|
Post by EWD 330 on Sept 26, 2014 16:58:26 GMT -5
I believe the guy I drafted, Jacob Cornelius (no relation to Don) is a good example of what you are asking iain.
|
|
|
Post by themojoking on Sept 26, 2014 17:11:22 GMT -5
If Cornelius is an example, a pre-existing contract, then there is no issue. His contract is what it is. The rule is in place for contracts that WE are offering.
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Sept 26, 2014 23:23:19 GMT -5
If Cornelius is an example, a pre-existing contract, then there is no issue. His contract is what it is. The rule is in place for contracts that WE are offering. That is exactly correct.
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Sept 27, 2014 20:08:02 GMT -5
Regarding the signing of players that will not enable an owner to meet the budget guidelines, I would suggest a penalty that is in line with the current budget penalties. For example, 10 win penalty per million not within the rules. This issue is a bit tricky, as it affects two franchises. The one drafting and the player's original franchise. What I've decided is IF this occurs, the pick will be IMMEDIATELY nullified, and the owner will simply need to make another selection ASAP. The draft will NOT stop because of the owner's oversight, and the player involved in the nullified pick may certainly be selected by another owner.
|
|
|
Post by iain on Sept 29, 2014 8:26:20 GMT -5
I'd like rock to give an example of the kind of misstep (or active flaunting of the rules) he is thinking of... because I can see a few way where someone might just lack foresight, rather than any active maliciousness.
|
|
|
Post by rockindock on Sept 29, 2014 8:34:05 GMT -5
I was replying to mchales site mail.
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Sept 29, 2014 12:56:20 GMT -5
I'd like rock to give an example of the kind of misstep (or active flaunting of the rules) he is thinking of... because I can see a few way where someone might just lack foresight, rather than any active maliciousness. I was replying to mchales site mail. Right. I have been sending out an updated "franchise payroll analysis", after the pick has been made. Since you haven't made a pick you have not yet received one. In part, that sitemail reads: " I will try to send this out at some point after your pick for each round.
If an owner went bare minimum in every category, the MAX payroll budget attainable in S24 is $133M.
You need to be aware of the figure at the end, and make sure you do not draft players that will put you over the payroll budget.
This will be especially critical the deeper into the draft we get, but I wanted everyone to get use to seeing these and to get any questions out of the way earlier rather than later". Then after some individual team details. " We should probably also discuss how we want to handle such an oversight. IOW, IF an owner drafts a player in the later rounds that would put him over the 133M". rockindock was simply posting a reply to that last part, which asked for a discussion about the possibility. I think my solution is fair & adequate. I've re-posted that decision below: What I've decided is IF this occurs, the pick will be IMMEDIATELY nullified, and the owner will simply need to make another selection ASAP. The draft will NOT stop because of the owner's oversight, and the player involved in the nullified pick may certainly be selected by another owner.
|
|
|
Post by kahrtmen on Sept 29, 2014 18:46:39 GMT -5
We also will need to look ahead for next season, since the payroll limit is lower.
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Sept 29, 2014 23:21:51 GMT -5
We also will need to look ahead for next season, since the payroll limit is lower. How so? It should be adjustable higher or lower depending on owner preference.
|
|
|
Post by kahrtmen on Sept 30, 2014 0:11:29 GMT -5
Meaning that if your payroll limit is 100m in s24, it is only 80m for s25 during season 24 (until the following season, when you can change it to whatever you want).
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Sept 30, 2014 0:24:58 GMT -5
Meaning that if your payroll limit is 100m in s24, it is only 80m for s25 during season 24 (until the following season, when you can change it to whatever you want). Ah, for trade screen. Wonder how that will play out?
|
|
|
Post by bjschumacher on Oct 2, 2014 8:36:16 GMT -5
Two questions on what will happen when we move into round 3:
1. When we get to the end of round 2, are we supposed to wait at that point until you give the go-ahead to proceed with round 3? Or do we just go ahead and continue moving? 2. Are we going to use the set time slots that you published? Or are we going to have 30 minute time limits from the time the previous owner posted their pick?
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Oct 2, 2014 12:33:04 GMT -5
Two questions on what will happen when we move into round 3: 1. When we get to the end of round 2, are we supposed to wait at that point until you give the go-ahead to proceed with round 3? Or do we just go ahead and continue moving? 2. Are we going to use the set time slots that you published? Or are we going to have 30 minute time limits from the time the previous owner posted their pick? 1. I say we continue on as is. We are making pretty decent time and I feel like we can have an un-timed round three at least. 2. That is something we can also work out as we move along. I'd rather not be on such a tight schedule, but it MAY become necessary if we start getting sluggish. The city draft went awesomely fast IMO. The first round is really not something we can judge, because we started early and then had a few days of down time in the middle. I don't think we have enough information to make a decision at this time. Rounds two and three SHOULD give us a better idea of what kind of pace this group can really keep. AT NO TIME DOES ANYONE HAVE TO STOP AND WAIT. Even if we decide to go to a schedule, the guys who are up can continue plugging away as is, until we decide on how tight of a schedule we want/need. What we will do is count on having an un-timed round three. At the end of round 3, tmfran will post picks 96 and 97, starting round 4. Owners will continue picking as we have been doing, and I will, at that time, take a poll and see how everyone is feeling about the pace through the first three rounds. AGAIN, we will be conducting the poll WHILE continuing to move forward drafting at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Oct 2, 2014 12:56:31 GMT -5
I'd also encourage the use of proxy picks even during these un-timed rounds.
The purpose of these rounds are simply to ensure no one gets skipped. Once we go to a schedule, owners will start getting skipped, and I'd like to avoid that happening if at all possible.
I certainly hope I am correct on this, but I feel like soxfan_9 will not get offended if I use him for an example here.
He just posted "Just a heads up I may not be able to make my pick until after 7pm est. I'm still a few away though".
He is up in two picks. RisingStar1 should be picking at any time, then soxfan_9 will be "on deck".
In this case I would like to see soxfan_9, in addition to posting the heads up, also send a 3 player list to kahrtmen or topoftheworl right now.
If everyone can get into this frame of mind I think we could make better time and stay un-timed longer.
IMO 3 picks away is PERFECT for using a proxy. I am 7 picks out. I will be at work until Midnight. I am not going to send that long of a list to anyone. But if it is only two or three, I'm always going to send one before I leave.
I would suggest everyone have a top 10, a top 5, or at least a top 3, and update it regularly. This way you are sitting on go at all times.
|
|
|
Q&A Area
Oct 2, 2014 13:34:14 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Soxfan_9 on Oct 2, 2014 13:34:14 GMT -5
I know the reason to use proxy's lol. But the way the last few picks went, making who I wanted to pick difficult for me, I want to make sure I make the pick that is best for me. Untimed round so reason why I didn't think it would be a big deal. I mean I went to sleep and nothing had changed. Lol.
|
|
|
Q&A Area
Oct 2, 2014 13:34:51 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Soxfan_9 on Oct 2, 2014 13:34:51 GMT -5
And obviously I have internet access but I'm just on my phone.
|
|
|
Post by GURU on Oct 2, 2014 13:51:44 GMT -5
personally if we get to a timed part of rounds i would suggest using common sense. EVERYONE IN THIS WORLD HAS ANOTHER WORLD GUARANTEED! common sense. when a pick is made the next guy has 24hrs to make that pick. if person A picks at 2:34pm on a monday then the next guy has until 2:34pm on tusday to get his pick in. the world will see who it is and if a pick isnt made then the next guy can make his pick. if the guy that makes his pick at 2:34pm and person B gets his pick in at 8:12pm then person C has until 8:12pm the next day. This whole 30-60min time windows is a joke really and on top of that u really wont need a proxy either
|
|
|
Post by mchales_army on Oct 2, 2014 13:58:13 GMT -5
I know the reason to use proxy's lol. But the way the last few picks went, making who I wanted to pick difficult for me, I want to make sure I make the pick that is best for me. Untimed round so reason why I didn't think it would be a big deal. I mean I went to sleep and nothing had changed. Lol. Sure. No problem. I just wanted to get everyone in the habit and would strongly encourage a top 10 that is regularly updated. Even though I do this, there have been times when, like you describe, based on the picks that just went in rapid succession, I may delete my entire top 10 and make a brand new one. Just tossing ideas out to get everyone thinking about it. I certainly want to encourage owners to be making the pick that is best for them. I wasn't even upset when mirky took 10 hours to just finally say "I'm going to sleep on it". That's fine because although it slowed everything down, it was the most important and franchise shaping decision and I'd rather everyone feel good about their choices. Obviously we will have to eventually balance the desired warm fuzzy feelings with the reality of time and see where we are after round three.
|
|
|
Post by rockindock on Oct 2, 2014 17:17:46 GMT -5
I want to make sure of this rule. I can offer a 5 year deal this season with an option. Is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by kahrtmen on Oct 2, 2014 17:56:17 GMT -5
Yes, as long as it is not a player option.
|
|