do something to prevent teams skirting the $120mm salary cap

[JRamirez]

Please do something to prevent teams (GMs) skirting the $120mm salary cap. NSH, for example, has an effective salary cap of $130mm. Because other teams are financing two top-paid players: Phil Cole and, most recently, Todd Tatlock.

I am new here and don't have great suggestions, but we might want to brainstorm this. This is basically getting around the purpose of a salary cap. Brainstorming ideas:

1 Don't allow contract retentions to allow a team to go over the salary cap
2 Fire GMs who retain salaries of players traded to such teams - not serious suggestion
3 Encourage Chad and other GM to be generous to the league and not accept such trades; what's good for Chad is not necessarily what's good for the league.

[Dington]

Please do something to prevent teams (GMs) skirting the $120mm salary cap. NSH, for example, has an effective salary cap of $130mm. Because other teams are financing two top-paid players: Phil Cole and, most recently, Todd Tatlock.

I am new here and don't have great suggestions, but we might want to brainstorm this. This is basically getting around the purpose of a salary cap. Brainstorming ideas:

1 Don't allow contract retentions to allow a team to go over the salary cap
2 Fire GMs who retain salaries of players traded to such teams - not serious suggestion
3 Encourage Chad and other GM to be generous to the league and not accept such trades; what's good for Chad is not necessarily what's good for the league.

I love how this is just becoming the anti-Nashville League. Would you believe you used to be able to retain 100% salary just a decade ago?

[Lane]

Please do something to prevent teams (GMs) skirting the $120mm salary cap. NSH, for example, has an effective salary cap of $130mm. Because other teams are financing two top-paid players: Phil Cole and, most recently, Todd Tatlock.

I am new here and don't have great suggestions, but we might want to brainstorm this. This is basically getting around the purpose of a salary cap. Brainstorming ideas:

1 Don't allow contract retentions to allow a team to go over the salary cap
2 Fire GMs who retain salaries of players traded to such teams - not serious suggestion
3 Encourage Chad and other GM to be generous to the league and not accept such trades; what's good for Chad is not necessarily what's good for the league.

I love how this is just becoming the anti-Nashville League. Would you believe you used to be able to retain 100% salary just a decade ago?

this will continue to be an anti nashville league until you stop winning 130 games every season

[aaronweiner]

Please do something to prevent teams (GMs) skirting the $120mm salary cap. NSH, for example, has an effective salary cap of $130mm. Because other teams are financing two top-paid players: Phil Cole and, most recently, Todd Tatlock.

I am new here and don't have great suggestions, but we might want to brainstorm this. This is basically getting around the purpose of a salary cap. Brainstorming ideas:

1 Don't allow contract retentions to allow a team to go over the salary cap
2 Fire GMs who retain salaries of players traded to such teams - not serious suggestion
3 Encourage Chad and other GM to be generous to the league and not accept such trades; what's good for Chad is not necessarily what's good for the league.

I love how this is just becoming the anti-Nashville League. Would you believe you used to be able to retain 100% salary just a decade ago?

Yeah. I can't seem to remember who stopped people from doing that...oh right, it was me. I did that. Still proud of that thought.

I really don't have any idea why people are trading with you at all though. I'd love to see what you've been putting in their Kool-Aid.

[Dington]

Please do something to prevent teams (GMs) skirting the $120mm salary cap. NSH, for example, has an effective salary cap of $130mm. Because other teams are financing two top-paid players: Phil Cole and, most recently, Todd Tatlock.

I am new here and don't have great suggestions, but we might want to brainstorm this. This is basically getting around the purpose of a salary cap. Brainstorming ideas:

1 Don't allow contract retentions to allow a team to go over the salary cap
2 Fire GMs who retain salaries of players traded to such teams - not serious suggestion
3 Encourage Chad and other GM to be generous to the league and not accept such trades; what's good for Chad is not necessarily what's good for the league.

I love how this is just becoming the anti-Nashville League. Would you believe you used to be able to retain 100% salary just a decade ago?

Yeah. I can't seem to remember who stopped people from doing that...oh right, it was me. I did that. Still proud of that thought.

I really don't have any idea why people are trading with you at all though. I'd love to see what you've been putting in their Kool-Aid.

Prospects, cash, etc. Y'know, things that help rebuilding teams get better. Crazy that other teams care more about building their team than trying to tear down another team...

[Trebro]

This is a horrible suggestion that will handicap rebuilding teams. There are so many other ways teams with high revenue can exploit (IFA, buying other people's high draft picks they can't sign, ability to max out development lab, etc.) All of those are far more powerful than salary retention and are all things that are far more damaging to the league competition level.

[Dington]

Please do something to prevent teams (GMs) skirting the $120mm salary cap. NSH, for example, has an effective salary cap of $130mm. Because other teams are financing two top-paid players: Phil Cole and, most recently, Todd Tatlock.

I am new here and don't have great suggestions, but we might want to brainstorm this. This is basically getting around the purpose of a salary cap. Brainstorming ideas:

1 Don't allow contract retentions to allow a team to go over the salary cap
2 Fire GMs who retain salaries of players traded to such teams - not serious suggestion
3 Encourage Chad and other GM to be generous to the league and not accept such trades; what's good for Chad is not necessarily what's good for the league.

I love how this is just becoming the anti-Nashville League. Would you believe you used to be able to retain 100% salary just a decade ago?

Yeah. I can't seem to remember who stopped people from doing that...oh right, it was me. I did that. Still proud of that thought.

I really don't have any idea why people are trading with you at all though. I'd love to see what you've been putting in their Kool-Aid.

Just two seasons ago you traded me a solid pitching prospect to take away a bad contract of yours. Did it help you?

[aaronweiner]

I love how this is just becoming the anti-Nashville League. Would you believe you used to be able to retain 100% salary just a decade ago?

Yeah. I can't seem to remember who stopped people from doing that...oh right, it was me. I did that. Still proud of that thought.

I really don't have any idea why people are trading with you at all though. I'd love to see what you've been putting in their Kool-Aid.

Just two seasons ago you traded me a solid pitching prospect to take away a bad contract of yours. Did it help you?

So far? It absolutely did not.

But thanks for asking. Oh wait, you were trying to make the opposite point again. My bad. I sometimes forget that's your MO.

[Dington]

Yeah. I can't seem to remember who stopped people from doing that...oh right, it was me. I did that. Still proud of that thought.

I really don't have any idea why people are trading with you at all though. I'd love to see what you've been putting in their Kool-Aid.

Just two seasons ago you traded me a solid pitching prospect to take away a bad contract of yours. Did it help you?

So far? It absolutely did not.

But thanks for asking. Oh wait, you were trying to make the opposite point again. My bad. I sometimes forget that's your MO.

The point is even you traded with the “behemoth” because you thought it would benefit your team. You didn’t care about taking down the behemoth.

[aaronweiner]

Just two seasons ago you traded me a solid pitching prospect to take away a bad contract of yours. Did it help you?

So far? It absolutely did not.

But thanks for asking. Oh wait, you were trying to make the opposite point again. My bad. I sometimes forget that's your MO.

The point is even you traded with the “behemoth” because you thought it would benefit your team. You didn’t care about taking down the behemoth.

Sadly, the behemoth was the only person who offered. And it didn't work out well - was your point that trading with you is a bad idea? Because that's the point you're making now.

Is there an "ignore" button on this? Every time I talk to Chad I get dumber. I guess I could just not respond.

[Dington]

So far? It absolutely did not.

But thanks for asking. Oh wait, you were trying to make the opposite point again. My bad. I sometimes forget that's your MO.

The point is even you traded with the “behemoth” because you thought it would benefit your team. You didn’t care about taking down the behemoth.

Sadly, the behemoth was the only person who offered. And it didn't work out well - was your point that trading with you is a bad idea? Because that's the point you're making now.

Is there an "ignore" button on this? Every time I talk to Chad I get dumber. I guess I could just not respond.

And the fact of the matter is I’m often the only one calling. You’re saying teams should get nothing in return if Nashville is the only team picking up the phone.

[jiminyhopkins]

Is this satire? We have always been able to retain over the cap. It's incumbent on the retaining team to make sure they get value for that retention.

[aaronweiner]

The point is even you traded with the “behemoth” because you thought it would benefit your team. You didn’t care about taking down the behemoth.

Sadly, the behemoth was the only person who offered. And it didn't work out well - was your point that trading with you is a bad idea? Because that's the point you're making now.

Is there an "ignore" button on this? Every time I talk to Chad I get dumber. I guess I could just not respond.

And the fact of the matter is I’m often the only one calling. You’re saying teams should get nothing in return if Nashville is the only team picking up the phone.

Seriously, could you point that somewhere else? I have enough problems without you trying to drop my IQ.

[RT60]

I prefer to keep the status quo. It is reasonable and I believe it is consistent with how at least one hard cap league in real life operates. Some day the Kernels might be the cream of the crop and do the same thing. Maybe even Louisville.

And can we please keep things civil in this community? Even Nashville should be afforded such.

[aaronweiner]

I prefer to keep the status quo. It is reasonable and I believe it is consistent with how at least one hard cap league in real life operates. Some day the Kernels might be the cream of the crop and do the same thing. Maybe even Louisville.

And can we please keep things civil in this community? Even Nashville should be afforded such.

If he needs the proper retort he could just peel off 25 wins and a couple titles and throw them at my head. I think he’s fine.

[RonCo]

Salary retention is, by alternate definition, trading both salary cap and annual cash at the same time. That is what it is. Every team that receives retention in a trade is effectively using the other team's cap. We've had dust-ups on it every now and again.

Nashville gets the heat now partially because they are at the top--and partially because Chad likes to pretend his situation is not as powerful as it is. I've been there. I get it.

We did at one time allow 100% retention. Until the notorious and inevitable Mons Raider deal. Personally, I don't like the concept of retained salary at all. But I'm a fuddy-duddy like that. I know it's here to stay. If we want to limit its impact the only thing I think we could do--but it would be another manual thing--is to limit retention to expiring deals. This would make the salary cap warpage limited to one year.

[JRamirez]

Salary retention is, by alternate definition, trading both salary cap and annual cash at the same time. That is what it is. Every team that receives retention in a trade is effectively using the other team's cap. We've had dust-ups on it every now and again.

Nashville gets the heat now partially because they are at the top--and partially because Chad likes to pretend his situation is not as powerful as it is. I've been there. I get it.

We did at one time allow 100% retention. Until the notorious and inevitable Mons Raider deal. Personally, I don't like the concept of retained salary at all. But I'm a fuddy-duddy like that. I know it's here to stay. If we want to limit its impact the only thing I think we could do--but it would be another manual thing--is to limit retention to expiring deals. This would make the salary cap warpage limited to one year.

I like limiting salary retention to expiring deals. Or reducing retention to 25% or 0. So I agree with Ron about that.

[RonCo]

I will say that for me...right now...that conversation is just conversation. Even if I like the idea, I don't like making a lot of changes at once and the cap/media contracts could use a little time to settle. Let Matt get those running and maybe in 2063+ we can tweak something else.

[RonCo]

I admit I'm pondering if OOTP Dev might consider a change, though, to have salary retention be a cash only thing when it comes to leagues with caps. In other words, team A agrees to pay salary when they send a player to another team, but the cap does not adjust. If OOTP worked that way, I think it would be better for salary cap leagues.

[ae37jr]

If done right, retention helps the small market/rebuilding team. They are essentially using cap space that they wouldn't use anyway as a trade asset. It also helps facilitate a trade that may not happen because a player has a bad contract.

I usually send cash back to cover retention cost and/or up the prospect haul to make it make sense.

But if you aren't viewing salary retention as an added "player" in a trade, than you are doing it wrong.