|
Post by Bryce - Minny on Jan 24, 2012 15:29:06 GMT -5
And now, my recommendations, to be discussed, and ultimately decided by Jesse/Gareth.
1. IMMEDIATE - 23 man pro roster limit (min 20) 2. Ensure we enforce paying full salary in farm for players over 1.5 million
3. Next season - 50 man player limit 4. No waiver draft - but again, discuss and decide 5. No minimum salary
|
|
|
Post by Bruins GM on Jan 24, 2012 18:14:29 GMT -5
The simplest way to keep "high end" talent from being stashed on the farm is to turn OV ratings back on in the system. Anyone with, say, 66 OV and better (higher) becomes ineligible for the farm. The OV level can be negotiated at the beginning of every season if necessary or just keep it fixed. I believe the Sim will automatically prevent players from being moved to the farm if their OV is too high.
Or we bring back the salary limit. The 1.5 mill rule worked for years. It was only when it was removed that people began stashing the higher end talent on the farm. I know the Sim has the maximum salary setting for farm players.
These are two easy fixes that the Sim can monitor leaving less for Jessie and Gareth and Bryce to have to worry about.
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Jan 24, 2012 18:34:47 GMT -5
I've got an idea that could work.
We already use player agents for RFA's. We could use the same type of system for players going to the farm.
It's obviously something that would need a few details ironed out but would stop star players from being buried in the farm as you'd need to explain why your making the move. Just saying we're tanking or cap issues isn't a very valid reason but maybe there could be some allowances for conditioning stints or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks on Jan 25, 2012 9:03:57 GMT -5
And now, my recommendations, to be discussed, and ultimately decided by Jesse/Gareth. 4. No waiver draft - but again, discuss and decide I truly believe a waiver draft can help balance out the teams and prevent GMs from placing decent talent on the farm at the start of each season. The proof is evident within the BRHL2. If it helps with the decision, I would be willing to co-ordinate with the league and run it next offseason.
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks on Jan 25, 2012 9:41:08 GMT -5
And now, my recommendations, to be discussed, and ultimately decided by Jesse/Gareth. 1. IMMEDIATE - 23 man pro roster limit (min 20) I noticed V2 removes players from the payroll when they are injured for extended periods. Would there be allowances for rosters over the player maximum due to long-term injury call-ups?
|
|
|
Post by B-Hawks on Jan 25, 2012 12:35:27 GMT -5
You guys are missing a bit of the point with the 1.5 million on the farm thing.
Philly never followed proper procedure to put these players on the farm so them being there was invalid. A thread would be made on the main forum stating said player is on waivers and teams would have 2 days to claim them. I think, of the players with 1.5 million and above salaries who have been attempted to be moved to the farm, at least half have been claimed on waivers by other teams.
I don't see the need to set any limits. If you want to stash a player on the farm and you expose him to waivers and nobody else claims him, you should be allowed to do what you want with said player. Having 13+ million of salary on the farm will not do your team any favours at all.
|
|
|
Post by B-Hawks on Jan 25, 2012 14:44:31 GMT -5
This may be my last post here because this league has become a joke. It seems like we've got a handful of active GM's and some of the active one's seem to like making a joke of the league by stashing high end NHL quality players on the farm or by trading recently signed UFA's. I'd say bring in some new GM's that have some integrity but, clearly, that's hard to do since we've just hired some new GM's but where the hell are they? Carolina? LA? Probably a couple more there too. As far as I'm concerned, this is the last straw, if things don't start to improve here soon, you might as well find a new GM for the Jets. That's how it goes with new GM's. How many were replaced in the offseason? 6 or so.. 50% success rate is about right. We've removed Carolina and LA.. had a replacement for LA but he hasn't done as requested in terms of posting and such yet so I don't know what's going on there... Some other longer term GM's are close to going as well. Dallas is done if I don't hear back by the weekend.
|
|
|
Post by Rubber_Duck on Jan 25, 2012 15:11:06 GMT -5
I'm also going to modify the loophole so that any player sent to the minors making more than $1.5 million must pass through waivers regardless of games played.
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Jan 25, 2012 15:52:07 GMT -5
You guys are missing a bit of the point with the 1.5 million on the farm thing. Philly never followed proper procedure to put these players on the farm so them being there was invalid. A thread would be made on the main forum stating said player is on waivers and teams would have 2 days to claim them. I think, of the players with 1.5 million and above salaries who have been attempted to be moved to the farm, at least half have been claimed on waivers by other teams. I don't see the need to set any limits. If you want to stash a player on the farm and you expose him to waivers and nobody else claims him, you should be allowed to do what you want with said player. Having 13+ million of salary on the farm will not do your team any favours at all.That doesn't stop GM's from signing 20+ mil contracts in the off-season. And not enough GM's care about money to make paying the full salary a punishment. ie the Blues will be bankrupt after this season paying all of Brunette's contract. Forcing a player who signed a 20+ million dollar contract per year to stay on the pro roster would 110% make GM's think twice about signing them in the off-season. Seeing players making that kind of money makes you look bad and also makes the league look bad. I'm not sure how people were even allowed to do this.
|
|
|
Post by Bruins GM on Jan 25, 2012 17:47:47 GMT -5
Jessie, it's all good until you have to do the work to monitor salaries and track payrolls etc. Unless the Sim can do it for you, why subject yourself to extra work and added stress? sths.simont.info/ManualV2_En.phpFarm Salary % - enter the percent of the salary a player makes while he's playing on the farm Farm Player Pay As Pro After X Games - enter the amount of pro games a player has to play before he is paid his full pro salary regardless of him playing in the pros or on the farm. Enter 0 to disable this option These are the only two options for changing farm salaries. We currently pay our farm players 10% of pro salaries. There is no manual adjustments to selectively get players to be paid at full pro salaries. It is either all or none. Or you use the second option and make the any pro player who has played X number of pro game to be paid full salary regardless of where they play. This becomes sticky though when injuries require call-ups from the farm. Why should teams have to pay career minor leaguers at full salary if they get called up and exceed their limit if games played while filling in for an injured player? Any other option requires manually tracking salaries. I'm going to suggest now that manually tracking salaries blows and you simply won't be able to keep up. Even if we had a dedicated salary tracker, it's more work than is needed. IMO, the best and easiest option is: Maximum Farm Overall - enter in the maximum OV (overall) rating a player on the farm team may be allowed to have Turn the OV ratings back on, set a limit we can all live with, problem solved. Less work for you = a happier simmer. High OV players should be kept on the Pro Roster. If someone has been dumb enough to overpay for a low OV player and they want to move that player to the farm, then I guess it's not a deal breaker if it happens. I thought the purpose of salary limts for farm players was to keep people from over-paying for marginal players. With a max farm salary, you can't hide dumb mistakes on the farm. You have to think twice about paying $4 million for some low OV knuckle-dragger. Anyways, my vote is to keep things as simple and idiot-proof as possible. There are ways we can do this with the Sim. Choosing to do things that require extra work and have the potential to be overly complicated doesn't make sense to me. - Chris (Simmer for the CNGHL where I love to keep things simple! )
|
|
|
Post by Wade - Rangers on Jan 25, 2012 18:36:49 GMT -5
Makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by B-Hawks on Jan 25, 2012 22:27:13 GMT -5
And now, my recommendations, to be discussed, and ultimately decided by Jesse/Gareth. 1. IMMEDIATE - 23 man pro roster limit (min 20)2. Ensure we enforce paying full salary in farm for players over 1.5 million 3. Next season - 50 man player limit 4. No waiver draft - but again, discuss and decide 5. No minimum salary Changed to 23 man limit in the sim so new files will reflect that.
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks on Jan 26, 2012 8:55:54 GMT -5
You guys are missing a bit of the point with the 1.5 million on the farm thing. Philly never followed proper procedure to put these players on the farm so them being there was invalid. A thread would be made on the main forum stating said player is on waivers and teams would have 2 days to claim them. I think, of the players with 1.5 million and above salaries who have been attempted to be moved to the farm, at least half have been claimed on waivers by other teams. I don't see the need to set any limits. If you want to stash a player on the farm and you expose him to waivers and nobody else claims him, you should be allowed to do what you want with said player. Having 13+ million of salary on the farm will not do your team any favours at all.ie the Blues will be bankrupt after this season paying all of Brunette's contract. Technically, Brunette will only be paid 10% of that salary listed on the farm. That's why his salary was increased when he was sent to the farm in the first place. I do however both understand and agree with your point.
|
|
|
Post by B-Hawks on Jan 26, 2012 10:55:08 GMT -5
You guys are missing a bit of the point with the 1.5 million on the farm thing. Philly never followed proper procedure to put these players on the farm so them being there was invalid. A thread would be made on the main forum stating said player is on waivers and teams would have 2 days to claim them. I think, of the players with 1.5 million and above salaries who have been attempted to be moved to the farm, at least half have been claimed on waivers by other teams. I don't see the need to set any limits. If you want to stash a player on the farm and you expose him to waivers and nobody else claims him, you should be allowed to do what you want with said player. Having 13+ million of salary on the farm will not do your team any favours at all.That doesn't stop GM's from signing 20+ mil contracts in the off-season. And not enough GM's care about money to make paying the full salary a punishment. ie the Blues will be bankrupt after this season paying all of Brunette's contract. Forcing a player who signed a 20+ million dollar contract per year to stay on the pro roster would 110% make GM's think twice about signing them in the off-season. Seeing players making that kind of money makes you look bad and also makes the league look bad. I'm not sure how people were even allowed to do this. Money is very important though. It's not like you can run a team into bankruptcy without consequences. You aren't that likely to stick around if that happens, and, at the very least you'll have a hell of a time signing free agents since you can't pay them signing bonuses.
|
|
|
Post by atlantagm on Jan 26, 2012 19:09:55 GMT -5
Yeah, money is important. But, what usually happens is the GM disappears/quits and the team is left with immovable contracts and no money in the bank, leaving the team undesirable and the team sits with no GM forever. Not exactly in the best interest of the league in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Vancouver Canucks on Jan 27, 2012 9:02:21 GMT -5
Yeah, money is important. But, what usually happens is the GM disappears/quits and the team is left with immovable contracts and no money in the bank, leaving the team undesirable and the team sits with no GM forever. Not exactly in the best interest of the league in my opinion. All part of the challenge if you ask me. I've taken over two teams now in the BRHL universe and both were in dire need of assistance. Rebuilding can be daunting but not impossible. It seems the real challenge is in finding dedicated GMs who are willing to work at it and not just looking for a quick fix.
|
|
|
Post by REX LEAK - PHILLY on Jan 27, 2012 16:45:13 GMT -5
Not to mention new GMs get their finances reset and $10 million added to their account.
|
|
|
Post by B-Hawks on Jan 29, 2012 10:32:43 GMT -5
So do people think we should scrap the 1.5 million rule then? Nobody really spoke out against it in the summer. Wouldn't happen until the offseason of course though.
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Jan 29, 2012 20:03:16 GMT -5
I think we should re-work that in the off-season.
As long as we are enforcing the rule for the remainder of the year, as I said the Blues will be bankrupt next year after paying all of Brunette's contract.
|
|
|
Post by B-Hawks on Jan 29, 2012 20:25:05 GMT -5
I think we should re-work that in the off-season. As long as we are enforcing the rule for the remainder of the year, as I said the Blues will be bankrupt next year after paying all of Brunette's contract. No.. farm players are paid at 10% hence why I add a zero to the contract. They are only paying him 2.75 million in reality.
|
|
|
Post by Wade - Rangers on Jan 29, 2012 21:40:21 GMT -5
I think it would be reasonable to give whomever is leading the league a 'common sense' policy, where if a team is very obviously tanking and abusing rules, that league leader (commissioner?) would have the right to first warn them, and then impose penalties if the offending GMs aren't approaching the league in good faith.
Unless we decide that this is a min/maxing league where such behavior is acceptable. But it seems we've already lost one GM over the issue.
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Jan 30, 2012 8:13:18 GMT -5
I think we should re-work that in the off-season. As long as we are enforcing the rule for the remainder of the year, as I said the Blues will be bankrupt next year after paying all of Brunette's contract. No.. farm players are paid at 10% hence why I add a zero to the contract. They are only paying him 2.75 million in reality. "If a player with a contract worth more than 1.5 million is sent to the farm, that player will be paid their full contract. No 10% like players making less. " This is the rule quoted directly from the rules section, what your telling me is we aren't enforcing this? Why? Teams knew this in the off-season, they chose to still sign monster contracts or bury big contracts on the farm. IMO we need to either enforce this rule or revoke the rule and players making 1.5+ mil can't go to the farm. We can't ignore it and leave it with no regulations.
|
|
|
Post by Rubber_Duck on Jan 30, 2012 14:16:24 GMT -5
No.. farm players are paid at 10% hence why I add a zero to the contract. They are only paying him 2.75 million in reality. "If a player with a contract worth more than 1.5 million is sent to the farm, that player will be paid their full contract. No 10% like players making less. " This is the rule quoted directly from the rules section, what your telling me is we aren't enforcing this? Why? Teams knew this in the off-season, they chose to still sign monster contracts or bury big contracts on the farm. IMO we need to either enforce this rule or revoke the rule and players making 1.5+ mil can't go to the farm. We can't ignore it and leave it with no regulations. Let me clear this up. Brunette was signed to a $2.75 million dollar contract (not $27.5 million as it shows on the index). However, when a player is in the minors, he makes 10% of his contract. To make sure that Brunette is paid his $2.75 million, Jesse has to edit Brunette's salary to $27.5 million in order for Brunette to make his $2.75 million.
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Jan 30, 2012 20:16:59 GMT -5
Ah, so that's how they are paying the full salary. Didn't know.
so what is the purposed change for next season?
|
|