Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Apr 26, 2018 14:41:33 GMT -5
This is a concept Ive been thinking about for a while, again in an attempt to come to as close to the real game as possible.
That is the idea that a team who wins a bid on a player who's contract expired in the off-season, and that a small percentage discount on the yearly annual salary of that player would be applied as discounts for a player not having to finance a move from one city to another. That discount would only apply to players won, after the previous years contract faithfully expired, and only the team of original origin from the previous season would have rights to this discount. All other 31 teams will pay complete market value. Where if all thing were equal, a player moving from one city to another would require relocations costs of having to pick up and up root a family. Things such as selling and buying a home, pulling kids out of school and the general trial that may occur in this players life because of this transition. Would a player be willing to stay and choose his former team where he has roots, if the costs of moving were made negligible. In general terms, would the team of origin have greater leverage in its negotiations with one of its former players? I think in general term, yes.
So here's an idea I propose. That when a player enters into free agency, he will be able to test the market and demand his fair market value, and if the team that originally had his rights the year before wins that player, a small discounted price of the yearly salary would be applied to that organization.
For example:
The Rams had the rights for Robert Woods in 2017 as he entered into UFA in the 2018 offseason.
Robert Woods was won in free agency by the Carolina Panther at a price of 4 years @ 13M per year.
But it was the Los Angeles Rams that has Woods the previous season, and assuming the Rams would have bid at 4 years at 13.5M and won the closing bid after a 24 hour period, then the Rams would get that hometown discount based on the final contract numbers negotiated in free agency. For example, let assume that the hometown discount rate was 7%, then the Rams GM would resign Robert Woods at a rate discounted by 0.945M, rounded off comes in at 0.95M, leaving a total contract price of 13.5M - 0.95m = 12.55M per year for 4 years.
Again, the Rams however would have to win him outright first in free agency, and the discount would apply only there after.
Thoughts?
That is the idea that a team who wins a bid on a player who's contract expired in the off-season, and that a small percentage discount on the yearly annual salary of that player would be applied as discounts for a player not having to finance a move from one city to another. That discount would only apply to players won, after the previous years contract faithfully expired, and only the team of original origin from the previous season would have rights to this discount. All other 31 teams will pay complete market value. Where if all thing were equal, a player moving from one city to another would require relocations costs of having to pick up and up root a family. Things such as selling and buying a home, pulling kids out of school and the general trial that may occur in this players life because of this transition. Would a player be willing to stay and choose his former team where he has roots, if the costs of moving were made negligible. In general terms, would the team of origin have greater leverage in its negotiations with one of its former players? I think in general term, yes.
So here's an idea I propose. That when a player enters into free agency, he will be able to test the market and demand his fair market value, and if the team that originally had his rights the year before wins that player, a small discounted price of the yearly salary would be applied to that organization.
For example:
The Rams had the rights for Robert Woods in 2017 as he entered into UFA in the 2018 offseason.
Robert Woods was won in free agency by the Carolina Panther at a price of 4 years @ 13M per year.
But it was the Los Angeles Rams that has Woods the previous season, and assuming the Rams would have bid at 4 years at 13.5M and won the closing bid after a 24 hour period, then the Rams would get that hometown discount based on the final contract numbers negotiated in free agency. For example, let assume that the hometown discount rate was 7%, then the Rams GM would resign Robert Woods at a rate discounted by 0.945M, rounded off comes in at 0.95M, leaving a total contract price of 13.5M - 0.95m = 12.55M per year for 4 years.
Again, the Rams however would have to win him outright first in free agency, and the discount would apply only there after.
Thoughts?
