2019 RULES: Sign and Trade

[soonertf]

What ruins the fun is $60m/yr contracts IMO. I would support just limiting 1-3 yr contracts similar to LTC. Then again I'm good either way. I think the better fix would be that SB can only exceed annual salary by a certain %. However, that would change the finance of the game, which seems to be a non-starter. We will never be like real life, just too many variables and GMs aren't held reliable...so I agree that argument is a bit silly.

[tjbarnaba]

One year no trade just seems like a crazy correction to a not so serious problem.

Players rating fluctuate during the year. If you sign someone to a contract as an 86 and by week 3, that player is a 91 on a good contract; you should be able to cash in on that value. Before the end of the year, that same player can drop to an 85, tear an acl, and start next year as an 81. I don't understand why so many teams want to handcuff themselves. I voted 3 months, only because the JJ Wilcox-signs with TB-DEN cuts TJ Ward-TB signs Ward-TB-trades Wilcox to PIT. If things like that are happening in the league, they should be able to happen here.

[jerrydlux]

I agree with that. Like Jared proposed earlier today.

I don't think I said no trades for everyone for one year. It is the top players that are being signed and traded for picks immediately.

[Strategist]

One year no trade just seems like a crazy correction to a not so serious problem.

Players rating fluctuate during the year. If you sign someone to a contract as an 86 and by week 3, that player is a 91 on a good contract; you should be able to cash in on that value. Before the end of the year, that same player can drop to an 85, tear an acl, and start next year as an 81. I don't understand why so many teams want to handcuff themselves. I voted 3 months, only because the JJ Wilcox-signs with TB-DEN cuts TJ Ward-TB signs Ward-TB-trades Wilcox to PIT. If things like that are happening in the league, they should be able to happen here.

I am not so worried about that but it is the teams that sign a top Qb for 5 years with a large SB and trade him before season even starts. That would never happen. Players IRL wouldn't stand for it. Unfortunately teams are taking advantage of the current system. I don't blame them but would prefer it not to be like this.

[azcardsfan]

Changed my vote from “No” to the “3 month”. Seems we’re destined for a change, might as well pick the one that will still allow trading of these players in certain situations to continue just a few months later

[soonertf]

One year no trade just seems like a crazy correction to a not so serious problem.

Players rating fluctuate during the year. If you sign someone to a contract as an 86 and by week 3, that player is a 91 on a good contract; you should be able to cash in on that value. Before the end of the year, that same player can drop to an 85, tear an acl, and start next year as an 81. I don't understand why so many teams want to handcuff themselves. I voted 3 months, only because the JJ Wilcox-signs with TB-DEN cuts TJ Ward-TB signs Ward-TB-trades Wilcox to PIT. If things like that are happening in the league, they should be able to happen here.

I am not so worried about that but it is the teams that sign a top Qb for 5 years with a large SB and trade him before season even starts. That would never happen. Players IRL wouldn't stand for it. Unfortunately teams are taking advantage of the current system. I don't blame them but would prefer it not to be like this.

Unfortunately some GM's will always look for a loophole to exploit. Legal? Yes...Douchebaggery? Probably

[stevebarrett24]

Changed my vote from “No” to the “3 month”. Seems we’re destined for a change, might as well pick the one that will still allow trading of these players in certain situations to continue just a few months later

Alright somebody talk me into why a 3 month wait would change anything. The only thing I see that would change is 3 months would put us past the draft so if somebody was pulling this to get draft picks they would just have to wait a year to use them. If your team stinks you would still do the same thing you would just have to wait a year to use your draft picks. I don't see how anything would change, Honestly.

[Strategist]

Changed my vote from “No” to the “3 month”. Seems we’re destined for a change, might as well pick the one that will still allow trading of these players in certain situations to continue just a few months later

Alright somebody talk me into why a 3 month wait would change anything. The only thing I see that would change is 3 months would put us past the draft so if somebody was pulling this to get draft picks they would just have to wait a year to use them. If your team stinks you would still do the same thing you would just have to wait a year to use your draft picks. I don't see how anything would change, Honestly.

Yes exactly 3 months does nothing at all to change it.

[tino38]

I think that is basically it, Steve. The idea of signing someone quick and flipping them for this years draft picks I think is what is most enticing for the GMs that do this. I too changed my vote to the 3 month option but only because I am strongly against a full year NTC and as some have mentioned before as well as you, circumstance with a team/player can change after the draft into the summer and all the sudden such player would no longer be necessary and could be flipped for value or depth elsewhere.

I do wonder if it would simply reduce the crazy sign and trade if it was regulated that no FA’s can be traded until after the draft. Though teams could still trade for those drafted players then in return? I don’t know, this isn’t something that is simple to fix in my opinion.

[soonertf]

The more I look at it, it's the SB to salary ratio that's messed up. You can sign a player to $1m a yr and then $50m in SB. That a valuable as hell as a trade chip. That needs to be limited to annual SB can't exceed 2x salary.