|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Jul 8, 2009 15:23:34 GMT -5
yes or no?
|
|
|
Post by Golden State Warriors on Jul 8, 2009 15:25:04 GMT -5
yes plz
|
|
|
Post by inactive-MEM on Jul 8, 2009 15:25:11 GMT -5
definately not
|
|
|
Post by inactive-OKC on Jul 8, 2009 15:50:06 GMT -5
No.
Contract extensions can be complicated sometimes. Plus, if the teams offer contract extensions to their best players then all the best players are off of the free agent market!
Sim leagues thrive on activity, and the offseason is always the most active time of the year. I believe that every player whose contract expires should just become a free agent, creating a large, diverse, talented FA crop that thus creates activity and ultimately helps spread talent.
|
|
|
Post by New Orleans Hornets on Jul 8, 2009 16:01:44 GMT -5
Yes plz
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Jul 8, 2009 16:02:58 GMT -5
added a poll
|
|
Los Angeles Lakers
Committee Member
Temporary Senior Journalist
Lakers 08-09 champs
Posts: 90
|
Post by Los Angeles Lakers on Jul 8, 2009 16:06:14 GMT -5
F NO.
OKC has first hand experience and so do I, both of us were in NBA GM LEAGUE.
and guys like Kwame Brown got 15 mil, and Stromile Swift got 19 MILLION.
unless you have a PA system, with specific values on how FA are going to certain places (40 percent money, 20 percent contenders, or if they are 25 and young MONEY, 30 and old signs for cheaper for title, that kinda thing.)
If we don't have that then NO way we should do a contract extension thing too risky unless we have a base structure on how players go to specific destination and for what reason and what value.
|
|
|
Post by inactive-OKC on Jul 8, 2009 16:11:12 GMT -5
Don't make a mistake here, guys. Think through this before you vote. I think most of you are thinking "Hey, I will be able to keep my star player with this extension." Okay, but so does everyone else so really what would the off-season become? If every star player is wrapped up in extensions the off-season gets boring. If the off-season gets boring then we lose activity. Losing activity means good-bye league.
I'm willing to let my star players become FA so that everyone has a chance to sign them and spread the talent around and make things interesting. Obviously a player agent system would work well and favor would be given to resigning with the team but the chance is there that any with cap could sign that player.
Vote no to contract extensions.
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Jul 8, 2009 16:12:31 GMT -5
I'm thinking no extensions unless they fall under two categories:
1) final year of rookie contract with the team that drafted them
2) superstar who would sign extension in real life because teams wouldn't be able to offer max contracts in FA
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Timberwolves on Jul 8, 2009 16:30:45 GMT -5
Well, it depends. If that rule of qualifying offers becoming team options, as OKC before explained, then I would have to say no to contract extensions with the exclusion of that. But I voted for yes, if that rule won't be approved, then I will stick with yes, if it will then it's no for me.
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on Jul 8, 2009 18:58:10 GMT -5
how does contract extension work anyways? how do we simulate whether or not the player accepts or decline the contract extension?
|
|
|
Post by inactive-NJ on Jul 8, 2009 20:25:37 GMT -5
Contract Extensions. ONLY IF YOU HAVE THE CAP ROOM. No max offers if you are already over the cap.
No contract extensions means that every free agent is going to get like 18 mil a year based on need. It hurts the teams that actually save money wisely for that big free agent. Contract Extensions can have player agents attached to them as well.
|
|
|
Post by inactive-OKC on Jul 8, 2009 20:29:49 GMT -5
Contract Extensions. ONLY IF YOU HAVE THE CAP ROOM. No max offers if you are already over the cap. No contract extensions means that every free agent is going to get like 18 mil a year based on need. It hurts the teams that actually save money wisely for that big free agent. Contract Extensions can have player agents attached to them as well. I disagree. Committee or player agents decide what is realistic and cap it there. We won't have 18 million dollar deals, I guarantee it. Or with max contracts it caps how much you are allowed to offer. I firmly believe in just keeping it simple and letting everyone become a free agent.
|
|
|
Post by inactive-OKC on Jul 8, 2009 20:37:59 GMT -5
But I do like the idea of only being able to offer an extension if you have the cap room.
If you have 15 mil in cap room you are allowed to offer an extension to your player for 10 mil a year.
But if you have 3 mil in cap room the most you can offer is 3 mil a year for that extension.
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Raptors on Jul 8, 2009 20:53:39 GMT -5
so are you saying that if there's no contract extension then if lets say josh howard's contract expires and I'm at 70 mil already. Is there no chances for me to resign josh howard since I'm over soft cap already?
|
|