Jump to content

Total Control GM Mock Draft Suggestions / Feedback


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Making them equal is the same thing as deleting it.  

What's your reasoning for wanting to keep them?

I remember we played around with the numbers a few years back and couldn't ever get it to look right.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure how many GM actually enter any values into the Roster or work out bonus.  Feels like something that could be eliminated, safe some space and cause a little less confusion on the UFA offer sheet.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ny92mike said:

What's your reasoning for wanting to keep them?

I remember we played around with the numbers a few years back and couldn't ever get it to look right.

 

 

1.  Its the easiest fix.  You just replace 120% with 20%.  boom, done.  You don't have to modify the spreadsheet anymore than that.  

2. For people who like to make the contracts more complex and realistic it allows them to do that.  Anyone who doesn't want to use bonuses wouldn't be negatively affected either.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MKnight82 said:

1.  Its the easiest fix.  You just replace 120% with 20%.  boom, done.  You don't have to modify the spreadsheet anymore than that.

I'm rebuilding these new ones from blanks.

Just now, MKnight82 said:

2. For people who like to make the contracts more complex and realistic it allows them to do that.  Anyone who doesn't want to use bonuses wouldn't be negatively affected either.  

I get that and would need to look at how many GM's are using these.

Making them equal doesn't really work at least not without making some additional adjustments.  I mean how many contracts do we see where the workout bonus is greater than the base salary.  We see it sometimes with roster bonuses but that's typically tied to some base guarantee money.

I won't scratch it without seeing what changes we could do to keep it, but I'm personally not a fan of the roster / w/o bonuses.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, squire12 said:

I am not sure how many GM actually enter any values into the Roster or work out bonus.  Feels like something that could be eliminated, safe some space and cause a little less confusion on the UFA offer sheet.  

In round one there were 122 contracts 16 contained a w/o bonus and 9 a roster bonus.  The only reason I've used the roster or w/o bonus was if the apy value was really close and to save time from adjusting the base salaries again, I just added in a small number of these types of bonuses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bcb1213 said:

Why would a workout bonus be weighted the same as base salary. That's nuts 

That's actually how the NFL does it in real life. Workout bonuses are considered to be under the players control as to whether or not they show up for offseason workouts. So the league classifies them as Likely to be Earned incentives and they go on the cap for the current year, long before the player has had a chance to actually earn them. If the player doesn't attend enough to qualify, the team gets a cap credit for the following year. 

 

From a team's point of view, it encourages the player to stay in contact and to be in shape for training camp. From the player's POV, it's easy money and I think is paid when the player has earned it, rather than waiting for the season. So it helps offseason cash flow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, sparky151 said:

That's actually how the NFL does it in real life. Workout bonuses are considered to be under the players control as to whether or not they show up for offseason workouts. So the league classifies them as Likely to be Earned incentives and they go on the cap for the current year, long before the player has had a chance to actually earn them. If the player doesn't attend enough to qualify, the team gets a cap credit for the following year. 

 

From a team's point of view, it encourages the player to stay in contact and to be in shape for training camp. From the player's POV, it's easy money and I think is paid when the player has earned it, rather than waiting for the season. So it helps offseason cash flow. 

Right I mean from what we are doing. Why not just include it in base and eliminate extra steps 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A huge space saver for the workbooks would be to eliminate the personal team roster workbooks.

I'm thinking if we privatized the official team roster workbook, and just provide a link to a single workbook that displays everyone's team roster for public viewing.  

From what I'm seeing 99% of us aren't even using them in terms of rosters matching the official ones.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ny92mike said:

A huge space saver for the workbooks would be to eliminate the personal team roster workbooks.

I'm thinking if we privatized the official team roster workbook, and just provide a link to a single workbook that displays everyone's team roster for public viewing.  

From what I'm seeing 99% of us aren't even using them in terms of rosters matching the official ones.

 

 

Sounds good.

I would use if all I had to enter was the 4 digit code to update only but I have added too many players to keep it updated so just open from your main view when I am checking

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, mountainpd said:

Sounds good.

I would use if all I had to enter was the 4 digit code to update only but I have added too many players to keep it updated so just open from your main view when I am checking

Okay, just wasn't sure about removing it because it allows us to see what releasing a player does to our cap before making it official.  It's the only reason I've used it for as long as I have, but adding players is such a pain in the butt.  I looked at the top 51 for both the official and unofficial rosters and all but one matched while the rest are miles off.  So we clearly aren't updating it to mirror the official ones.  Deleting it will free up a ton of space allowing me to potential get everything into one workbook or at the very least speed up the load and run times.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ny92mike said:

 

Okay, just wasn't sure about removing it because it allows us to see what releasing a player does to our cap before making it official.  It's the only reason I've used it for as long as I have, but adding players is such a pain in the butt.  I looked at the top 51 for both the official and unofficial rosters and all but one matched while the rest are miles off.  So we clearly aren't updating it to mirror the official ones.  Deleting it will free up a ton of space allowing me to potential get everything into one workbook or at the very least speed up the load and run times.

That’s a good point. Something a lot of people probably do at start to see cap variances. It will still show but won’t have the calculations done for us.

I can handle that but I’m not sure if it will make it more difficult for others or not,

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ny92mike said:

 

Okay, just wasn't sure about removing it because it allows us to see what releasing a player does to our cap before making it official.  It's the only reason I've used it for as long as I have, but adding players is such a pain in the butt.  I looked at the top 51 for both the official and unofficial rosters and all but one matched while the rest are miles off.  So we clearly aren't updating it to mirror the official ones.  Deleting it will free up a ton of space allowing me to potential get everything into one workbook or at the very least speed up the load and run times.

The official roster sheet has a column that shows the cap hit if released.  Seems easy enough to look at that column and do the math on what releasing a player does

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could I get some feedback on the new build workbook.

Looking to combine the player trade block and league trade block.  Also started working on the trade value chart sheet.

The trade value chart is one of my favorite sheets that I use a lot to evaluate trade proposals, but I think it could be much better.  This version would pull the opponents roster.  I currently have this being dropped in to the right of the opp. draft pick info, but wondering if it should have it's own sheet or if having it in the one sheet works better.

I'm also working on plugging in players to the block to help with cap calculations.

Let me know what you guys think...Thanks.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NT3SLtapzH5b0PqvuuItIL0TYfDX3wKaDkIoMjyuHJM/edit#gid=1155226826

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...