Login

BarnabasCollins · 01-09-2017, 05:12 PM

Heck Allen may tell me to fuck off and I'll be a free agent

ThatDamnWalrus · 01-09-2017, 05:14 PM

I vote no on everything besides the additional contract tiers and collapsing managerial into a flat 70m cap.

Hallsy · 01-09-2017, 05:16 PM

i dont get why the league is making all these changes tbh

HO should be looking into how to inject activity into the forums, have bigger recruitments, maybe have a better site than a fuckin salary cap issue which has been working perfectly fine for ages and really isn't a issue.

Phobospwns · 01-09-2017, 05:16 PM

Quote:Originally posted by belgarat@Jan 9 2017, 04:12 PM
Heck Allen may tell me to fuck off and I'll be a free agent

Kinda hoping he does.

JK, <3 you.

MWHazard · 01-09-2017, 05:16 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Brandon@Jan 9 2017, 01:08 PM

To me this is about preventing future problem contracts, I don't think it's fair to teams right now that have their budgets planned around their current contracts to all of a sudden have an extra $7M dropped on them because of contracts they did not agree to.

Re: teams changing contracts to get around this before it takes effect, why not put a ban on altering contracts until changes have been finalized? Prevents any shady behind door alterations.

I think it's fair given that we're having these dicussions publicly and working on a collaborative solution. As with any policy decision, its likely some will be worse off, and some will be better off. Pareto-improving solutions are rare.

As to your second point, a freeze on extensions and free agency sure ties things up for the sake of this whole thing, and makes the league less fun. Plenty of GMs have extensions they want to do and FAs to sign. I'm not sure I'd be supportive of such a measure.

Brandon · 01-09-2017, 05:16 PM

Quote:Originally posted by belgarat@Jan 9 2017, 04:11 PM

Thats' why there is a season before it happens and buyouts during that offseason to mitigate those effects.

I understand that, but I still don't think it's fair to force teams to deconstruct a core that they've played fair up to this point to receive. I know the elephant in the room is the Selich contract, so I'm gonna use that as an example - I don't think it's fair for us to have to compromise to keep players in our core that we've worked hard to put together, and we've done so under the current set of rules. Just about every one of these changes I'm in favor of, heck I myself have been calling for length caps and more tiers for a while now, but I think it's an unfair handcuff to teams to have to compromise their current core and be punished for not breaking any rules up to this point.

ThatDamnWalrus · 01-09-2017, 05:17 PM

Quote:Originally posted by ThatDamnMcJesus@Jan 9 2017, 04:16 PM
i dont get why the league is making all these changes tbh

HO should be looking into how to inject activity into the forums, have bigger recruitments, maybe have a better site than a fuckin salary cap issue which has been working perfectly fine for ages and really isn't a issue.

Eggy216 · 01-09-2017, 05:19 PM

Quote:Originally posted by CRUTCHFIELD@Jan 9 2017, 03:15 PM
[b]Section 0 - Salary Cap
Starting with S34:
Management budget will be folded into the existing salary cap, for a total budget of $70M per team. Minor League Budget will remain unaffected for the time being.[/b]

I don't know if I fully understand the reasoning behind this? Not for/against it, just not sure why this is necessary or desired.

Quote:[b]Section 1 - New Contract Rules
Starting in S33 (all contracts signed from the time of announcement must be in compliance with this):[/b]

Sure.

Quote:[b]1.1) Addition of a new salary cap tier, such that:
</li>

Tier 5 = 1000-1299 TPE (4 mil)

Tier 6 = 1300+ TPE (5 mil)

1.2) Maximum Contract Lengths based on existing contract tiers
</li>

Tiers 1-4: 3 seasons maximum

Tiers 5-6: No maximum length

It is illegal to circumvent the salary cap. Head office holds the right to determine if there is possible cap circumvention, and to take actions accordingly. If you are unsure if what you are doing may break any rules then you should message us first to ask.[/b]

New tier, great. I didn't like the idea of a tier above 13 (that is to say making a tier that was 13-15 and one that's 15+ or something) because honestly I would have just stopped at 15 if it would've made my contract go up lol, but a new tier above 13 is fine.

I also wonder here if it might make more sense to cap tier 5 contract lengths as well if you're going to cap contract lengths, because if not it still allows for cap circumvention.

Quote:[b]1.3) The Hometown discount is eliminated[/b]

I'd kind of like to see this kept in some more limited way, honestly, so that vets who really don't need the money can take a pay cut to allow younger players who need the money more to get it. I'm sitting here with 155M in the bank, I don't need 5M a year.

Quote:[b]1.4) Released or Retiring Players
Current active and inactive release penalties apply. Note: "Active" and "inactive" contracts are defined at the time the contract is signed.

If a player retires before their contract is finished, their team will take a cap hit each season equal to 1/3 of the player's salary for that season.[/b]

This is a terrible idea in a league that doesn't use an AAV (if I missed the fact that we're moving to an AAV system then forgive me, I can write up reasons why I wouldn't want to see that instead Tongue

). Since we have a cap on contract lengths anyway there's really no reason to have this as well.

Quote:[b]Section 2 - Existing Contract Adjustments
One time only, during the offseason between S33 and S34:

2.1) All contracts will be brought in compliance with the new standards.

2.2) Contracts that are under the minimum value for the player's current tier will be adjusted up to the minimum salary commensurate with TPE level. Contracts that already exceed the minimum for the current salary tier will NOT be adjusted.

2.3) Contracts with remaining term that exceeds the maximum length for their adjusted salary will have their term adjusted to the maximum. (Example: If a player's salary is adjusted to $3M and they have 8 seasons remaining, their contract is adjusted to 3 seasons remaining as that is the maximum for a Tier 4 contract.) Contracts with less than maximum term remaining are not adjusted.

Note: TPE for contract adjustment is based on all TPE EARNED prior to the updating week during which the SHL playoffs conclude (including Championship Week PTs even if they are not tabulated until after the conclusion of that updating week). It does not matter when this TPE is claimed in an update thread, if it is earned before the final game of the playoffs it counts toward the contract adjustments.[/b]

If you're going to make these changes, then yeah fine.

One question I'd have on this would be whether people who are in tier 5 can just sign for tier 4 value at whatever term? Because right now if people are signed for, say, $2M, will they have a grace period where they can sign longer term at the tier 4 level to compensate for the change? (I may have phrased this terribly, let me know if I did and I can try to say this more clearly).

Quote:[b]Section 3 - Compliance Buyouts & Long Contracts
One time only, during the offseason between S33 and S34:

3.1) Compliance buyouts are available for GMs who feel they are necessary in order to manage these changes for their teams. Compliance buyouts will only be available in the offseason between S33 and S34 - players may be notified before the start of the offseason that they are being bought out, but they will count against the team's cap until the beginning of S33. Compliance buyouts will no longer be available once the S34 has begun. Players bought out in this fashion will not incur any ongoing penalty for their team, but are not eligible to be re-signed by that team until the following offseason (S35).

3.2) Contracts with remaining legal term greater than 5 seasons may be reduced to 5 seasons, if both player and GM agree to the change.[/b]

Is there any limit on compliance buyouts? Or is it just limited by the number of players you have on your roster? No opinion on that, just a question.

I do like the ability to change length if player and GM desire, good call.

<hr>

There's the giant wall of text I couldn't post from my phone.

Phobospwns · 01-09-2017, 05:21 PM

Quote:Originally posted by ThatDamnMcJesus@Jan 9 2017, 04:16 PM
i dont get why the league is making all these changes tbh

HO should be looking into how to inject activity into the forums, have bigger recruitments, maybe have a better site than a fuckin salary cap issue which has been working perfectly fine for ages and really isn't a issue.

Maybe making the league more competitive by creating a functional salary cap system could create more activity?

I think it's exciting, the notion of discussing the decision team A made to keep player x over player y, and reading/writing about the notion that player y could to go team B, the impact that would have on that team and the league as a whole.

Sure beats another fuckin' repetitive presser for cash. The whole idea is to make it more interesting, and I hope it will.

prettyburn · 01-09-2017, 05:27 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Eggy Nog@Jan 9 2017, 04:19 PM
I don't know if I fully understand the reasoning behind this? Not for/against it, just not sure why this is necessary or desired.

Making management more relevent, mostly - it's more commonly just a weird side amount of cap space that currently can't be counted towards meeting minimums. It standardizes things and stops random distribution of money.

Quote:I also wonder here if it might make more sense to cap tier 5 contract lengths as well if you're going to cap contract lengths, because if not it still allows for cap circumvention.

$4M is so much higher than the current limit of $2M that I think we're just not super worried about it, honestly. We had discussed a middle tier of payments, and could possibly revisit if necessary.

Quote:I'd kind of like to see this kept in some more limited way, honestly, so that vets who really don't need the money can take a pay cut to allow younger players who need the money more to get it. I'm sitting here with 155M in the bank, I don't need 5M a year

We've had multiple discussions around this, and it just got brought up again, so something may come of it.

Quote:One question I'd have on this would be whether people who are in tier 5 can just sign for tier 4 value at whatever term? Because right now if people are signed for, say, $2M, will they have a grace period where they can sign longer term at the tier 4 level to compensate for the change? (I may have phrased this terribly, let me know if I did and I can try to say this more clearly).

Already answered, I think.

Quote:Is there any limit on compliance buyouts? Or is it just limited by the number of players you have on your roster? No opinion on that, just a question.

We talked about limiting it, but since the GM is effectively just losing a player and we expect it to be used primarily as a last resort we decided the limit was unnecessary.

ArGarBarGar · 01-09-2017, 05:27 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Steelhead77@Jan 9 2017, 04:11 PM
[b]DO NOT REMOVE HOMETOWN DISCOUNTS, PLEASE.

I made my point about it in this POST. I would hope the opinion of one of the longest tenured GM's would be taken into heavily consideration on this matter.

I voted NO on this.

Thank you.[/b]

I have asked for something that indicates people would be torn from their favorite teams because of this.

I have not seen it yet.

Alonzo Garbanzo Final Tallies (Among Defensemen):
2nd in Goals (208), All-Time Assists Leader (765)*, All-Time Points Leader (973), 3rd in Hits (2587), All-Time Blocked Shots Leader (1882)*
*All-Time Leader Among All Skaters
Player Profile | Update Thread
[Image: IeEV7Iv.png]

Baelor Swift · 01-09-2017, 05:28 PM

A poll literally means nothing here. If a poll prevents the league from fixing the single biggest issue we're dealing with right now (we need more competitive balance to make the league more exciting for everyone and to discourage tanking as the only method to create a good team if you don't have a good roster already), it's a complete failure. Regardless of the results of a poll.

.bojo · 01-09-2017, 05:30 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Baelor Swift@Jan 9 2017, 04:28 PM
A poll literally means nothing here. If a poll prevents the league from fixing the single biggest issue we're dealing with right now (we need more competitive balance to make the league more exciting for everyone and to discourage tanking as the only method to create a good team if you don't have a good roster already), it's a complete failure. Regardless of the results of a poll.

Poll is just to gauge the general interest of the proposal. And thanks to the feedback, we'll likely be axing the retirement penalty. HO will still vote regardless of how the polls go.

ThatDamnWalrus · 01-09-2017, 05:31 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Bojo@Jan 9 2017, 04:30 PM

Poll is just to gauge the general interest of the proposal. And thanks to the feedback, we'll likely be axing the retirement penalty. HO will still vote regardless of how the polls go.

New HO and still fucking with the league. Never change SHL.

Eggy216 · 01-09-2017, 05:33 PM

Quote:Originally posted by prettyburn@Jan 9 2017, 05:27 PM

Making management more relevent, mostly - it's more commonly just a weird side amount of cap space that currently can't be counted towards meeting minimums. It standardizes things and stops random distribution of money.

Tbh I always looked at the random distribution of money aspect of it to be a way to compensate for the fact that GMs can't give money to their players - that this was kind of the pool that took the place of that ability.

Quote:$4M is so much higher than the current limit of $2M that I think we're just not super worried about it, honestly. We had discussed a middle tier of payments, and could possibly revisit if necessary.

My thought is more having people at tier 5 signing long term to avoid hitting tier 6. That's still circumvention, isn't it?

Quote:We've had multiple discussions around this, and it just got brought up again, so something may come of it.

(In regards to hometown discount) good to hear, thanks.

Quote:Already answered, I think.

(In regards to tier 6s getting a chance to sign longer term at tier 5 with the restructure) I didn't see this if it was, do you know what the response was?

Quote:We talked about limiting it, but since the GM is effectively just losing a player and we expect it to be used primarily as a last resort we decided the limit was unnecessary.

Makes sense. Like I said, no opinion the buyouts was just asking for curiosity's sake.

Poll: Would you like to see these changes to the Salary system in the SHL? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes	0%	0	0%
No	0%	0	0%
Total		0 vote(s)	0%

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us