SKYWALKER WINS RR NBA Dynasty League - S3

[Mack North]

The Stash Clause is a little iffy... Players not in the NBA could technically include college players, players that skipped college to go overseas for a year etc... I believe for you to have one of these guys, they should be in the Yahoo system and have been already drafted by an NBA team. After all, you need 15 players on your Yahoo roster during the season, right? I'm not sure how Yahoo has this now or has done it in the past though.

I mentioned the Tiago Splitter saga earlier... was he in Yahoo during those 3 or 4 years or so that he wasn't on the Spurs after being drafted by them? I'm not sure, but a player in that situation should definitely count as cap space if this is the case in our league.

[Mack North]

Cant let Fully take me out on his final week... wish you would reconsider man! You have a solid team and you're a fine GM.

"Stayyyyyyy with us... won't you, stayyyyyyy with us?" Lol sorry, B Dubs Tuesday got me tipsy

P.S. I guess if he does leave, we don't need to set his lineups for the rest of this week... but this week only, after that you can set em all til we have a new owner.

[Mack North]

**We interrupt this heated debate to bring you actual basketball news**

Kobe sat on the sidelines, looked up at the score with time winding down, and was overheard saying to Jrue Holiday, "I could have easily got 4 blocks and 51 points! No way we should have lost this week!!" Holiday could be seen nodding in agreement. Nevertheless, since they were both in street clothes, neither of them could contribute much of anything to the success of their team.

Kobe was later released by the team.

Gonna be interesting to see who might wanna throw some cash at The Bean on waivers!

[Axel]

The Stash Clause is a little iffy... Players not in the NBA could technically include college players, players that skipped college to go overseas for a year etc... I believe for you to have one of these guys, they should be in the Yahoo system and have been already drafted by an NBA team. After all, you need 15 players on your Yahoo roster during the season, right? I'm not sure how Yahoo has this now or has done it in the past though.

I mentioned the Tiago Splitter saga earlier... was he in Yahoo during those 3 or 4 years or so that he wasn't on the Spurs after being drafted by them? I'm not sure, but a player in that situation should definitely count as cap space if this is the case in our league.

I would be curious to see what Yahoo's parameters on including players to the player pool is.

Realistically, a player who hasn't reached his draft year shouldn't exist in yahoo.

Once a player's draft has taken place (whether drafted or not), I wonder which players get added and which have to wait until they "make it". FWIW, Daniels is on yahoo too. Will have to look back at the last few drafts and research to see who has stuck and who hasn't.

The Splitter example is a good one and is my thoughts as well. If Saric doesn't come over next year, will Yahoo bother adding him or will he disappear from their player pool? We certainly have to maintain him on the cap sheet.

The next question, which I'm not sure anyone else really has interest in or not, is whether we want to incorporate "draft and stash" rules, where a player is drafted, but not in the NBA, but doesn't exist on the cap sheet. Rules to tie in to the re-sign slots would be necessary I think.

[Axel]

In regards to yahoo including Int'l players,

From the 2014 draft, all international players are on there (including deep 2nd rounders).
From the 2013 draft - no Livio Jean-Charles (Spurs 1st rounder) or Alex Abrines (OKC, 32nd overall)
From previous drafts - no international player that hasn't made the jump yet is still listed.

Best guess is that after a rookie year, most players disappear. Saric may stay longer since he was a lottery pick (not too many lotto picks don't come over).

[mcHAPPY]

The Stash Clause is a little iffy... Players not in the NBA could technically include college players, players that skipped college to go overseas for a year etc... I believe for you to have one of these guys, they should be in the Yahoo system and have been already drafted by an NBA team. After all, you need 15 players on your Yahoo roster during the season, right? I'm not sure how Yahoo has this now or has done it in the past though.

I mentioned the Tiago Splitter saga earlier... was he in Yahoo during those 3 or 4 years or so that he wasn't on the Spurs after being drafted by them? I'm not sure, but a player in that situation should definitely count as cap space if this is the case in our league.

For stashing I think you need 3 parameters:

1) player must be drafted by NBA team
2) player must be in Yahoo system
3) player counts towards roster space and counts against the cap.

[mcHAPPY]

P.S. I guess if he does leave, we don't need to set his lineups for the rest of this week... but this week only, after that you can set em all til we have a new owner.

His lineup is set

Sorry dude

[mcHAPPY]

1) In Season Minimum Roster Limit
Can go under 15 - Cap hold (1 year) placed for any roster spot not filled - intent to fill a.s.a.p via Waiver Wire

Yes: mcHAPPY, tucas, Axel, skywalker, Joey, WJF, DanH, koncept, Mack North
No:
PASSED WITH 9 VOTE MAJORITY

__________________________________________________ __________________

2) Off Season Maximum Roster Limit
No Max Limit - Have Roster to 15 or less 7 days prior to FA auction

Yes: mcHAPPY, tucas, Axel, skywalker, Joey, DanH, koncept, Mack North
No:
Withheld: WJF
PASSED WITH 8 (of 15) VOTE MAJORITY

__________________________________________________ __________________

3) Legality of Trading a Player for Capspace/ Years (1 for 0 Trades)
Officially known as "the Parker Ammendment"

Yes: mcHAPPY, tucas, Axel, skwalker, WJF, DanH, koncept, Mack North
No: Joey

__________________________________________________ __________________

4) Limit to Number of Waiver Adds Per Week in Season/Playoffs

Limit to Adds in season
Yes: Axel, skywalker, Joey, WJF, koncept, Mack North
No: mcHAPPY, tucas, DanH

Limits to Adds in Playoffs
Yes: mcHAPPY, Axel, skywalker, tucas, Joey, WJF, DanH, koncept, Mack North
No:

__________________________________________________ __________________

5) Buying-in / Money Pool
The "Money Bags Ammendment"

Yes: Joey, koncept, Mack North
No: mcHAPPY, tucas, Axel, skywalker, WJF, DanH

__________________________________________________ __________________

6) Transactions that are Unclear or not Explicitly banned by CBA are Fair Game
The "Loop-hole Ammendment" or "The Fair Game Clause" (both sound cool! Lol)

Yes: mcHAPPY, tucas, koncept
No: Joey, DanH, WJF, Mack North

__________________________________________________ __________________

7) Adding a player without an NBA contract (usually going to be foreign draft pick, i.e. owning rights)
The "Stash Clause"

Yes: skywalker, Joey, WJF, DanH, koncept, Mack North
No: mcHAPPY, Axel, tucas

QUESTION FROM JOEY: Is The Stash Clause looking to allow Managers to carry players "Rights" without charging said player to the Cap?
Or just to be able to own a player even if they don't technically play in the NBA?
__________________________________________________ __________________



Nearly there guys! Once again, very much appreciate everyones patience through-out this betterment process!

Even though some have technically been passed, I would of course appreciate any feedback on anything that's been actioned on if you feel strongly opposed, and of course, still weigh on if you have not.

Questions:

Re: 3) with 8 of 15 isn't that passed?

Re: 4) is there preference to maintain 3 adds in playoffs (as is) or to set rosters with no adds in playoffs only (change)? I assume we keep same rule as no offseason extensions for playoff signings, regardless.

[Axel]

Questions:

Re: 3) with 8 of 15 isn't that passed?

Re: 4) is there preference to maintain 3 adds in playoffs (as is) or to set rosters with no adds in playoffs only (change)? I assume we keep same rule as no offseason extensions for playoff signings.

Re #3 - 8 is majority for #2 since WJF explicitly withheld from voting. Since we only have 8 yays of the 16 potential voters, technically #3 is still one short (although if Fully is gone, all our voting totals would drop to 15 anyway).

Re #4 - at this point, I say maintain the limit at 3 for the playoffs and see how it goes. I do like the idea of locking playoff rosters though (how many people cycled through expiring guys in last year's playoffs just to maximize the daily plays? - mcHappy wouldn't know since his playoffs didn't last very long )

[mcHAPPY]

Re #3 - 8 is majority for #2 since WJF explicitly withheld from voting. Since we only have 8 yays of the 16 potential voters, technically #3 is still one short (although if Fully is gone, all our voting totals would drop to 15 anyway).

Re #4 - at this point, I say maintain the limit at 3 for the playoffs and see how it goes. I do like the idea of locking playoff rosters though (how many people cycled through expiring guys in last year's playoffs just to maximize the daily plays? - mcHappy wouldn't know since his playoffs didn't last very long )

I thought WJF withheld from 2). Right now 3) it is 8-1.

Re: 4) you dick

[Joey]

Questions:

Re: 3) with 8 of 15 isn't that passed?

Re #3 - 8 is majority for #2 since WJF explicitly withheld from voting. Since we only have 8 yays of the 16 potential voters, technically #3 is still one short.

Exactly my reasoning.

[Joey]

I thought WJF withheld from 2). Right now 3) it is 8-1.

Right, so #3 will still require the 9 for Majority unless someone else withholds their vote as WJF did for #2.

[Mack North]

His lineup is set

Sorry dude

I was only kidding... I wanna play versus full lineups.

[mcHAPPY]

Right, so #3 will still require the 9 for Majority unless someone else withholds their vote as WJF did for #2.

OK. Gotcha now.

[Joey]

#7 is a tricky one because it encompasses a lot. Seems to me it's sort of worded like "if you make a new move not illegal (yet) in the rules it shouldn't be revoked even if that move becomes a new rule.
For example if we voted no for trade a player for nothing, the implication is we wouldn't move those players back already traded.

Its less to do with revoking questionable moves after the fact, and more about having a rule where those moves must be brought before the league before you can even make them.