Contract Years For Tagged Players

[Achon44]

I'm not sure if there is a rule of thumb for this, but I was thinking that if there is an offer made to a tagged player with multiples years (example $2M for 2 years) that all bids after that should be for no less that 2 years. Is there a guideline for this?

[bonscott]

From what the constitution says a higher salary trumps any years.

If a team tags a guy at the 1 year tender for 6 million, then a team can place a higher bid 2 ways; either a higher salary or more years on the contract. So a team could bid 1 years at 6.025 million. A second team could bid 4 year at 6.025, then they would be the highest bid. The final contract offer could be 1 year at 6.05 million.

[Achon44]

Gotcha. Kind of doesn't make sense. A $2M contract at 2 years is worth $4.2M and a $2.5M contract at 1 year is worth $2.5M.

[braven112]

We tried to keep it as simple as possible though its by no means perfect. Your example makes sense, though we didn't want to use total value as that can skew things as well...

1 million contract for 5 years is worth just over 6.1 million in total value but would never be accepted in real life over a 5 million for 1 year even though the total value is greater in the first option.

[Achon44]

1 million contract for 5 years is worth just over 6.1 million in total value but would never be accepted in real life over a 5 million for 1 year even though the total value is greater in the first option.

Agreed. My thinking is once somebody makes a bid for 2 years that any bid made after that must be for no less than 2 years.

[bocious]

1 million contract for 5 years is worth just over 6.1 million in total value but would never be accepted in real life over a 5 million for 1 year even though the total value is greater in the first option.

Agreed. My thinking is once somebody makes a bid for 2 years that any bid made after that must be for no less than 2 years.

This makes sense to me.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

1 million contract for 5 years is worth just over 6.1 million in total value but would never be accepted in real life over a 5 million for 1 year even though the total value is greater in the first option.

Agreed. My thinking is once somebody makes a bid for 2 years that any bid made after that must be for no less than 2 years.

This makes sense to me.

Wouldnt a min bid of 5 years put a crutch on anyone that was also wanting that player but for less years?

[Achon44]

Wouldnt a min bid of 5 years put a crutch on anyone that was also wanting that player but for less years?

Sure it would and that's where strategy comes in.

[braven112]

Basically years trump salary, which for the higher end players does make a lot of sense. It would also give the original team tagging the player a much better chance at a long term deal.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

Wouldnt a min bid of 5 years put a crutch on anyone that was also wanting that player but for less years?

Sure it would and that's where strategy comes in.

Implementing a years condition rule into tagging a player would be a neat little wrinkle to tagging. Maybe something where the offer can be a 1 year less than the previous offer. But I guess this could eventually lead to multiple bids, each time dropping the number of years... But

Dunno how much I'd want to drop X number of dollars on a player only for someone to open w/ a smaller bid of 5 years right off the bat on them and being stuck with having to also offer 5 years. The strategy w/ submitting offers also lies w/ trying to put an offer that the original owner doesn't see beneficial to them anymore. A lower multi year offer on a player would may end up being matched a lot of the time?

I actually think that Geeks suggestion to put a 48hr clock from the start of an offer was fantastic.

As it stands right now, you put a bid and you gotta wait forever...
If you put a clock on it, everyone has to take action to formulate a strategy on what to do with that player. Right now, whoever is the last person to bid "wins" the offer that can be matched or not. This is the first time I've put a bid on a player, and there's still 2 weeks before the tagging period concludes to know if any of those offers will stand and then another wait to find out if it'll be matched. If my cap dollars were more fluid, like in FA, it could make this tagging period a lot more interesting.

With the number of studs available in this tagging period, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we see a flurry of bids as the deadline approaches so no one "tips their hand". A future 2nd isn't a lot to give up if you can secure some of these guys that are tagged as RFA2.

[bonscott]

I don't think it really matters for number of years because frankly, how often is a tagged bid going to be more then 1 year? No way in heck I'm going to bid 2 or 3 years on a guy and allow that team to match and lock that player for multiple years. Outside of a unique situation I would never bid more then one year on a player just to prevent that. I want to force that player to get super expensive if tagged again next year or off to the auction.

[bocious]

how often is a tagged bid going to be more then 1 year?

Aaron Rodgers and the Seahawks D both come to mind offhand, and a few seasons back I traded for Peyton Manning who Brandon had locked in for multiple years. I'm sure there are other examples if we scour the forum.

Personally, I like the idea of simply saying that new bids must be at least the same salary and number of years as the current high bid. Seems pretty straightforward and easy.

[bonesman]

ain't broke, don't fix

[bonscott]

ain't broke, don't fix

[Achon44]

ain't broke, don't fix

Every two years I trade my perfectly good cell phone in for a new one. Just because something "ain't broke" doesn't mean it can't be improved.

[bonesman]

well when someone actually proposes something that's an improvement we'll take it from there

[Achon44]

well when someone actually proposes something that's an improvement we'll take it from there

It's such a Godsend that you're here to make all the tough decisions for us. We are truly blessed to have you.

And Wabbits, I totally agree with you about Geeks idea for the 48hr clock.

[bonesman]

well when someone actually proposes something that's an improvement we'll take it from there

It's such a Godsend that you're here to make all the tough decisions for us. We are truly blessed to have you.

And Wabbits, I totally agree with you about Geeks idea for the 48hr clock.

[Achon44]

Looks like Geeks idea just picked up another vote.

[bonscott]

We definitely need some sort of clock starting the last day (24 hours is fine). No way I'm staying up until midnight on a Monday when I gotta get up at 5am for work.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

We definitely need some sort of clock starting the last day (24 hours is fine). No way I'm staying up until midnight on a Monday when I gotta get up at 5am for work.

I'm interested to see how much action there is Monday night when the tagging deadline is about to hit

[Cybergeek]

I say either have a clock for the entire period or no clock at all. To me it's about an ideology, pick one, clock or no clock. In my opinion, it shouldn't be based on convenience, but on philosophical principles.

With a clock throughout the bidding period, the league has auction style bidding for all free agency periods, and sniping is eliminated.

Without a clock, we sit and wait until the deadline to see if a sniping bid occurs.

We have auction bidding for off-season free agency. We have auction bidding for in-season free agency. Why not for tagged free agency?

Of course the answer could be that the snipe is so ingrained as part of the league identity that ownership doesn't want to change it. If the timing of the deadline is an issue for east coasters, perhaps it could be arranged so that the deadline occurs on a Saturday.

[Cybergeek]

We have auction bidding for off-season free agency. We have auction bidding for in-season free agency. Why not for tagged free agency?

Just wanted to point out an inaccuracy in my previous post. In-season free agency is done through blind bidding and FCFS.

[bonesman]

Looks like Geeks idea just picked up another vote.

big proponent of the 48 hr clock

[Wascawy Wabbits]

Of course the answer could be that the snipe is so ingrained as part of the league identity that ownership doesn't want to change it. If the timing of the deadline is an issue for east coasters, perhaps it could be arranged so that the deadline occurs on a Saturday.

I think this may end up becoming a new thing after the the change was implemented last off-season. The cost of the Franchise tag went up, the transition tag lost it's compensation, and the cost of the RFA tag went down.

I think last year was the first time (at least since I joined) that there were bids submitted as late as they were (on Lynch)