Post by White Sox GM (Michael S.) on Jan 7, 2024 3:45:03 GMT -5
We have previously had some issues with respect to RFA bids, which exceed the cap of a team. Our general offseason bidding sets forth in Rule E(4) with respect to Free Agency Bidding:
With regard to adherence to salary cap and roster size, The Show will relax the general rule during the off-season only to allow some flexibility in light of the blind bidding system. Each GM will be allowed to carry up to 4 extra players at any point in time during the auctions. During this off season exercise, each franchise will be able to exceed their salary cap by up to 10% of their cap. If a winning bid takes a team over 110% of the salary cap [for] all players, then that bid will be voided. If a team provides a priority list, that will be used to determine which bid to invalidate. If a priority list is not provided, the bids will be processed in the order they were submitted.
In interpreting the League Rules, it has not been clear whether this cap limitation also applies to RFA bidding. However, to be consistent with Free Agency Bidding, it is my opinion that RFA bidding should be subject to the same or similar limitations as regular Free Agency Bidding. While there are nuances which make RFA bidding and regular Free Agency different, the underlying principle is to have RFA bids, which are more consistent with team's existing salary cap structures.
If we apply the same standard of 110% [However, I had previously suggested last year that this could be up to 150%]:
You will only be permitted to submit RFA bids which, in the aggregate would be no more than 110% of your available cap space. Accordingly, priority lists will be permitted. For instance, if your available cap space is $30 million, you will be permitted to place RFA [2024] bids which are in the aggregate of $33 million. You, however, cannot place a (2024) $20 million bid on player A, a (2024) $13 million bid on player B, a (2024) $10 million bid on player C and a (2024) $10 million bid on player D, unless you submit a priority list with your bids. In this scenario, your bids for player A and B would be valid. If you are the winning bidder for players A and B, your bids for players C and D will be voided. If you are not the winning bidder for player A, your bids for players B, C, and D would be valid. This will require more strategic planning for your RFA bids.
I am open to a vote as to whether the standard for RFA bidding should be 110% or 150% of available salary cap.
Proposed New Rule for Bidding on your own RFAs:
Under the Rules you can bid on your own RFA players. However, there will now be a maximum bid of a one year contract for your own RFAs. As a result, if you are the only bidder on your Player A, you can theoretically retain your player on a one year $300,000 contract.
With regard to adherence to salary cap and roster size, The Show will relax the general rule during the off-season only to allow some flexibility in light of the blind bidding system. Each GM will be allowed to carry up to 4 extra players at any point in time during the auctions. During this off season exercise, each franchise will be able to exceed their salary cap by up to 10% of their cap. If a winning bid takes a team over 110% of the salary cap [for] all players, then that bid will be voided. If a team provides a priority list, that will be used to determine which bid to invalidate. If a priority list is not provided, the bids will be processed in the order they were submitted.
In interpreting the League Rules, it has not been clear whether this cap limitation also applies to RFA bidding. However, to be consistent with Free Agency Bidding, it is my opinion that RFA bidding should be subject to the same or similar limitations as regular Free Agency Bidding. While there are nuances which make RFA bidding and regular Free Agency different, the underlying principle is to have RFA bids, which are more consistent with team's existing salary cap structures.
If we apply the same standard of 110% [However, I had previously suggested last year that this could be up to 150%]:
You will only be permitted to submit RFA bids which, in the aggregate would be no more than 110% of your available cap space. Accordingly, priority lists will be permitted. For instance, if your available cap space is $30 million, you will be permitted to place RFA [2024] bids which are in the aggregate of $33 million. You, however, cannot place a (2024) $20 million bid on player A, a (2024) $13 million bid on player B, a (2024) $10 million bid on player C and a (2024) $10 million bid on player D, unless you submit a priority list with your bids. In this scenario, your bids for player A and B would be valid. If you are the winning bidder for players A and B, your bids for players C and D will be voided. If you are not the winning bidder for player A, your bids for players B, C, and D would be valid. This will require more strategic planning for your RFA bids.
I am open to a vote as to whether the standard for RFA bidding should be 110% or 150% of available salary cap.
Proposed New Rule for Bidding on your own RFAs:
Under the Rules you can bid on your own RFA players. However, there will now be a maximum bid of a one year contract for your own RFAs. As a result, if you are the only bidder on your Player A, you can theoretically retain your player on a one year $300,000 contract.
