CSBC Financials

[Bobbob1313]

Fine. I'm not talking about that. That's fine if everyone can do it this year. But what about next year. It's not fair if an owner can continue to do this every year and run with an $80 million payroll while trading away just one player every year. That's what I don't think is fair.

Why? It all comes back to the fact that anyone who wants to run with an $80 million payroll has the opportunity. There is nothing inherently unfair about it. Eventually if you keep trying to resign people and sign free agents, it's going to go above $80 million anyways, and you're going to have to get rid of people.

It's not like it's some huge advantage. If anything, the only teams who will likely take advantage of it are teams with limited payroll flexibility like me. this isn't giving me any advantage in signing free agents. If anything, it limits my flexibility by allowing me to keep together a roster that is already making a lot of money. If I had gotten rid of my higher paid guys for cost controlled ones I would be in better shape for payroll going forward. It's not really an advantage except it allows me to keep this specific team together.

[Mainge]

I was just unaware of this rule where you can trade a player and carry an $80 million cap, that's why I was confused. And I'm still not sure I like it unless there is a stipulation that, if you choose to do it, you can't do it again for another 2-5 years. Otherwise, you could have a team do this year after year after year to get the better paid, generally more talented players and basically allowing himself to continue to field a better team than everyone else because of the higher salary cap he would have every year. I'm not saying Bobbob would do this but this rule could be abused. It also could be a little bit of collusion if this happened with two buddy owners agreeing to do it every year.

I think you're getting too hung up with the extra 5m in cap space. Look at it as a trade for cash considerations. He traded away a piece for 5 million. Its not unfair. Anyone can do it.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

It defeats the point of having a salary cap set at $75 million if you're allowed to go over it every year. Why not just set it at $80 million flat then? That's my point. I don't like things that could lead to people cheating and providing an unfair advantage on the field. That's my concern.

[Mainge]

I do not see how this is unfair and/or cheating. he gave up an asset to meet the restriction. If he wants to do it again, he'll have to give up another asset in the following year, as well as find someone with the cap space to pull it off. Its very easy to understand and I'm baffled that it's an issue.

[CrimsonCane]

It defeats the point of having a salary cap set at $75 million if you're allowed to go over it every year. Why not just set it at $80 million flat then? That's my point. I don't like things that could lead to people cheating and providing an unfair advantage on the field. That's my concern.

IT'S NOT CHEATING OR GIVING AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE IF EVERYONE ELSE CAN DO IT TOO!!!

Each player has an expected value (how much you pay him vs. how much you'd have to pay a free agent for similar production). If Bobbob (for the purposes of this discussion) keeps trading young prospects for veteran talent that only stays for 1 yr, he's possibly sacrificing years of benefit for short term, single season gain. Also, the more teams that do it, the higher the price will be for those cash considerations. So, instead of complaining, think strategically and ask yourself how you can possibly benefit from this. By remaining under the cap, you have a valuable asset that you can play and exploit teams over the cap who are desperate for an extra $5 mil. Consider it like buying a prospect outright for $5 million. If the prospect develops, there is no way you don't get your money's worth.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

Let me try to explain why I don't think this is fair because, apparrently, you guys are misunderstanding me.

To me, the salary cap should be used as just that, a cap. It should be firm and if you are at risk of going over it, as Bobbob did, you should have to do something to get yourself under the salary cap, not go out and give up a prospect that may bust and may not even be on a major league team to allow yourself to keep all your players. Sure, you may not want to lose any of your players but every other team in the league managed to come in under the salary cap without a problem so it can be done. The point is that everyone would have the same maximum amount of money to use, period.

I don't care that anyone can do it. That's not the point. The point is that it creates disparity in the league because there is at least one team out there that has potentially better players than the others, while someone else, although of their own volition, is running a team at only $70 million. If you want to run a Marlins-style team where you have a bunch of prospects and are running a $35 million payroll, that's your choice. But teams shouldn't be allowed to have the advantage of being able to trade an unknown that could turn into nothing so he can field a better team this year. And then be allowed to do the same thing over year, after year, after year.

This brings me to where the cheating may come from. Suppose one owner wants to keep his payroll low for a while so he strikes a deal with a friend that he'll float him the $5 million salary cap bump for a few years and they'll work together to get the guy over the salary cap the best players while the guy under the cap just stocks up on some top notch prospects that the guy over the cap was stockpiling. Then, a few years later, these two strike a deal to reverse the scenario now that the prospects that the guy with the lower salary cap have gotten to the point where they are really good and now he needs the salary cap room. So they reverse the cycle and just keep repeating it. Do you not see a problem with that? Setting the cap firm at $75 million or saying that, if you decide to trade for the salary cap bump, then you are exempt from doing it again for another couple of years would prevent this problem.

[nny]

But teams shouldn't be allowed to have the advantage of being able to trade an unknown that could turn into nothing so he can field a better team this year. And then be allowed to do the same thing over year, after year, after year.

So what you're saying is, we should put a league wide ban on trading prospects for veterans?

[Bobbob1313]

Are we really worried about collusion?

Nny and I have very different ideas on how to build an OOTP team. He likes prospects and upside, I like guys who are more surefire bets to perform now. That's the reason I came in well over the salary cap. I see guys that were undervalued and who are likely to outperform others right now, so I went with them, despite their high salaries.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

So what you're saying is, we should put a league wide ban on trading prospects for veterans?

No, that's not what I'm saying. But trading a prospect for $5 million so you can keep a better team on the field than the rest of the league is what I'm worried about. I just want the TALENT ON THE FIELD to be even and I don't want there to be a possibility for people to start cheating.

[Bobbob1313]

It's literally a difference of $3 million. I was at $78 million before the trade. If you really think the difference between Greg Maddux and some random 5th starter making the minimum is the difference between this league being competitive and me winning every game then we can undo the trade.

I think you're being pretty ridiculous, personally, with this, but if you're really going to keep complaining about 6% of the cap being fluid, then we can redo it.

Also, the talent on the field will never be even. That'd be boring. And $5 million either way isn't going to change that.

It's not like I can just keep doing it. It's a one time thing.

[PitchingWinsGames]

The thing is, if you want to keep inflating your cap space... you'll have to sell prospect(s) to do it...

Think about that, it's not like you're just getting cap space for nothing, and besides... if we really want to attack salary cap philosophies... look at the NBA/NFL, "Franchised" players, mid-level exceptions and so on and so forth... loading contracts with signing bonus vs contract... this is just like that.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

If you don't think the difference between Greg Maddux and some random 5th starter making the minimum is that big of a difference, why didn't you just do that? You wanted to keep the higher paid, known commodity than role the dice on the cheaper guy.

I just don't like grey areas in rules. To me, rules should be firm. They shouldn't have loopholes in them that allow for the possibility for teams to start cheating. Again, I'm not saying that's what you did but the possibility is there.

[Bobbob1313]

This isn't going to keep collusion from happening. Everything you're saying can happen without this $5 million of fluid cap space. If people want to cheat, they'll cheat regardless of this. There is no grey area here. You can trade for $5 million at the most each season. That is it. There is 0 grey area, and there is no more chance for cheating in this than in the game itself. If you're worried about people cheating, this shouldn't change that.

[penis34]

If you don't think the difference between Greg Maddux and some random 5th starter making the minimum is that big of a difference, why didn't you just do that? You wanted to keep the higher paid, known commodity than role the dice on the cheaper guy.

I just don't like grey areas in rules. To me, rules should be firm. They shouldn't have loopholes in them that allow for the possibility for teams to start cheating. Again, I'm not saying that's what you did but the possibility is there.

Sad thought. If I were Mbaamin08 and I said the same thing, alot of you would be jumping down my throat.

On a side thought, I agree with Mbaa, the cap should be firm--with no grey area. You work with what you have, and if you can't make it work, trade to get under.

Just the way I see it. It is a advantage to work with 5 million more in cap. 5 Million in this league will make a big difference with such a low cap number.

[Bobbob1313]

If I were Mbaamin08 and I said the same thing, alot of you would be jumping down my throat.

Climb down off the fucking cross, it's getting really old.