Quote:
Originally Posted by Solonor
EDIT: Duh. The "minimum salary guys" bit just hit me in the head. I see what you're saying. Yes, the cap would be ignored in that case, because minimum salary is minimum salary (kinda like arbitration is arbitration). So, I understand what you're getting at now. I will TT this, but since the cap is not historical, then I doubt it will be an easy fix for the same reason you can't decide on how to fix it yourself...what percentage growth do you use? Who knows?
|
So, in the case of minimum salary described above... should the team
only sign guys to minimum salary contracts to do their best to stay under the cap? Even if this means losing a star player? In other words, if there is an absurdly low cap (say... 10 dollars), should every player on the team be signed to a minimum salary deal? Or can the team at that point just act as if there is no cap? Because in this case, they're doing the latter, even though this isn't an absurdly low salary cap like that, (as evidenced by the fact that
some of the teams are obeying the cap).
I can certainly see the complications that arise from all of these different situations, though. I'll pour through some transaction logs and see what's going on with all of these teams and report back sometime later.
Thanks for the info!