sparky151 Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 For what it's worth, I don't like the idea of giving more bidding slots to the teams with more cap space. IMO they can bid on more expensive players than the ones who are cap strapped but it's rubbing it in to let them take more chances on guys. It would basically require everyone to restructure their most expensive players and cut guys they may want to keep. Though it would shorten free agency. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downundermike Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 2 minutes ago, sparky151 said: For what it's worth, I don't like the idea of giving more bidding slots to the teams with more cap space. IMO they can bid on more expensive players than the ones who are cap strapped but it's rubbing it in to let them take more chances on guys. It would basically require everyone to restructure their most expensive players and cut guys they may want to keep. Though it would shorten free agency. 100% agree. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted February 21, 2023 Share Posted February 21, 2023 Totally against removing the immediate vet mins also. If I have less cap space, why should we let the teams with tons bid against each other for guys we can’t afford.. only to have them on even ground for vet min in a couple rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2023 Author Share Posted February 22, 2023 15 minutes ago, RedGold said: Totally against removing the immediate vet mins also. If I have less cap space, why should we let the teams with tons bid against each other for guys we can’t afford.. only to have them on even ground for vet min in a couple rounds. This is what made the shark tank in ffmd not work so well. Guys with no cap having to wait to make offers on vet min deals. Only for the guys that missed out in the talent agency to beat us up again in the shark tank. Against that as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2023 Author Share Posted February 22, 2023 I think the system we have in place works well just not my best attempt at APY values this year. Which is fixable for next year. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2023 Author Share Posted February 22, 2023 The concept for this mock was to make the FA enjoyable for everyone. Allow each team the chance to sign players from start to finish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2023 Author Share Posted February 22, 2023 So going back to the conversation about the whatif bid options. I think we can work this into the system next year just wanna nail down some specifics. Could the "alt bid" be used to sign a different position? I'm thinking if we are doing these alt bids that it should be for the same position. How many of these "alt bids" do we allow per round? I think this should also be for just one bid slot. Have the option to change the last UFA/Resign to UFA/Resign/Alt (until we figure out a better name for it). Once that's selected, we have another cell that allows you to specify which this alt bid is replacing should you get outbid. Once you make that selection then the position is synched to the bid position. Then the drop down list shows that list of free agents. Would definitely need to adjust some formulas to seek out the winners and losing bids on the sheet for sorting out all of this. Setting it up like you suggested @RedGold with it actually costing a bid slot to do this works for me. I just didn't like the idea of it not costing anything to make it work. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 (edited) One per round Max! If we do it. Like I said it’s not all that complicated, or not as complicated as some want to make it. Make it count as a bid.. you can do even put the Position into the formula for Alt. If bid 1 fails, and bid 4 = same Pos. As Alt bid. Factor the bid in. If Bid 1 passes ignore Bid 4x. It is not uncommon for teams to be talking to two players at the same position, and drop out on the 2nd or 1st if they agree to a deal with the other. I know it’s not popular because people think it takes away strategy.. but think of it this way, a team is using 2 bids for one Position in FA. Edited February 22, 2023 by RedGold Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2023 Author Share Posted February 22, 2023 10 minutes ago, RedGold said: One per round Max! If we do it. Like I said it’s not all that complicated, or not as complicated as some want to make it. Make it count as a bid.. you can do even put the Position into the formula for Alt. If bid 1 fails, and bid 4 = same Pos. As Alt bid. Factor the bid in. If Bid 1 passes ignore Bid 4x. It is not uncommon for teams to be talking to two players at the same position, and drop out on the 2nd or 1st if they agree to a deal with the other. I know it’s not popular because people think it takes away strategy.. but think of it this way, a team is using 2 bids for one Position in FA. Right...It's definitely manageable. I see their point as well, but I'm looking at it as it's providing another element of game planning rather than taking anything away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 Right. That’s just my argument on it. We see it all the time IRL. Teams host two players of the same position. Obviously they aren’t going to sign both, but they want one. From a strategy standpoint, I see it as a team using two bids for one spot. If I lose on that one spot; Clearly my offer wasn’t good enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2023 Author Share Posted February 22, 2023 17 minutes ago, RedGold said: Right. That’s just my argument on it. We see it all the time IRL. Teams host two players of the same position. Obviously they aren’t going to sign both, but they want one. From a strategy standpoint, I see it as a team using two bids for one spot. If I lose on that one spot; Clearly my offer wasn’t good enough I say we go for it for next year. Providing any unseen issues of course. Anything you would change with the reserve bidding system? I personally like it the way it is but so many of the new guys are confused by it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 What happens if 2 teams have the exact same bid on a player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 4 minutes ago, NYRaider said: What happens if 2 teams have the exact same bid on a player? the bid slots are an additional tie breaker. So your #1 bid slot should be used on your highest priority UFA bid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsandI Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 3 minutes ago, squire12 said: the bid slots are an additional tie breaker. So your #1 bid slot should be used on your highest priority UFA bid That means top target should be used on bid #1 instead of reserve bid. Logically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 6 minutes ago, squire12 said: the bid slots are an additional tie breaker. So your #1 bid slot should be used on your highest priority UFA bid What if both teams have that player in their first slot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.