|
Post by aaron2344 on Oct 10, 2007 17:38:25 GMT -5
What is the hard cap going to be next year?
93 or 90?
|
|
|
Post by Outlawz on Oct 10, 2007 17:49:06 GMT -5
i think he said 2 years of 93 mil then 90.. but good question.. i initally thought it would be 90 next season but now that i think about it.. it should be 93 again
|
|
|
Post by aaronjh on Oct 10, 2007 18:04:36 GMT -5
It'd be sick if it ws 90...I love what the hard cap's doing to balance out competitiveness.
|
|
|
Post by nova on Oct 10, 2007 18:08:28 GMT -5
Yeah, it's definitely needed because of how crazy some of the recent drafts were with amazing teams landing top 3 picks.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Oct 10, 2007 18:34:15 GMT -5
It'd be sick if it ws 90...I love what the hard cap's doing to balance out competitiveness. grow up
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 10, 2007 20:49:39 GMT -5
Im gonna do 90 at some point, but not next year. I think it'd be too tough for teams to adjust. Its gonna happen within 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by garf2000 on Oct 10, 2007 21:34:28 GMT -5
Yeah, it's definitely needed because of how crazy some of the recent drafts were with amazing teams landing top 3 picks. Why on earth should teams be punished for trading for good picks and in turn drafting great players?? It makes absolutely no sense to me. I traded good players, and in return got good picks. Why should I now have to trade away these players again? I'm not trying to pick on you at all, it just happened that you were the first to write what many people eventually say, and it makes no sense to me. Instead, why don't shitty teams learn how to build good teams on their own, instead of relying on good teams to lose their good players to the hard cap.
|
|
|
Post by Outlawz on Oct 10, 2007 21:35:57 GMT -5
Yeah, it's definitely needed because of how crazy some of the recent drafts were with amazing teams landing top 3 picks. Why on earth should teams be punished for trading for good picks and in turn drafting great players?? It makes absolutely no sense to me. I traded good players, and in return got good picks. Why should I now have to trade away these players again? I'm not trying to pick on you at all, it just happened that you were the first to write what many people eventually say, and it makes no sense to me. Instead, why don't shitty teams learn how to build good teams on their own, instead of relying on good teams to lose their good players to the hard cap.
|
|
|
Post by garf2000 on Oct 10, 2007 21:37:47 GMT -5
nice edit there
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 10, 2007 21:38:23 GMT -5
Yeah, it's definitely needed because of how crazy some of the recent drafts were with amazing teams landing top 3 picks. Why on earth should teams be punished for trading for good picks and in turn drafting great players?? It makes absolutely no sense to me. I traded good players, and in return got good picks. Why should I now have to trade away these players again? I'm not trying to pick on you at all, it just happened that you were the first to write what many people eventually say, and it makes no sense to me. Instead, why don't shitty teams learn how to build good teams on their own, instead of relying on good teams to lose their good players to the hard cap. Hard Cap is good. It creates parity, and it makes it more difficult to maintain a winner. I think Nova is discouraged and his view is a bit skewed, but overall the Hard Cap is better for the league.
|
|
|
Post by aaron2344 on Oct 10, 2007 21:41:33 GMT -5
Yeah, it's definitely needed because of how crazy some of the recent drafts were with amazing teams landing top 3 picks. Why on earth should teams be punished for trading for good picks and in turn drafting great players?? It makes absolutely no sense to me. I traded good players, and in return got good picks. Why should I now have to trade away these players again? I'm not trying to pick on you at all, it just happened that you were the first to write what many people eventually say, and it makes no sense to me. Instead, why don't shitty teams learn how to build good teams on their own, instead of relying on good teams to lose their good players to the hard cap. Amen. I don't understand the rationale behind penalyzing the good teams. This really reminds me of an analogy with politics. Some people want the government to support them, giving them money and handouts, while others get off their ass and go get the job done. I'm all for the parity in the league, but I don't think the hardcap had anything to do with the recent trades of players like Baron, Kobe, Wade. Just guys getting much better at going out and getting the top players to help their teams win. It's just frustrating when I have to go deal Meka for expiring contracts and get 10 cents on the dollar for him.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Oct 10, 2007 21:44:09 GMT -5
I have expiring contracts for Meka. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Oct 10, 2007 21:44:16 GMT -5
Why on earth should teams be punished for trading for good picks and in turn drafting great players?? It makes absolutely no sense to me. I traded good players, and in return got good picks. Why should I now have to trade away these players again? I'm not trying to pick on you at all, it just happened that you were the first to write what many people eventually say, and it makes no sense to me. Instead, why don't shitty teams learn how to build good teams on their own, instead of relying on good teams to lose their good players to the hard cap. Amen. I don't understand the rationale behind penalyzing the good teams. This really reminds me of an analogy with politics. Some people want the government to support them, giving them money and handouts, while others get off their ass and go get the job done. I'm all for the parity in the league, but I don't think the hardcap had anything to do with the recent trades of players like Baron, Kobe, Wade. Just guys getting much better at going out and getting the top players to help their teams win. It's just frustrating when I have to go deal Meka for expiring contracts and get 10 cents on the dollar for him. See Luke Walton had to make him a toss in on a deal when he was my best bench player Also couldn't go out and improve my bench the last few seasons because of the hard cap very fustrating BUT it does add a more challenging aspect to the league and prevents dynasties but as a competitor its frustrating
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Oct 10, 2007 21:49:31 GMT -5
the hard cap should also remind people not to give out such outlandish contracts being unable to buy them out with no penalty
I think it would be really cool if you win 50 games you are aloud to go over the hard cap but must pay a luxury tax of a first round pick with in 3 seasons that is in your possession at the time. However if you are a team in the luxury tax you can not buy a player out and must maintain 50 wins if not you will fall victim of the hard cap rules.
|
|
|
Post by nova on Oct 10, 2007 21:50:52 GMT -5
First off, I'm not discouraged really, but simple fact of the matter is, a hard cap is necessary in EVERY league if you want it to be realistic.
I'm not saying it should be enforced to punish anyone, it should be enforced to make you have to think twice about deals, make you have to work harder, and make you have to continuously work to keep your team elite instead of just being able to sit on a team and let them win. It makes things much more interesting and competitive.
The 4 of you guys have built great teams, and I'm not saying it should be done to punish you, but fact of the matter is, the hard cap does force you to work hard to stay on top, and it also forces those of us who are trying to become elite teams to also be wary of it. It doesn't just affect you, it affects all of us. It does affect you the most, but of course it's always going to impact the elite teams more, that's why it's in place, to maintain competitive balance & make things more interesting.
|
|
|
Post by aaron2344 on Oct 10, 2007 21:51:28 GMT -5
that creates too much work. i believe hardcap should stay, i guess i'm just letting my frustrations out, haha
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Oct 10, 2007 21:53:14 GMT -5
If there was a bitchball right now (christ, no one start one) I'd say fuck calculus.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Oct 10, 2007 21:53:54 GMT -5
The Hard Cap stops people like Lumley and Nova maxing out a bunch of scrubs, so Free Agency will hopefully be more competitive and you really got to make the right contract offer to get the player you want.
You people saying that this is just penalizing the good teams, well you're wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Oct 10, 2007 21:55:42 GMT -5
And Galo too. Not even this version of Derrick Rose is worth 200 million.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Oct 10, 2007 21:56:53 GMT -5
and look at real life NFL.. unlike NBA which has a soft-cap, the NFL has a hard-cap but that doesn't mean good GMs/Coaches can't still build a dynasty see New England, Indianopolis.. they may lose alot of key players to free agency, but if you're a good GM, you will always field a competitive team.
|
|
|
Post by aaron2344 on Oct 10, 2007 21:58:05 GMT -5
yeah, but contracts aren't guaranteed in the nfl. so if lumley maxes a shit player, he can buy him out the next year and go spend money on other players.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Oct 10, 2007 22:00:42 GMT -5
If you max out a player, and you buy him out the next year... you're going over the Hard Cap lol
|
|
|
Post by aaron2344 on Oct 10, 2007 22:03:11 GMT -5
is that how it works in the nfl? i'm not familiar with the salary cap rules. i assumed the rest of the contract didn't count. i guess i meant to say cut instead of buyout.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Oct 10, 2007 22:05:56 GMT -5
oh I thought you were talking about BBS
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Oct 10, 2007 22:09:48 GMT -5
is that how it works in the nfl? i'm not familiar with the salary cap rules. i assumed the rest of the contract didn't count. i guess i meant to say cut instead of buyout. Pretty sure all that counts is the guaranteed, but I'm curious exactly how it works. Anyone know for sure?
|
|