Making transactions that put a team over a cap

[Reds GM (Pat H.)]

It is unacceptable to exceed the salary cap and roster restrictions of 50 total players (or go below 10 minor leaguers, or above 35). You are, however, allowed to submit bids and complete trades that initially put you over, with 48 hours to officially get under. In conjunction with that though, when submitting bids or completing trades, you MUST outline a specific plan to get under. For example, if signing Albert Pujols pushes me over the salary cap, within my bid (or in a separate PM), I must say that I will release such-and-such that definitively gets me under the cap. I hope this is clear.


This keeps coming up over and over.

If you read the rules, it gets confusing. We have this hard cap of 50 players and a salary cap. In other posts, under the rules, we have this grace period to get back under the caps & we have to have a plan to get back under.

Here is my idea.

We have a Designated for Assignment (DFA) thread. We go back to stating that no one may eclipse the salary cap or the 50 man cap ever. When you make a transaction that will put you over a cap, you must immediately release or DFA a player or players to get back under the cap. This would mean that you must include in a bid or trade which player/s will be DFA'd to keep you under the cap. When you DFA a player to open a roster spot you will still be on the hook for half the salary, just like a released player. A player DFA'd will also be automatically placed on waivers. Once a player is on a teams DFA list, they have to trade or release that player unless other moves are made to allow enough room under the caps and they can be added back to the 50-man roster. If the player is traded or added back to the roster, then the original contract will still be honored. If the player is traded, the team that traded away the player will no longer owe the other half of the salary. You would only be allowed to DFA any player once per year and a player may only be on a DFA list for a total of 7 consecutive days. If a player is involved in a trade that is being reviewed, that player may remain on the DFA list until the trade is resolved. If after 7 days, the player is not involved in a trade, that player will be automatically released and become a free agent. The same person in charge of waivers can run the DFA thread.

Basically you would have 7 days to trade or release a player. I think it would promote more trading and it solidifies the salary cap and 50 man player cap.

Post by Nationals GM (Preston) on Sep 7, 2013 at 12:54pm
I like that, though I disagree that you can only DFA a player once. I would be in favor of no restriction, but perhaps we should do the three times rule like with waivers.

[Guardians GM (Matt)]

I like this rule. I know it would be hard to enforce, but I would like to put in the restriction if possible that a DFA'd player cannot be used on an active roster during that time period. This prevents people from having 50+ man rosters for temporary time. This should affect the spirit of the rule which is to give a small grace period to see if you can get some value for a player before outright releasing them.

This might facilitate some bad contract for bad contract swaps as teams tinker on the edges.

[Cubs GM (Beau)]

I would be willing to process DFAs along with Waivers.

The current 48 hr grace period is kind of messy.

Also agree DFAs cannot be active and being able to DFA three times.

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

Again, sorry for being out of the loop, but was there a decision on this? I think a few of us liked this. DFA could work with a max of three times a year, similar to waivers.

[Cubs GM (Beau)]

Here is the Real Life DFA Rule (Wiki-style):

Designated for assignment is a contractual term used in Major League Baseball. A player who is designated for assignment is immediately removed from the team's 40-man roster, after which the team must either:[1]
return the player to the 40-man roster within 10 days from the date of designation, or
make one of the following contractual moves: 1.Place the player on waivers (which can only be done within the first 7 days of the 10-day period)
2.Trade the player
3.Release the player
4.Outright the player from the 40-man roster into the Minor Leagues (NOT for our purposes)

Put both DFA and Waivers under the same thread. You have one week to waive the player after DFA, then waiver process take precedent. If you don't make deadline and put DFA'd player into Waivers, then too damn bad. Or cut or trade within 10 days. I think we should do this. Very realistic and less messy than current system. I am the Waivers manager and will enforce this with Iron Fist!

[Guardians GM (Matt)]

I think this makes sense. If possible I want to make sure that we enforce that a player who has been DFA'd cannot be used in a lineup during that time so that this can't be used to temporarily gain a roster spot (as stated above)

[Cubs GM (Beau)]

Dec 9, 2013 11:29:12 GMT -8 Guardians GM (Matt) said:

I think this makes sense. If possible I want to make sure that we enforce that a player who has been DFA'd cannot be used in a lineup during that time so that this can't be used to temporarily gain a roster spot (as stated above)

Agreed. Dropping immediately from Fantrax when a player is DFA would be the way to do this. Worst case, the guy gets nominated for that week's FA and it gets Voided.

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

Dec 9, 2013 11:24:47 GMT -8 Cubs GM (Beau) said:

Here is the Real Life DFA Rule (Wiki-style):

Designated for assignment is a contractual term used in Major League Baseball. A player who is designated for assignment is immediately removed from the team's 40-man roster, after which the team must either:[1]
return the player to the 40-man roster within 10 days from the date of designation, or
make one of the following contractual moves:

1.Place the player on waivers (which can only be done within the first 7 days of the 10-day period)
2.Trade the player
3.Release the player
4.Outright the player from the 40-man roster into the Minor Leagues (NOT for our purposes)

Put both DFA and Waivers under the same thread. You have one week to waive the player after DFA, then waiver process take precedent. If you don't make deadline and put DFA'd player into Waivers, then too damn bad. Or cut or trade within 10 days. I think we should do this. Very realistic and less messy than current system. I am the Waivers manager and will enforce this with Iron Fist!

great post....

So on Trades we have 48 hours, got it...

So on FA's bids when we don't know how many players we could win its??? what 7 days or 10 days? to do one of the 4 listed options?

and I am going to use players in a trade til its accepted and put through on Fantrax...not going to get hosed on starts because of delays in the trade process

[Reds GM (Pat H.)]

Review this and give feedback please.


This is the proposal as it will be in the rules:

At no point is a team allowed to go over the salary cap or roster limits. There is no grace period.

Anytime a team adds a player or players to their roster that would cause them to exceed the roster limits or salary cap then they have to immediately (within a reasonable amount of time) do one of the following:

1. Designate a player or players for assignment

2. Release a player or players to free agency


Designating a player for assignment

When a player is designated for Assignment you must post the players name in the DFA/Waivers thread and immediately drop the player on fantrax. Any player on the DFA list can not accumulate stats in a matchup on fantrax.

A player can be placed on the DFA list for a total of three times a year.
A player can reamin on the DFA list for a total of seven days each time he is placed on the DFA list.

Once a player is on the DFA list one of the following may happen at any time within the next seven days:

1. The player is traded.
2. The player is recalled and added back to the original teams roster (if all roster and salary cap rules are met).
3. The player is given his outright release and the owner must follow the guidelines for releasing a player to free agency.

If after seven days none of the above have taken place then the player will be automatically placed on DFA/waivers. Once a player is on DFA/Waivers, the rules for placing a player on waivers are followed except option 3 is no longer available.


Releasing a player to free agency

A GM has the right to release any player to free agency. To release a player and drop him to free agency, you must post the player's name that you are releasing in a new thread in the board titled "Player Releases". This will make permanent the decision to release a player to free agency. Once posted, there is no turning back. A GM will still be responsible for half of that player’s salary for the duration of the contract. If the player is a PP or signed to an AAS contract then the duration of the amount owed will be for the rest of the current season.

If that player is signed to a contract by another franchise, and the new salary AAS is equal to or more than the AAS that is still owed, then you must request the CO to review the situation. After receiving a request for review, the CO will determine if the salary owed is negated. If the new salary AAS is lower, then you will still be responsible to pay half of that player's salary over the life of the previous contract. If said player remains unsigned, you must continue to count half of that player's salary against your cap until his contract expires.

Each player that you have released and still owe must be listed on your roster page along with the amount of the original contract and what you still owe.

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

ok, the process of FA once a week when the season begins is actually different than MLB's process...in our process you have to put blind bids on sometimes up to 4 players and not know if you get a single one.

As long as you can drop the FA's than you won, if you get all 4 and just need one without penalty in the 48 hr period then that would make sense but getting all 4 players and having to drop 3 and get penalized with their contracts without the chance to trade them isn't right on any level...

Or we could go to open bidding, that would solve the issue I have also, instead of blind bidding.

[Deleted]

im for open bidding!!! get players based on need. Go above for the ones you really want. Its like an auction all season long. Sucks losing a blind bid one day every week when you weren't sure about the market for said player. it'll inflate minor league contracts but should save money on the flukey over bids that everyteam makes once or twice a yr.

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

Actually, open bidding (during the regular season ONLY) might not be a bad idea.

[Cubs GM (Beau)]

I am down with in-season open bidding. As Phils points out, those weird contracts would start to disappear.

I have one bit of feedback on the DFA thing, which was a great idea Pat. My guess is you are trying to streamline DFA and Waivers together. Which is commendable. I just don't think the auto-waiving requirement with DFA'ing a player works. As DFA rule one is written out, a claim player is forced to be given away which is contradictory to our own Waiver process. Really cuts the legs out of the Waiver System. Make the whole DFA process ten days with the seven day mark as a deadline for Waiving your player in DFA limbo. It will not be hard to track, as when a DFA player gets Waived it is going to pop and will get audited by the Waivers Manager.

[Reds GM (Pat H.)]

It has been edited, re-read and see what you think?

[Cubs GM (Beau)]

Pat, excellent work. It is a cool rule.

My last suggestion is simply to make no changes whatsoever to Waivers. It would look like this:

DFA options 1,2 and 3 stay the same.

Add,

4) The player may be put on Waivers. At no point can Waivers Option 3 be utilized unless all roster and salary cap rules are met.


If after seven days none of the above have taken place or if roster and salary cap rules have failed to be met, then the player will be automatically released to FA and owners will be responsible for half the salary.

[Pirates GM (Hollar)]

DFAs go along especially nicely with teams having to activate players on the salary-exempt roster who get called up.

[Guardians GM (Matt)]

The one concern I have with open bidding is the minor league contracts. Given how we structure minor league deals this could cause huge inflation not just now but for teams down the road. Given that for most situations the cap on a minor league bid is essentially $1 million under the current rules (as teams can still stash them). I would like to see the minor league bidding remain closed. It allows for players to make their own evaluations of a player's worth based on their research and not have minor league value driven by markets (essentially I see this as a hindrance to rebuilding teams for rebuilding farm system at cheaper prices).

EDIT: This is because there is no consequences to overbidding on a minor leaguer to drive their price up because you can drop them later for free. This will eliminate the cheap 500k minor league contract.

[Cubs GM (Beau)]

Dec 12, 2013 11:48:57 GMT -8 Guardians GM (Matt) said:

The one concern I have with open bidding is the minor league contracts. Given how we structure minor league deals this could cause huge inflation not just now but for teams down the road. Given that for most situations the cap on a minor league bid is essentially $1 million under the current rules (as teams can still stash them). I would like to see the minor league bidding remain closed. It allows for players to make their own evaluations of a player's worth based on their research and not have minor league value driven by markets (essentially I see this as a hindrance to rebuilding teams for rebuilding farm system at cheaper prices).

EDIT: This is because there is no consequences to overbidding on a minor leaguer to drive their price up because you can drop them later for free. This will eliminate the cheap 500k minor league contract.

Agreed.

That leaves us Open Bidding for MLB Talent, In-Season only.

Personally, I think that sounds awesome.

[Deleted]

Eliminating the window for trades makes sense. With the trade post, you should have to get under cap/roster limit immediately. You know what impact the trade will have when you are accepting it. I see free agency as a different issue.

I see why giving a team 48 hours to be over-cap after a FA signing is problematic. I also feel like exceeding the 50-player limit is a different issue. If I'm under cap and sign players 51-55 in a given week, I can only add those players by dropping a player. I can't utilize more than 50 players at any given time. I see the 48 hour grace period as necessary since people have lives and don't know exactly when the bids will be revealed.

Also, who I drop will largely be based on the position of the incoming player.

[Deleted]

Dec 12, 2013 12:05:32 GMT -8 Cubs GM (Beau) said:

Dec 12, 2013 11:48:57 GMT -8 Guardians GM (Matt) said:

The one concern I have with open bidding is the minor league contracts. Given how we structure minor league deals this could cause huge inflation not just now but for teams down the road. Given that for most situations the cap on a minor league bid is essentially $1 million under the current rules (as teams can still stash them). I would like to see the minor league bidding remain closed. It allows for players to make their own evaluations of a player's worth based on their research and not have minor league value driven by markets (essentially I see this as a hindrance to rebuilding teams for rebuilding farm system at cheaper prices).

EDIT: This is because there is no consequences to overbidding on a minor leaguer to drive their price up because you can drop them later for free. This will eliminate the cheap 500k minor league contract.

Agreed.

That leaves us Open Bidding for MLB Talent, In-Season only.

Personally, I think that sounds awesome.

Why not using open bidding in the off-season, too? It really makes the most sense in terms of setting a market price.