SQL Utilities/Financial Utility

[Ryan]

Dear God.

[funclown]

You're doing it wrong. You have to say, "I can haz voteburger?"

Fine. I call for a haz voteburger!

[BradZ]

Lol, so we putting this to a vote or what?

You're doing it wrong. You have to say, "I can haz voteburger?"

[funclown]

Lol, so we putting this to a vote or what?

[BradZ]

I also think that minor league callups (ie purchasing contracts from your minor league teams) are allowed to push you over the cap.

Brad, I think the cap is based on payroll, not player expenses.

Ah, so I guess a team would just have to negotiate enough cash in a deal to buy down the contract.

[BradZ]

I thought based on 1991 we were all clear.

We would be provided arb figures don't push a team or two slightly above.

[Andrew]

I also think that minor league callups (ie purchasing contracts from your minor league teams) are allowed to push you over the cap.

Brad, I think the cap is based on payroll, not player expenses.

[funclown]

I thought based on 1991 we were all clear.

[BradZ]

Anyone correct me if I am wrong but I see just Philly and Commish above the cap? If we set it at 96.8, Philly will make it too, it would be just Virginia that we'd have to work out.

Philly's 1991 payroll, as it stands right now with arb estimates, is set at 73.4mil. We'd be fine with $95mil as a cap.

That does raise a question though. Our 1990 financials are a good example of midseason trades raising "payroll" above a $ limit (in this case our final payroll figure ended above the luxury tax level of $94 and change), but our actual player expenses were only $86.5mil, below the luxury tax. So, how do we account for a team that wants to make a trade that would force the "payroll" number above the cap, but wouldn't force their end of season player expense number above?

[Delandis]

Will a 95 million dollar cap impact any teams this season?

Anyone correct me if I am wrong but I see just Philly and Commish above the cap? If we set it at 96.8, Philly will make it too, it would be just Virginia that we'd have to work out.

[Clay]

Will a 95 million dollar cap impact any teams this season?

[funclown]

Think I'd be ok with Abitration making u over the cap. Eventually not signing extensions, f/a will be impacted.

I'd vote for 95ml for the hard cap due to the abitration loophole.

[Carlos]

Yea, resigning talent is important for the small market teams. Whatever you give the small markets, the large markets are going to be able to use no matter the situation. So, while it would seem unfair to allow them to go above the cap to retain talent, it's far more important that small market teams are able to retain their own talent.

[Delandis]

I think I read that extensions can't violate a hard cap for two years. Prioritizing extensions would become more important. But I'm wondering how the game would prevent arbitration salaries from violating the cap. Maybe it would end up being a loophole?

I don't see any problem with people being able to resign their home grown talent.

[BradZ]

I think I read that extensions can't violate a hard cap for two years. Prioritizing extensions would become more important. But I'm wondering how the game would prevent arbitration salaries from violating the cap. Maybe it would end up being a loophole?

I've tested the arbitration thing and it definitely will allow you to break the payroll cap via arbitration signings.