World 15 Discussion

[Maca24]

What are the maximum amount of players that can be poached from one club?

[ossie85]

Honestly I'm not a fan of an actual salary cap to be honest, especially if the contracts are just one year long before someone can bid for your player. You said ossie it's the owners own fault that they're not paying a player enough if they have a break out, but let's use an example from my team.

Matthew Wright was a 22 year old who had been picked up from the 2010 rookie draft. Didn't play in 2010, and then played in 2011 averaging 68, so not all that fantasy relevant. This year however he had a breakout and upped his average by 20 points to 88. No one would have expected that and now his value is a lot more than it was one season ago. And since I wouldn't have been paying him much anyone could just come in and take him.

I think the only way it could work would be that at the end of each season we tell you what we are willing to pay them for the following season and then people can try and pay more. But even then it is pretty silly because in the AFL players wont just go to another club because they can earn some more money. They might stay at a club because they think they will get premiership success.

Sorry CF, I wasn't clear. That's exactly how I see it happening, at the end of the year you set the prices for the next year.

Understand the realism argument, but at the moment you could have a player that would be in the best XV at one club, but is perpetually on the outer at a succesful one - players leave for opportunity all the time (look at Mummy as a prime example).


@Maca, 2 players lost would be maximum, and compensation would be given.

And yeah, agree on the limit on who you can bid for. If you can only bid what you can afford though, that should limit the amount of bids you can make. I.e. if you had $700,000 free in the cap, you can only make $700,000 worth of bids...

[AFEV]

How would this work with trading? Would we just PM you to tell you their new wage or would they keep the wage they had at their old club?

[Maca24]

Thanks Ossie.
How many bids would we be aloud to put in? As many as we wanted?

[c4v3m4n]

Honestly I'm not a fan of an actual salary cap to be honest, especially if the contracts are just one year long before someone can bid for your player. You said ossie it's the owners own fault that they're not paying a player enough if they have a break out, but let's use an example from my team.

Matthew Wright was a 22 year old who had been picked up from the 2010 rookie draft. Didn't play in 2010, and then played in 2011 averaging 68, so not all that fantasy relevant. This year however he had a breakout and upped his average by 20 points to 88. No one would have expected that and now his value is a lot more than it was one season ago. And since I wouldn't have been paying him much anyone could just come in and take him.

I think the only way it could work would be that at the end of each season we tell you what we are willing to pay them for the following season and then people can try and pay more. But even then it is pretty silly because in the AFL players wont just go to another club because they can earn some more money. They might stay at a club because they think they will get premiership success.

If we were ever going to look at having a salary cap, we should have done it from day one in the draft, like an IPL bidding draft. It's too late to add something like this now, it'll complicate things far beyond what I'd like.

Let's just keep it simple and leave the competition as is. Please.

[ossie85]

Thanks Ossie.
How many bids would we be aloud to put in? As many as we wanted?

:( Second question you've asked I've already answered....


Reckon trading re-sets it all Sid, do bidding first, and then trading after.

[Maca24]

Sorry Ossie but I fail to See how it works despite reading :p
I'm not a big fan of the idea due to it becoming technical but hey you're the boss.

[CrowsFan]

Still not a fan of the idea to be honest. In my opinion you can't really change something from a draft oriented game to a salary game. If we're doing this then we might as well not have a nat draft and just have teams bidding on the players they want.

With people having different strategies it just wont work, because a team such as Mexico for example is extremely strong now so will have to pay his star players a lot to keep them, but obviously will want to keep some youth prospects in the team for the future, but wont be able to pay them much, but will later once the older players retire. But before it gets to that stage a team that has gone youth such as the Islanders can come in and offer more to the young player and take him away from Mexico just because they can afford to pay more to the player.

Makes it far too complicated and severely disadvantages the stronger teams trying to keep players, and benefits the teams that have gone the youth approach.

[Maca24]

Agree with CF.
Also the game is meant to be about skill, but if we are giving the lower teams such a huge advantage then we are punishing the coaches that have used their skills to get to the position they were wanting.

[Purple 77]

I like this idea, but it has potential to be messy.

But I suppose we have a whole year to think about it, and iron out things we are unclear about; if this was to go through. It's not like a decision has to be made now.

[AFEV]

Agree with CF.
Also the game is meant to be about skill, but if we are giving the lower teams such a huge advantage then we are punishing the coaches that have used their skills to get to the position they were wanting.

I think it would actually add a whole lot of skill to the game...Having to choose/predict which players to choose, where to spend your cap...Managing that well would definitely be a challenge.

It doesn't exactly advantage teams such as C4 and I as much as you might think, players like Greene and Rockliff would be just as sought after as a Watson or a Swan and we'd have to pay them accordingly. The weaker your team is the more important it is to retain your few good players, and how you manage that again comes down to skill.

But like P77 said could get pretty messy.

[Maca24]

C4 would just pay rockliff tonnes.
CF wouldn't be able to pay enough for all of his guns.

[AFEV]

C4 would just pay rockliff tonnes.
CF wouldn't be able to pay enough for all of his guns.

If he managed his cap well enough I daresay he'd be able to retain most if not all of them.

You have to watch and predict the market and it'd be difficult but definitely doable. Deciding whether to pay your players according to their relative value or absolute value could make or break a list.

It wouldn't be easy to poach big players anyway. Assume that you can pay your 10 'protected' players 600k each. Now, the maximum that any team can have free in their cap is 500k. To poach one of those 600k players (assuming you need to outbid by say...100k) you'd need to have used only 95% of your cap and then delist 4 bottom wage players just to make a half decent bid.

That's a lot of effort to land one player and you might not even get them.

But that's not all, of course you can't just cut your list down by 4 players so now you need to lower some wages in other areas which leaves you open to having players poached.

So if you pay your guy 600k and leave a bit of cap space to fend off poachers you should be able to get through a bid period (mostly) scratch free.

Trading would still be the easiest way to land a big player IMO, this is more for the small market players.

[My Chumps]

O'Keefe a pure midfielder  :(  :'(

[ossie85]

C4 would just pay rockliff tonnes.
CF wouldn't be able to pay enough for all of his guns.

If he managed his cap well enough I daresay he'd be able to retain most if not all of them.

You have to watch and predict the market and it'd be difficult but definitely doable. Deciding whether to pay your players according to their relative value or absolute value could make or break a list.

It wouldn't be easy to poach big players anyway. Assume that you can pay your 10 'protected' players 600k each. Now, the maximum that any team can have free in their cap is 500k. To poach one of those 600k players (assuming you need to outbid by say...100k) you'd need to have used only 95% of your cap and then delist 4 bottom wage players just to make a half decent bid.

That's a lot of effort to land one player and you might not even get them.

But that's not all, of course you can't just cut your list down by 4 players so now you need to lower some wages in other areas which leaves you open to having players poached.

So if you pay your guy 600k and leave a bit of cap space to fend off poachers you should be able to get through a bid period (mostly) scratch free.

Trading would still be the easiest way to land a big player IMO, this is more for the small market players.

Think Sid's nailed it there :)