Hockey5djh Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 1 minute ago, wwhickok said: I get what you're saying I just disagree with you. Because you are applying the same real life logic that I am in that you wholeheartedly believe that this particular 37 year old tackle will retire next season. So if you're going into a contract with that in mind thinking okay I'm willing to sign this guy because I know that he's a stop-gap player and I only need him for a single-season then why would you find him for a five-year contract if in the event he doesn't retire you are now on the hook for that contract still and it didn't want to be? So that's where Biddle us years on him is a disadvantage because now you have to pay 5% per year to reduce the contract. I get what you're saying but that doesn't make what I am saying irrelevant The bid started at 5 years. Trying to reduce a 5 year contract to a more realistic 2 year contract is going to cost you way more than risking a potential 3D if he doesn't retire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFLukic Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 Exactly. 5 years at the min salary was the best opening bid on Whitworth because realistically, he's retiring either next year or the year and going with 5 years I get the first mover advantage because someone can only beat me by bidding up on him. If I bid 4 years at 5.625k per year, someone could've just gone 5 years for 5.625k and I'd have to go up in salary. Obviously Hockey outbid me which made me have to up it again, but the way I positioned my bid was that the very minimum someone would've had to pay for him was 6.025k/5. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Hockey5djh said: The bid started at 5 years. Trying to reduce a 5 year contract to a more realistic 2 year contract is going to cost you way more than risking a potential 3D if he doesn't retire. That's my point. That is the disadvantage I am referring to Edited June 5, 2019 by wwhickok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, WFLukic said: Exactly. 5 years at the min salary was the best opening bid on Whitworth because realistically, he's retiring either next year or the year and going with 5 years I get the first mover advantage because someone can only beat me by bidding up on him. If I bid 4 years at 5.625k per year, someone could've just gone 5 years for 5.625k and I'd have to go up in salary. Obviously Hockey outbid me which made me have to up it again, but the way I positioned my bid was that the very minimum someone would've had to pay for him was 6.025k/5. BTW sorry for talking about the player mid bid, I could have sworn it was a 24 hour clock and you already won the bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 4 minutes ago, wwhickok said: That's my point. That is the disadvantage I am referring to There is no disadvantage. You either bid or you don't. It's a risk tolerance move, not a disadvantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFLukic Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Hockey5djh said: BTW sorry for talking about the player mid bid, I could have sworn it was a 24 hour clock and you already won the bid. Not a problem. It's 48 hrs I think anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 1 minute ago, Hockey5djh said: There is no disadvantage. You either bid or you don't. It's a risk tolerance move, not a disadvantage. We can agree to disagree. I do know there's at least one GM that disagrees with you. But it doesn't really matter. And we are not allowed to talk about free agents while their being bid on? I guess you're talkin about Mitch Morse then huh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 PM me these proposals by the way. But we have literally changed the bidding like 3 times now because nothing is going to satisfy everyone. That's also why we reduced max deals from 6 years to 5 years to prevent stuff like Whitworth. The only solution I see if 4 year deals maybe for FA only. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, SirA1 said: PM me these proposals by the way. But we have literally changed the bidding like 3 times now because nothing is going to satisfy everyone. That's also why we reduced max deals from 6 years to 5 years to prevent stuff like Whitworth. The only solution I see if 4 year deals maybe for FA only. I'll put a little more thought into my proposal to see exactly what I actually want to propose or think on it from a few different angles before I send it to you 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 Also the % numbers really aren't the issue people are having it's always Salary versus Contract that trips people up. Some people think Salary is the whole deal sometimes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 When did we change it from last year's? For every extra year added you must add at least 60% of the leading bids salary to the total contract size. When decreasing the years for every year taken off you add 60% of the average contract size of the year lost to the contract size for the number of years you want. Was this broken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 @SirA1 no need to concern yourself with this frivolous back and forth. Instead you should reward me with my prizes... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlash Posted June 5, 2019 Author Share Posted June 5, 2019 53 minutes ago, Counselor said: @SirA1 no need to concern yourself with this frivolous back and forth. Instead you should reward me with my prizes... I'll have one also! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 Bcb - Take a look at the owner's meeting doc to find your answer. The changes were agreed to a coupe of years ago and just weren't implemented last year because it was forgotten. I found it when I did the guidelines update last summer. SO it should have been in effect last year and was done because people dislikes the 60% thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted June 5, 2019 Share Posted June 5, 2019 14 minutes ago, SirA1 said: Bcb - Take a look at the owner's meeting doc to find your answer. The changes were agreed to a coupe of years ago and just weren't implemented last year because it was forgotten. I found it when I did the guidelines update last summer. SO it should have been in effect last year and was done because people dislikes the 60% thing. Ahhh OK I checked the most recent meetings only, why I was confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts