see if a team has the available funds. Google Form Link The form request a Owner code, use 1234 for now, but later we've got two options to ensure each team is submitting only to the team they are assigned to. We can use the code or require signing into google docs. Sign in would work best in my opinion. FA Tracker Workbook Please take a moment and review each link and let me know if we need to change the layout or if you'd like to see more information added. I'm still working on the replacement workbook for the BDL Roster Workbook that is directly linked to various spotrac pages, which will automate the NFL status of the player, which team the player is on and if the player is on IR. This should help the heads out tremendously. I'm still working on this project but will have something to post soon. Thanks for your time. @bcb1213 @Counselor @DingoLadd @Hockey5djh @Jlash @MD4L @pheltzbahr @PR @Ragnarok @RuskieTitan @SirA1 @SwoleXmad @TedLavie @WFLukic @Whicker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted December 10, 2018 Share Posted December 10, 2018 I can 100% get behind this for Shark Tank and FA. I can imagine updating everything by hand is a pain in the rear end for the spreadsheet people and this makes it easier and solves that issue. My only complaint is I'd like to be able to enter in a specific amount to bid, or have something better than 500,1000,1500 etc. I assume that's just placeholder anyway. I'd say a testing period like 2 weeks before FA so any kinks/bugs can be worked out but other than that would vote to use this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted December 10, 2018 Share Posted December 10, 2018 5 minutes ago, SwoleXmad said: I can 100% get behind this for Shark Tank and FA. I can imagine updating everything by hand is a pain in the rear end for the spreadsheet people and this makes it easier and solves that issue. My only complaint is I'd like to be able to enter in a specific amount to bid, or have something better than 500,1000,1500 etc. I assume that's just placeholder anyway. I'd say a testing period like 2 weeks before FA so any kinks/bugs can be worked out but other than that would vote to use this. Nothing to speak for Mike but he's been playing with it and working out the kinks already. I think the rounded numbers are just for now for example purposes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted December 10, 2018 Share Posted December 10, 2018 Stop forcing me to change!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted December 10, 2018 Author Share Posted December 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, SwoleXmad said: I can 100% get behind this for Shark Tank and FA. I can imagine updating everything by hand is a pain in the rear end for the spreadsheet people and this makes it easier and solves that issue. My only complaint is I'd like to be able to enter in a specific amount to bid, or have something better than 500,1000,1500 etc. I assume that's just placeholder anyway. I'd say a testing period like 2 weeks before FA so any kinks/bugs can be worked out but other than that would vote to use this. Thanks for the feedback. Entering in a specific amount works but in order to do so we'd have to come up with some additional formulas to eliminate the bids that are offered less than the required next bidding amount. For example if I bid 500, the current layout doesn't allow you to bid 501. If we allowed the amount offered I think it would lead to more errors in staying true to the amount required and although I haven't ever made an offer in bdl yet, I don't really think that if the current bid is 500 and the next required amount to offer is 525 and 550 after that having the ability to make an offer between those two numbers shouldn't be a deal breaker to use this. Even when it gets upward of 250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted December 10, 2018 Author Share Posted December 10, 2018 9 minutes ago, bcb1213 said: Nothing to speak for Mike but he's been playing with it and working out the kinks already. I think the rounded numbers are just for now for example purposes Actually that is how it's created. Basically it just prevents someone from offering less than the required amount to outbid someone. Personally, I don't think being able to bid 530 when the next required amount is 525 is that big of a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted December 10, 2018 Author Share Posted December 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, Whicker said: Stop forcing me to change!!!! This change is good for everyone and could possibly increase retention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted December 10, 2018 Share Posted December 10, 2018 6 minutes ago, ny92mike said: This change is good for everyone and could possibly increase retention. I've said before I'm set in my way of doing things, and thus far, I'd argue that my ways suit me pretty well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted December 10, 2018 Author Share Posted December 10, 2018 Would you guys rather have a 4 digit code to confirm the correct owner is making the offer or sign in, which collects the email but it would be stored on a hidden sheet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.