| Welcome to NHL04 Rebuilt 2017. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Suggested rule amendment | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 24 2015, 12:59 AM (254 Views) | |
| gino200 | Mar 24 2015, 12:59 AM Post #1 |
|
Hall of Famer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't feel its fair that those making cpu trades because they want to improve their lines should take precedence over owners trying their hardest making cpu trades to get under the cap.....if an owner has a lower TV/TA then someone that is further under the cap then they are, that owner should be rewarded for his efforts to get under the cap. If I did not make myself clear enough with this proposition, here's an example: Kyle offers a trade w/ CPU trade Florida to get better checking or shooting on one of his lines. He would add $1.0 M to his payroll in the process. Alaq trades with CPU Florida too but has a trade value 5 pts. lower than Kyle's. Alaq is $10 M over the salary cap and Kyle is only $3.5 M over....if Alaq wins his trade with Florida he will save $5.5 M and be closer to getting underneath the cap. Based on this logic, the owner trying to get further underneath the salary cap before the trade deadline gets rewarded, assuming though it has been proven that Alaq has tried his best in human-human offers to get further under the salary cap and failed. I can't name all of the specifics of the proposition as of yet but I have seen in the past where owners with many cpu assets (young guns, prospects, etc.) win cpu trades while those with very few cpu assets don't win them and remain over the salary cap by a large margin. Anyways, this is what spurred this post. Any thoughts? Good idea, bad idea? |
![]() |
|
| Paybak | Mar 24 2015, 01:05 AM Post #2 |
|
School of Betty Founder
|
I think salaries should be a part of the TV calculation. Otherwise CPU teams become a pit of overpaid players who are most likely crap. Mikes original idea with $53 M cap was to ensure cpu teams were attractive, however theres a problem when they are also filled with undesired contracts that end up in free agency anyway thanks to the grinder rule or low cap. Maybe overall the fix for this would be just having player contracts come into play in determining the TV just as age, games played, OVR and potential do. |
| |
![]() |
|
| gino200 | Mar 24 2015, 01:28 AM Post #3 |
|
Hall of Famer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Or do away with most of my suggestion altogether and have player salaries be factored into tiebreakers just like age is after a certain part of the season has been reached. I would be all for that. |
![]() |
|
| formx | Mar 24 2015, 01:40 AM Post #4 |
|
Hall of Famer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
ok |
| |
![]() |
|
| hidek91 | Mar 24 2015, 11:58 AM Post #5 |
|
BONOBO
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Gino, I understand your idea but there are some problems: - how would you measure if owner tried his best to get under the cap with human-human trades? the biggest problem is that if you want to get under the cap via h-h trades, you usually have to give up lots of quality. - I think that the fact that CPU ignores salaries is huge bonus for those who are trying to get under the cap because CPU allows you to dump the cap in a way that usually isn't possible in human-human trading. - people who had CPU assets lost lots of quality when dumping the cap to CPU (this season) - rewarding people who offer higher contracts to CPU will most likely result in CPU teams being full of players with big contracts so new owners would get even more overpaid roster than they do now - it'd also increase gambling with being over the cap I can adjust to everything but I actually believe that in the world of very tight salary cap having CPU trading which ignores some factors (like salaries, current season of the player) is making it more interesting. After Havlat saga, I know that getting under the cap isn't always easy but if it was there wouldn't be any interesting FAs on the market and guys who are playing for 3-5 years would have significant advantage over newcomers because current system forces those vets to dump the cap by giving up quality or releasing players to FA. |
|
I'm addicted to the pain, even more than words can say
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · NEHLPC · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



7:03 PM Jul 11