Draft Salaries

[braven112]

Here is what I'm proposing we vote on:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_Nagl ... sp=sharing

I tried to address these concern's below as well as my sticking point that some of the other proposals dramatically increased salaries after the 1.05 pick all the way till the end of the 2nd round..

I think my biggest sticking points throughout all of this have been
- The cost of the 1.01 is very high for a RB compared to every other position
- The cost of WRs vs RBs should be brought closer to together (maybe have a single scale for those two positions?)
- The cost of the 1st round draft picks should be brought closer together as the taper rate on them is quite dramatic from the top of the 1st to the middle.

There is a comparison chart in the spreadsheet as well as here. Note that some proposals had one price per pick and others different per position so I averaged the cost per position so its easier to compare between them.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

- I like that the RBs and WRs are closer in cost, as evidenced by running the formula over w/ the updated salaries.
- I like that the salaries in the second round aren't as "cheap" as they are now and don't hit their low point until mid-way thru the 2nd.
- I have no issues at all with 3rd round salaries being slightly higher than a UDFA
- I'm sure there's a reason for the RBs salary to decline faster than the WRs, but I would think with them starting only 100k apart at the top they'd be a little closer in cost as the draft progressed?

Overall I can see myself getting on board with the proposed

[Cybergeek]

I like the proposal as well. It is a good mix of all of the ideas from this thread. It's not as big of a change as some of the other proposals, which gives it a better chance of being voted in.

[braven112]

- I'm sure there's a reason for the RBs salary to decline faster than the WRs, but I would think with them starting only 100k apart at the top they'd be a little closer in cost as the draft progressed?

Generally we roster more WR's than RB's so generally it tends to be a deeper position than RB's. Same idea with QB's.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

- I'm sure there's a reason for the RBs salary to decline faster than the WRs, but I would think with them starting only 100k apart at the top they'd be a little closer in cost as the draft progressed?

Generally we roster more WR's than RB's so generally it tends to be a deeper position than RB's. Same idea with QB's.

Makes sense

[bonscott]

Do it.

By the way, I now know my Excel-fu is nothing, I'm just a hack.

[Cybergeek]

Do it.

By the way, I now know my Excel-fu is nothing, I'm just a hack.

[Wascawy Wabbits]

This thread kinda lost steam...
Does it need to get more response to consider putting it to vote?
Would this go into affect for next season or 2017?

[braven112]

I'm going to put it up for vote today. I wanted to wait till the draft week so everyone will be online. Since its not a drastic proposal, if it passes it will go into effect next season.