Buying Out the Contract of an EBA Player

[agrudez]

So, in light of the '09 version of the financial debate I'm trying to brainstorm some 'fun' and 'useful' ways to use the excess (currently useless) cash in the league's system. My first idea is the ability to 'buy-out' an existing contract of an EBA player at a specific point in the offseason (I think it would work best between the end of the regular season and FAs file) to give the buying team exclusive rights to sign the player for a specific period of time (which is why it would work best before FAs file, since at that point the contract-less player would be made a full-fledged MBBA FA).

The trick is making it both a 'tough' decision while not making it an 'impossible' one, so for a first cut I'd say a good number would be 50x the salary left on the player's EBA contract for an opening bid (and 20PP from the winning team of the bid, or something). Let's now take Sanguinacco as an example. I'm sure I'm not the only one out there that would LOVE the chance to sign this kid. He has 1 year left at 280K, so the STARTING bid would then be 14M. So, had this idea been implemented this season prior, the completion of the sim on 1/29 would be the first time a 'bid' could be placed (and I think an 'open' bid would be best - so the first team could just start a thread for the player's auction). FAs then wouldn't file until the 2/3 sim, so the 2/2 sim* would likely need to be the 'closing' time for the bid (to give the winning team a shot to sign the player before he opts for FA).

*And the schedule could potentially be massaged to better implement this idea if it were to be deemed something we’d like to use moving forward.

So, to extend the hypothetical further let's say I start the opening bid for Sanguinacco and get into a 'bidding war' with 2 other teams. I end up winning the bid by the 2/2 sim for 20M - so 20M and 20 PP (and nothing from the other teams) are deducted from me in the 2/2 sim and Sanguinacco is placed on my roster sans a contract. I then have that one sim to negotiate a contract with him (so I better not try and lowball!) before he files for full fledged FA in the 2/3 sim (and if that happens no compensation is made to me - I lose the 20M and 20 PP regardless... that is the risk you take in this process).

Bids for players with contracts through the 2010 season could be started as well, but the starting bid for a 280K salary would be 28M (50*2*280K), which means that these bids would be much less common (maybe some truly ELITE players would be sought after enough to warrant such a cash dump) – creating a naturally fluid flow of desirable players for auction each season.

Imo, this idea does 5 things that add to this league:
1) It is just flat out a fun idea… who wouldn’t love the drama of one of these auctions? And it is set up in such a way to make it very strategic since there is always the chance you can win the auction and still strike out on the player.

2) It could potentially artificially increase the FA pool each season from the plausibility of players not signing contracts with the auction winning team (after all, they only get 1 sim to negotiate – so it becomes a true ‘take it or leave it’ situation – for both sides) which I think is something everyone would enjoy.

3) It makes money semi-relevant. Some teams are approaching the 100M mark in cash on hand, so a 20M auction bid is a drop in the bucket for them (especially since most of those teams would recoup that the very next season anyway – particularly the elite teams pulling in extreme gate revenue + playoffs), but it is still a potential decision that could take some of that excess money out of the system.

4) It makes the EBA more relevant, like a true ‘feeder’ league. I know I’ll be ‘scouting’ the EBA as the season goes on for potential players I’d like to bid on at the end of it – and I’m sure some of my fellow, more active owners would as well. Heck, I’d probably even start writing some articles about that league, about players that could potentially be bid upon the next offseason.\

5) With the current state of FA, it is SO hard for bottom feeder teams to climb the ladder of success quickly (currently they can only do it through years and years of good drafting – or, more rarely, an expertise in trading). This gives those teams a chance to use some of their excess cash (and excess budgets) to bolster their roster – potentially increasing league parity (since some of the elite teams may not have the budget under the cap to fit some of these players in).

[recte44]

I do want to explore "posting" of an EBA player. I'll give this some thought....and I think it could be part of our financial plan.

[kestu]

I love it - don't like having PP's associated with the bidding however.

[agrudez]

I love it - don't like having PP's associated with the bidding however.

That is something that I was on the fence about as well, but my rationale was making the decision difficult on an extra level (to keep this from being potentially abused - since cash is CURRENTLY little consequence on its own). As I said, as well, only the team whom WINS the bid would have PP (and cash) taken, the losing bidders don't have to 'pay' anything for the right to participate in the auction. It is also a way to protect the process from newer GMs whom don't quite understand the construct of the league yet. If a new owner came in and bid 90M cash (or something equally absurd) to win a player and then cuts and runs after realizing that it may have been a mistake it would be bad for that org - needing 20 PP built up to win the bid curbs that potential situation. Another way to do that is have the outcome of the bid left to the discretion of the commish (to save newer owners from themselves), but I hate stuff like that, personally (and it would get convulated rather quickly - particuliarly with such a short auction window).

[Manny]

This sounds like fun and it would be a good way for the bottom teams to infuse some talent onto themselves a little faster than the draft allows. Hopefully we can find a way to incorporate this into the league.

[Al-Hoot]

I'm not adverse to buying EBA players (I prefer this idea much more than adversarial buying out other team's coaches).

But, since using ca$h is the number one premise behind the idea, I would not like PPs linked to this.

There is, in the league, besides teams that have a lot of cash, a PP elite. This group comprises few GMs. Linking PPs to this is a great thing for people who have time to write beaucoup articles, or copy and paste spreadsheets, but a lot of GMs, including many who would stand to benefit greatly from this concept, simply do not have the PPs to spend.

And their real life does not afford them the opportunity to earn 100s or even dozens of PPs..... So I have always seen the PP rewards as helpful and fun, but none involving anything that could dramatically affect a GMs ability to better his team. Which this idea seems to fall on this category, therefore, I would prefer of PPs were delinked or way deemphasized from it.

[agrudez]

I'm not adverse to buying EBA players (I prefer this idea much more than adversarial buying out other team's coaches).

But, since using ca$h is the number one premise behind the idea, I would not like PPs linked to this.

---

therefore, I would prefer of PPs were delinked or way deemphasized from it.

It sounds as if that portion is getting a good bit of push back (and I mentioned I had been on the fence about its inclusion to begin with) and that is fine/understandable. I'm glad that you were able to seperate the core of the idea from this portion of it, though.

Question: Do you share my fear that some GMs (particuliarly newer ones) could potentially ruin a franchise (and then cut and run) with this idea and, if so, do you have an idea (sans the inclusion of PP - my first cut at a deterrent) to curb the potential of that?

[Al-Hoot]

I would need time to think about that.

[kestu]

Kyle - aren't there multiple ways a 'new GM' can ruin a franchise? I mean, they can give out absurd contracts, screw up ticket pricing, etc, etc. I don't view this any differently.

[agrudez]

Kyle - aren't there multiple ways a 'new GM' can ruin a franchise? I mean, they can give out absurd contracts, screw up ticket pricing, etc, etc. I don't view this any differently.

True, of course, but I guess my argument is that an egrigiously bad contract is a more obvious 'mistake' than emptying a team's entire coffers in an auction setting like this. By nature I am generally against 'hand-cuffing' GMs (even new ones) arbitrarily, though - so I suppose it is odd that I had the fear to begin with.

[Al-Hoot]

Perhaps, I say perhaps, if a hit and run GM came in and did something like this, then the situation with the team he "ruined" could somewhat be recte-fied upon his departure.

[felipe]

hah! He'll really have his hands full trying to recte-fy Louisville when I cut and run...

[Fat Nige]

I like this idea but no pp and perhaps a limit on how many can be bought in one season? I don't want to see every team sporting one or two 'bought-out' players

[kestu]

I like this idea but no pp and perhaps a limit on how many can be bought in one season? I don't want to see every team sporting one or two 'bought-out' players

Why not? If they buy 2 in season one they probably wouldn't be able to pay top dollar for the option to go after guys in the following season which could be even better...

[agrudez]

then the situation with the team he "ruined" could somewhat be recte-fied upon his departure.

Nice.

Why not? If they buy 2 in season one they probably wouldn't be able to pay top dollar for the option to go after guys in the following season which could be even better...

Yeah, that situation would work itself out just because noone has endless pockets. I agree with this.

[Edward Murphy]

Kyle a nice out of the box idea. How about allowing GM's in good standing to buy PP and improve players in his farm club also.

[agrudez]

How about allowing GM's in good standing to buy PP

I don't have an opinion one way or another, but I imagine Matt and the GB would since this is a participation driven writing league. I could be wrong, though.

and improve players in his farm club also.

I am very much against this.

Edit. Snipped a long, offtopic tangent about my disdain for the custom ammys .. probably not worth it, though - I think I've made enough enemies in the past few days!

[Manny]

I still really like this idea and I hope we can find a way to make it work to everyone's satisfaction

[agrudez]

I still really like this idea and I hope we can find a way to make it work to everyone's satisfaction

So far the response has been unanimously positive (at least from what I can tell) with the exception of near equivalently unanimous disdain for the involvement of PP. So, barring that, it seems like it is a proposal that people like (from a peripheral view)... the next step, then (and I haven't seen much discussion on this yet), is actually discussing the terms of the current instantiation of the proposal - ie. the money figure for buying out a contract, the intricacies of the schedule (time frame of when the process would take place, logistics of working it into the sim schedule, etc.) and any other miscellaneous caveats (a possible restriction of buy-outs per year, etc.).

[Manny]

I'll be happy to hear ideas on those, I'm still looking over everything in the league (I didn't expect to get in so quickly) so I don't feel that I can properly propose guidelines, I'd love to hear what others (and you) would like to see. I think this would add great things to the league and allow the lower tier teams a chance at some top end talent. Looking over my first free agent pool I do see that I have a long road ahead of me and that doesnt bother me as I love rebuilding through the draft but others may prefer a more dramatic turnaround and with the way teams hold onto top talent in this league (and rightfully so) it makes it hard for a team to pick up big names quickly. I'm not complaining nor am I able to offer a solution it's just my observation.