I'm waiting for the $185M answer.

I've used the same logic. It's net of a liability. Someone is giving up something to get me there. Must be ok.

Or, is there some arbitrary number in your head where it stops being ok?

Funny thing is, for many, that number is 0. But, you have to hammerhead some vague, mysterious player X that crossed the threshold and should make it ok for everyone.

I said quit using logic

I want jclarkbakeout to tell me what the arbitrary ok to add cash number is!!!!

I thought it was 185M as long as assets equal liabilities and the players are real good!!!!!

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 9:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 5:49:00 PM (view original):
Not quite. Your payroll and cap are $100M. You trade the player for $5M and receive $5M cash. Your payroll goes down to $95M and your cap goes up to $105M. You now have $10M available. If you waive the player your payroll goes down to $95M and your cap stays at $100M leaving $5M available. See now?

Bwb must have missed this post ....

You are not recieving an additional 5m in cash. The deal is a net  5m  one way, and a net minus 5m the other.
 5M player plus 27k player  for 27k player

Posted by jclarkbaker on 7/30/2012 10:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/30/2012 7:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jclarkbaker on 7/30/2012 5:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 4:43:00 PM (view original):
True. But on its own, the idea of giving another owner $5M more than everybody else while bringing my total budget down to $180M is pretty unappealing. I'd have to be getting a screaming deal to agree to that.

Holy ****.  I literally cannot believe what I am reading.

Sigh.......

Question, jclark. And yes, I'm getting philosophical. There is also a follow up question/point depending on how you answer this:

Do you see the $185M as a budget given to you, or a cap the league imposes?

It's a budget.  The system allows you to go over that number after initially setting your budget.  However, the league has a cap: 32 x $185m.  That number cannot be exceeded.

Ok. So it's a budget. And you spent time in the beginning of the season setting your budget. X million to this scouting, Y million to training, Z training to medical, etc. You take time making sure you have enough money to each part of your budget, to make sure you have enough in FA, prospect $, etc. And everyone is on a level playing field - everyone has the same challenge as you - to take your $185M and set your budget to best accomplish your goals for this season.

Someone in your division spends too much in getting international free agents. The draft comes, and he can't afford his 1st rd draft pick. A team buys a player off him, a cheap player who is about to hit Arb. He gets his draft pick, and promotes his player in AAA who was ready to replace him anyway, who was once an international free agent that was signed 3 seasons prior when, guess what, that owner spent too much money to get him (and let's say you could have gotten him, but didn't because you realized you needed to sign your draft picks) and then sold another player to be able to sign his draft picks.

Do you see how this can be abused? How it isnt exactly fair? One team spends $190M on his team, while you, and the rest of the league, spends $185M.

Why is this fair? You spent your $185M in an efficient way, didn't screw anything up, didn't need a bailout. Why should one owner be allowed to spend $190M this season? Your division rival continues a trend of being allowed to spend more money than you, or anyone else in the league, did.

Posted by bwb53 on 7/30/2012 10:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 9:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 5:49:00 PM (view original):
Not quite. Your payroll and cap are $100M. You trade the player for $5M and receive $5M cash. Your payroll goes down to $95M and your cap goes up to $105M. You now have $10M available. If you waive the player your payroll goes down to $95M and your cap stays at $100M leaving $5M available. See now?

Bwb must have missed this post ....

You are not recieving an additional 5m in cash. The deal is a net  5m  one way, and a net minus 5m the other.
 5M player plus 27k player  for 27k player

Somewhere along the way I missed that we weren't talking about trading the $5M cash anymore

Posted by bwb53 on 7/30/2012 10:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 9:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hbdgirl on 7/30/2012 5:49:00 PM (view original):
Not quite. Your payroll and cap are $100M. You trade the player for $5M and receive $5M cash. Your payroll goes down to $95M and your cap goes up to $105M. You now have $10M available. If you waive the player your payroll goes down to $95M and your cap stays at $100M leaving $5M available. See now?

Bwb must have missed this post ....

You are not recieving an additional 5m in cash. The deal is a net  5m  one way, and a net minus 5m the other.
 5M player plus 27k player  for 27k player

If there's no additional cash, then what you're stating is irrelevant to this thread. Stop causing headaches.

You are trading him.

Posted by bwb53 on 7/30/2012 10:54:00 PM (view original):
You are trading him.

What? Go away.

5m Player  and 27k player traded for 27k player

Posted by bwb53 on 7/30/2012 10:57:00 PM (view original):
5m Player  and 27k player traded for 27k player

If there's no additional cash, then this is irrelevant to this thread. Stop causing headaches.

That's a salary dump which is a different story. But the worlds I play in frown on that as well. There are plenty of openings in worlds that don't. To each his own.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/30/2012 10:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jclarkbaker on 7/30/2012 10:36:00 PM (view original):
So, no takers re what the advantage is of getting $5m as opposed to cutting $5m in liabilities?  I thought not.  So sad.

Because you would have $190m of assets (scouting/training/medical/coaching/prospect/payroll budgets) instead of $185m.

What's that?  You don't understand?  I thought not.  So sad.

Sigh.......

You can't stop someone from that unless you eliminate the waiver wire. You can veto the trade  sure, but I waive/ designate him and get the same results from the same owner., except I am not limited to 5m.

Depends on the players. In the worlds I play in your aging vets with contracts over $327K are going to clear waivers unless they have something legit to offer in the majors.