New CBA talk. Last chance to get stuff in before voting!

[BrazilianDude]

So we are looking to have a new CBA for next season. I think I will leave this post up for 2 days. After those two days the important issues will go into a poll for voting. If you post something that needs to be added to this list just tag me and I can add it to the OP when I have time.  bundybastard shorty itnas123 obviously feel free to add stuff in here/ throw in your two cents where ever. Just trying to get the ball rolling a bit.

Main topics for potential change this coming CBA


1. CY- change length?
Currently 4 years, 5th CY. I personally propose we bump it up one year. so 5 seasons 6th CY but would not be mad if we kept it

2. cy- change format ( expansion, fire gm)
 I personally think we should change this. Very open to suggestions. I think it should be one or the other, unless the GM sucks then could be  a good usage for firing them. Difference between a bad GM and someone who stuff doesnt work out for.

4.  A new GM taking over an expansioned team has to have at least 35 mil on the salary book after the expansion draft. One thing I hate is how a cy team should give the new gm pretty much gaurentee top pick next season?


5. cap restrictions- higher or keep same
. I feel that we should move it up 1-2 mil AT MOST. I like the balance of the league as is. Higher cap just makes it easier for GMs to offer shit contracts and live with them. A skill I think GMs will develop over the next few seasons will be negotiating and risk taking. Not every player deserves a max. 

7. option to cut rookies ( i propose non lotto rookies have option to be cut after second season for 25 cash each) like a buy out

draft lists being imposed


8. CY pick protection ( i think already established top 6) We need to figure out trading too. Many teams trade the picks far in advance to get better and it does not work out. 

9. fire super every other season?
I vote yes

10. contract negociations- i think would be too much work for Gm. maybe allow one every season or limit to only star players

11. Idk how people will like this, but a trial period/must prove yourself for a new gm in first year. Every time a new GM comes in they trade all their good players for shit to tank hard as fuck. This is not good for the league. forces other good teams to aquire good players for nothing and doesnt show us much about the new GM. would be interesting to see them try and make moves to get better instead.  Not taking a shot at ROY bc he is doing good, but if you think about it the sixers had a new gm do this like 10 times lol... pacers too

12. 30 min clock after finals are finished for draft. If you have not already picked by end of playoffs Mandatory list.

13. an 'insulted' stipulation to max-calibre RFAs in an old league. If a guy got lowballed by a team, he would lose a random amount of potential from 1-10 (random.com) because he felt as if his team lost trust in him for low balled contracts via RFA so that you can not lowball your own guys to use the loop in the FA period. ( i think already implemented )

[BrazilianDude]

Everyone look at this and give input.

Hawks- BANNAK
celtics- blue
nets- @lakersgm1
Hornets- itnas123
bulls- bloop
cavs- entrapy
mavs- swish
nuggets- springs
pistons- username
warriors- ducksruleall51
rockets- lakers209er
pacers- @saric
clippers- nyybaseball
lakers- getbeard
grizzlies- BrazilianDude
heat- ballislife
bucks- danieldias17
timberwolves- daedalus
jazz- gmgreggor
knicks- SuperMaor23
sonics- somerandomguy
magic- Flip
76ers- rookieoftheyear
suns- popnfresh
blazers- HyperYellow
kings- basenoc
spurs- guins
raptors- tyfreak
wizards- celticfan

[tyfreak]

9. fire super every other season?
I vote yes

I agree

[daedalus]

For the rfa rule it should be clearer. Are we talking about 5 mil per to a max player or what number in particular. I agree teams should have to offer reasonable terms just need to hash out what is reasonable.

[BANNAK]

Apr 16, 2015 15:25:05 GMT daedalus said:

For the rfa rule it should be clearer. Are we talking about 5 mil per to a max player or what number in particular. I agree teams should have to offer reasonable terms just need to hash out what is reasonable.

I think the simmers will decide what is reasonable

[guins]

i have 2 ideas

#1 - Completely eliminate the CY , if a GM is not active..or just keeps tanking..then its time for him to move on if the moves keep falling through..( AKA the real life 76ers GM RULE) An acitve GM who has some bad luck(draft busts,injuries.etc...thats tough to let them go though.

#2 - The Draft should be started after the Finals , but to make it go smooth, have the actual draft day set as the the day after the finals..1 day..starting at 8pm EST..15 minutes per pick, if you arent going to be there , please send in draft lists or your pick will be autoed after the 15 minutes pass.

these are just some suggestions

[daedalus]

Apr 16, 2015 15:03:29 GMT BrazilianDude said:

So we are looking to have a new CBA for next season. I think I will leave this post up for 2 days. After those two days the important issues will go into a poll for voting. If you post something that needs to be added to this list just tag me and I can add it to the OP when I have time.  bundybastard shorty itnas123 obviously feel free to add stuff in here/ throw in your two cents where ever. Just trying to get the ball rolling a bit.

Main topics for potential change this coming CBA


1. CY- change length?
Currently 4 years, 5th CY. I personally propose we bump it up one year. so 5 seasons 6th CY but would not be mad if we kept it

2. cy- change format ( expansion, fire gm)
 I personally think we should change this. Very open to suggestions. I think it should be one or the other, unless the GM sucks then could be  a good usage for firing them. Difference between a bad GM and someone who stuff doesnt work out for.

4.  A new GM taking over an expansioned team has to have at least 35 mil on the salary book after the expansion draft. One thing I hate is how a cy team should give the new gm pretty much gaurentee top pick next season?


5. cap restrictions- higher or keep same
. I feel that we should move it up 1-2 mil AT MOST. I like the balance of the league as is. Higher cap just makes it easier for GMs to offer shit contracts and live with them. A skill I think GMs will develop over the next few seasons will be negotiating and risk taking. Not every player deserves a max. 

7. option to cut rookies ( i propose non lotto rookies have option to be cut after second season for 25 cash each) like a buy out

draft lists being imposed


8. CY pick protection ( i think already established top 6) We need to figure out trading too. Many teams trade the picks far in advance to get better and it does not work out. 

9. fire super every other season?
I vote yes

10. contract negociations- i think would be too much work for Gm. maybe allow one every season or limit to only star players

11. Idk how people will like this, but a trial period/must prove yourself for a new gm in first year. Every time a new GM comes in they trade all their good players for shit to tank hard as fuck. This is not good for the league. forces other good teams to aquire good players for nothing and doesnt show us much about the new GM. would be interesting to see them try and make moves to get better instead.  Not taking a shot at ROY bc he is doing good, but if you think about it the sixers had a new gm do this like 10 times lol... pacers too

12. 30 min clock after finals are finished for draft. If you have not already picked by end of playoffs Mandatory list.

13. an 'insulted' stipulation to max-calibre RFAs in an old league. If a guy got lowballed by a team, he would lose a random amount of potential from 1-10 (random.com) because he felt as if his team lost trust in him for low balled contracts via RFA so that you can not lowball your own guys to use the loop in the FA period. ( i think already implemented )

1 & 2. I'd rather add 1 year to the CY than change the way it is handled. If a GM isn't getting the job done he gets fired. 5 consecutive seasons without the playoffs would cause a mob to form and drag the GM out by his ankles.

4. This is probably a reasonable idea. New GM would be insane to not intentionally tank year 1. Easiest way to do that is to draft all crummy expiring contracts and add enough cash in FA to hit the min cap.

5. Agreed. Small increase would be fine. I wouldn't go crazy with it.

7. YES!

8. Complicated issue with a complicated answer. Protection is needed for the new GM. Only way to really help though is to control the trading of future picks. That isn't going to be a popular idea.

9. Isn't that what the CY is for?

10. Hells to the no. Adding this with RFA would lead to a super boring FA. Bird rights and RFA provide the required leg-up for the home team IMHO.

11. Just like the pick protection this is going to be extremely hard to implement and unpopular.

12. Agreed - once the playoffs have a clock should be in place to move things along.

13. As I said before I'd be more interested to know the criterion for the "insulted" clause. If it's obviously insulting say 5 million per year to an obvious max candidate then of course that should be punished. Would you punish someone for offering a league max over 5 years to an RFA? Or maybe even a million under that figure? We definitely need to end the obvious low-ball to avoid the player accepting it in FA Day 1 & 2. Just concerned that this will take away the ability to negotiate with your RFAs.

[bloop]

1 and 2. Add 1 year
4 because Braz can't count. Yes
5. I'm fine with leaving it or increasing by 1 or 2 mil. Indifferent.
7 because again Braz can't count. yes
8. I don't have an answer and am still confused by everything that went down post-super so I'll leave it to the big guns
9. ok
10. No would just make the few simmers we have even more annoyed with the process.
11. No. Veto is there if ever needed.
12. Idc
13. I believe this is coming from what shorty said before BUT i want like clear criterion or guidelines for low balling. I agree some things should be left up to the admins to have wiggle room, but something this important should be pretty clear to all GMs. Idk how it would be done but I dont like the idea of someone possibly offering their RFA a reasonable contract, to find out later it's considered a lowball by the admin and they lose potential over it (even though I think pot is overrated). I remember Javaris crittenton wanted like 65 mil over 5 from me my first offseason. If I offered him a min, which he was worth, am I lowballing? It'd technically offend him but I think that's fair worth. Would be interesting to see how this could be implemented. Like the idea, but if it's too complicated for admins and GMs then I'm ok with it being put on the backburner until a better solution is figured out. I know Bannak said he used it before, so he could help out possibly.

[SuperMaor23]

1. Keep it at 4 years
2. I said this before, Have the simmers/a chosen few vote on whether to keep/fire a GM. If a GM stays its a forced expansion, if a new GM comes in you give him the choice if he wants to keep the existing team/go through expansion.
3. You skipped number 3, you moron
4. Theres a SC floor, make sure the rules state that after the expansion draft/Free Agency the GM must meet the floor.
5. Either raise HC or make a max, max. The problem is if a team is going to lose its star due to RFA, they will always have to match, and that can cause cap problems, Make it 87.
6. You skipped 6 also, do they not teach you how to count in brazil?
7. Make it like the NBA, 2 years + 2 Year team option.
8. NO, its unfair to the GM's who own the picks. If a new GM comes in with no picks then make that clear, they can either choose to tank in X amount of years or keep the current team, tweak and contend. Not that hard, my wolves CY team had enough to make playoffs the next year.
9. Its ittys fault, stop blaming me.
10. Always loved this idea, but simmers already have enough work to do as it is.
11. Thats what CY is for.
12. Make the list mandatory, list due by start of finals. (Free scout if submitting a list.) That way GM's are more inclined to submit a list.
13. Make it 5-10

[daedalus]

7. Make it like the NBA, 2 years + 2 Year team option.

^ We have a winner IMHO. Heavily support this part of the new CBA. Having the ability to cut ties after 2 years if a pick is a bust would add a lot of flexibility.

I would add a caveat to make it an Opt OUT rather than Team Option though. Less work for the simmers. Then the onus is placed on you being responsible for opting out of the contract at the appropriate time

[SuperMaor23]

Apr 16, 2015 20:03:30 GMT daedalus said:

7. Make it like the NBA, 2 years + 2 Year team option.

^ We have a winner IMHO. Heavily support this part of the new CBA. Having the ability to cut ties after 2 years if a pick is a bust would add a lot of flexibility.

I would add a caveat to make it an Opt OUT rather than Team Option though. Less work for the simmers. Then the onus is placed on you being responsible for opting out of the contract at the appropriate time

Opt out it is. 

[guins]

I hate the idea that you can cut a player because he is a bust, you drafted him , you should honestly have to ride out at least his rookie contract.

[bundybastard]

Am a little bit over discussing the CBA every 2 Seasons

[gmgreggor]

1. CY- change length?
Currently 4 years, 5th CY. I personally propose we bump it up one year. so 5 seasons 6th CY but would not be mad if we kept it

I think it's fine as is

2. cy- change format ( expansion, fire gm)
I personally think we should change this. Very open to suggestions. I think it should be one or the other, unless the GM sucks then could be a good usage for firing them. Difference between a bad GM and someone who stuff doesnt work out for.

I dont like the expansion. I think it's pointless. I think fired is sufficient.

4. A new GM taking over an expansioned team has to have at least 35 mil on the salary book after the expansion draft. One thing I hate is how a cy team should give the new gm pretty much gaurentee top pick next season?

Again, expansion is pointless to me.


5. cap restrictions- higher or keep same
. I feel that we should move it up 1-2 mil AT MOST. I like the balance of the league as is. Higher cap just makes it easier for GMs to offer shit contracts and live with them. A skill I think GMs will develop over the next few seasons will be negotiating and risk taking. Not every player deserves a max.

Same is fine with me.

7. option to cut rookies ( i propose non lotto rookies have option to be cut after second season for 25 cash each) like a buy out

draft lists being imposed

Meh, not sure about this. If you dont want him trade the pick.

8. CY pick protection ( i think already established top 6) We need to figure out trading too. Many teams trade the picks far in advance to get better and it does not work out.

Cant trade picks 1 yr past your CY status?
9. fire super every other season?
I vote yes

10. contract negociations- i think would be too much work for Gm. maybe allow one every season or limit to only star players

Depends on simmer. Need to ask them. They have a lot on their plate already, I'm fine with whatever though.

11. Idk how people will like this, but a trial period/must prove yourself for a new gm in first year. Every time a new GM comes in they trade all their good players for shit to tank hard as fuck. This is not good for the league. forces other good teams to aquire good players for nothing and doesnt show us much about the new GM. would be interesting to see them try and make moves to get better instead. Not taking a shot at ROY bc he is doing good, but if you think about it the sixers had a new gm do this like 10 times lol... pacers too.

Yea, maybe some type of trade review initially? As much as anything to understand player values.

12. 30 min clock after finals are finished for draft. If you have not already picked by end of playoffs Mandatory list.
Eh, I think if we set a predetermined time for the clock to start is better.

13. an 'insulted' stipulation to max-calibre RFAs in an old league. If a guy got lowballed by a team, he would lose a random amount of potential from 1-10 (random.com) because he felt as if his team lost trust in him for low balled contracts via RFA so that you can not lowball your own guys to use the loop in the FA period. ( i think already implemented )

Dont like this at all. You should be able to offer whatever you think is fair.

[gmgreggor]

Apr 16, 2015 20:03:30 GMT daedalus said:

7. Make it like the NBA, 2 years + 2 Year team option.

^ We have a winner IMHO. Heavily support this part of the new CBA. Having the ability to cut ties after 2 years if a pick is a bust would add a lot of flexibility.

I would add a caveat to make it an Opt OUT rather than Team Option though. Less work for the simmers. Then the onus is placed on you being responsible for opting out of the contract at the appropriate time

I could live with this. Two years is better.

[bundybastard]

I dont mind the Expansion feature because it helps strengthen FA classes which in this league tend to be average and it also gives a good excuse to have lotto protected draft picks, nothing worse then signing up for a team which doesn't have the next 3 picks in the draft.

[BrazilianDude]

Apr 16, 2015 20:54:37 GMT bundybastard said:

Am a little bit over discussing the CBA every 2 Seasons

If you want to hold off that's fine with me. Seems like it been a while tho.

[somerandomguy]

1. CY- change length?
Like I said, the length is perfect, this is the biggest non issue that's CBA related, next question

2. cy- change format ( expansion, fire gm)
Have always been an advocate for the expansion draft (I was the first one to propose the idea and later incorporated it into the league when I first became commish in the other league) but we could probably do away with it. I personally like the challenge of creating something out of nothing, but not everyone else feels the same way

3. Where's question 3?

4. A new GM taking over an expansioned team has to have at least 35 mil on the salary book after the expansion draft. One thing I hate is how a cy team should give the new gm pretty much gaurentee top pick next season?
nvm, this is a bigger non issue, next question

5. cap restrictions- higher or keep same
I'm always in favor of raising the cap, but that means there will be bigger rookie contracts and bigger max contracts, if a majority of GM's are ok with that then sure.

6. Stop fucking skipping questions to make these list of questions look more important

7. option to cut rookies ( i propose non lotto rookies have option to be cut after second season for 25 cash each) like a buy out
No, I would rather have the 2 team options have the first two years of a rookie deal (like dae mentioned/what we had before) but we went away from that because commishes forgot to keep inputting the TO's, so that's on the commishes really

7a. draft lists being imposed
I'm calling this 7a, and no just gonna lead to people quitting tbh, the set up right now is fine, just need to try and make it a little quicker pace (1st round should be done in less then 24 hours after the playoffs end imo) again, it's on the commishes


8. CY pick protection ( i think already established top 6) We need to figure out trading too. Many teams trade the picks far in advance to get better and it does not work out.
sounds like a them problem


9. fire super every other season?
I'm ok with that, if you feel like your not firing him enough then every season or half season works to

10. contract negociations- i think would be too much work for Gm. maybe allow one every season or limit to only star players
I have actually done this, and it's very fun, time consuming, but fun and can really keep you on your toes, because the best player can sign at anytime.

I would actually be willing to do this, but that would be a conflict in interest since I'm running the Sonics atm


11. Idk how people will like this, but a trial period/must prove yourself for a new gm in first year. Every time a new GM comes in they trade all their good players for shit to tank hard as fuck. This is not good for the league. forces other good teams to aquire good players for nothing and doesnt show us much about the new GM. would be interesting to see them try and make moves to get better instead. Not taking a shot at ROY bc he is doing good, but if you think about it the sixers had a new gm do this like 10 times lol... pacers too
every league has this problem, it's not just our little problem here, letting new GM's trade is fine, trades can always be vetoed


12. 30 min clock after finals are finished for draft. If you have not already picked by end of playoffs Mandatory list.
basically what it should be, minus mandatory list, most people don't like being autoed


13. an 'insulted' stipulation to max-calibre RFAs in an old league. If a guy got lowballed by a team, he would lose a random amount of potential from 1-10 (random.com) because he felt as if his team lost trust in him for low balled contracts via RFA so that you can not lowball your own guys to use the loop in the FA period. ( i think already implemented )

you kids are young and think can change the world, so you do whatever the fuck you want with this

[somerandomguy]

Apr 16, 2015 15:37:55 GMT guins said:

i have 2 ideas

#1 - Completely eliminate the CY , if a GM is not active..or just keeps tanking..then its time for him to move on if the moves keep falling through..( AKA the real life 76ers GM RULE) An acitve GM who has some bad luck(draft busts,injuries.etc...thats tough to let them go though.

#2 - The Draft should be started after the Finals , but to make it go smooth, have the actual draft day set as the the day after the finals..1 day..starting at 8pm EST..15 minutes per pick, if you arent going to be there , please send in draft lists or your pick will be autoed after the 15 minutes pass.

these are just some suggestions

oh lawdy no, not interested in seeing the same team with the same GM tank for 10 years, just watching itty GM is already pissing me off

[somerandomguy]

CY actually makes this league more competitive, your never gonna stop tanking so teams will always tank. But it puts pressure on teams to win eventually. If you have teams actually wanting to be in the playoffs combined with teams looking at a deep playoff runs, it makes the league so much more competitive and leads to teams with 42/43/44 wins who still can't get an 8th spot in whatever conference.

[BrazilianDude]

These weren't all my ideas just almost of all I been seeing snd hearing fyi

[basenoc]

Stop autoing BPA and that should make GMs send lists!!!

[bundybastard]

Auto WPA imo

[bloop]

Apr 17, 2015 0:56:17 GMT basenoc said:

Stop autoing BPA and that should make GMs send lists!!!

agree with this

[shorty]

1. CY- change length?

Currently 4 years, 5th CY. I personally propose we bump it up one year. so 5 seasons 6th CY but would not be mad if we kept it

2. cy- change format ( expansion, fire gm)

I personally think we should change this. Very open to suggestions. I think it should be one or the other, unless the GM sucks then could be a good usage for firing them. Difference between a bad GM and someone who stuff doesnt work out for.

I think CY is fine the way it is now. 5 seasons is plenty enough time to tear down and rebuild back up. Obvious if a new GM comes into a situation like what Saric had to deal with, we may make an exception, but keep in mind that teams around you also change. In 5 years lots of teams rise and fall, and if you can't get 42 wins or make the playoffs, then you get a timeout. 

Active GMs will of course, get first preference on the wait list. 



4. A new GM taking over an expansioned team has to have at least 35 mil on the salary book after the expansion draft. One thing I hate is how a cy team should give the new gm pretty much gaurentee top pick next season?


I like this. This way it doesn't give them a big advantage in FA right off the bat as well. 


5. cap restrictions- higher or keep same

. I feel that we should move it up 1-2 mil AT MOST. I like the balance of the league as is. Higher cap just makes it easier for GMs to offer shit contracts and live with them. A skill I think GMs will develop over the next few seasons will be negotiating and risk taking. Not every player deserves a max.


If anything you guys should argue for change in SC because that's where the real contract structures are decided. Maxes are affected by percentage of SC available after all. Changing the HC only creates short term problems because then teams will adjust with extra or less cap. At the end of the day, all players get paid relative to what they are worth, and so it shouldn't matter if the HC is 100 mil or 50 mil. It just needs to stay consistent.


I think the caps are fine the way they are right now. Really the only problem I'm hearing is that teams are finding it hard to form their super teams and paying 3 max contract superstars. Super teams are super for a reason; they aren't easy to put together and it takes some savvy GMing. It can be done, but it shouldn't be a given right. 

7. option to cut rookies ( i propose non lotto rookies have option to be cut after second season for 25 cash each) like a buy out



draft lists being imposed



Agree


8. CY pick protection ( i think already established top 6) We need to figure out trading too. Many teams trade the picks far in advance to get better and it does not work out.


There's some gray area in here of course. But everyone has fair warning that their pick may have protection on it if the team gets expansioned.

9. fire super every other season?

Let him do himself in


10. contract negociations- i think would be too much work for Gm. maybe allow one every season or limit to only star players


It's a fun idea honestly, but at the end of the day, it's the simmers who will need to act in the player's interest and we can't take on that extra work right now. I myself can only help sim like once a week right now so I don't think we can support unless something changes. 

11. Idk how people will like this, but a trial period/must prove yourself for a new gm in first year. Every time a new GM comes in they trade all their good players for shit to tank hard as fuck. This is not good for the league. forces other good teams to aquire good players for nothing and doesnt show us much about the new GM. would be interesting to see them try and make moves to get better instead. Not taking a shot at ROY bc he is doing good, but if you think about it the sixers had a new gm do this like 10 times lol... pacers too


Well for completely new GMs, their trades will be monitored closely of course and there will be less benefit of the doubt given. For former GMs and proven GMs, that probably won't be necessary.

12. 30 min clock after finals are finished for draft. If you have not already picked by end of playoffs Mandatory list.


The 30 min is hard to enforce because it would require constant surveilance by a simmer so it may not be possible. But good step in the right direction.

13. an 'insulted' stipulation to max-calibre RFAs in an old league. If a guy got lowballed by a team, he would lose a random amount of potential from 1-10 (random.com) because he felt as if his team lost trust in him for low balled contracts via RFA so that you can not lowball your own guys to use the loop in the FA period. ( i think already implemented )
I'll have to give this more thought. This is completely open to suggestions of course. If we can decide on something that's fair and can prevent the unfair lowballing in FA, then that's the goal. 

[shorty]

Apr 16, 2015 21:00:43 GMT gmgreggor said:

2. cy- change format ( expansion, fire gm)
I personally think we should change this. Very open to suggestions. I think it should be one or the other, unless the GM sucks then could be a good usage for firing them. Difference between a bad GM and someone who stuff doesnt work out for.

I dont like the expansion. I think it's pointless. I think fired is sufficient.

4. A new GM taking over an expansioned team has to have at least 35 mil on the salary book after the expansion draft. One thing I hate is how a cy team should give the new gm pretty much gaurentee top pick next season?

Again, expansion is pointless to me.

Well I see what you mean, but if a team is in a situation where it can't even win 42 games or make the playoffs in 5 seasons, then it's not a very appealing situation for the next GM to take over. The expansion gives the next guy a clean slate to work with and free of baggage (tho if their picks are traded, then that complicates things obviously)

[BANNAK]

I would only support a 5th CY year if the team won 35+ games, or some number close to it. CY is just a tool to discourage repetitive tanking and bad GMs. If you win 35+ games in the 5th year, you should get one more season to make it to 42 or play-offs. If after all that you still can't, well hand the team over to someone else.

[BrazilianDude]

Apr 17, 2015 14:13:52 GMT BANNAK said:

I would only support a 5th CY year if the team won 35+ games, or some number close to it. CY is just a tool to discourage repetitive tanking and bad GMs. If you win 35+ games in the 5th year, you should get one more season to make it to 42 or play-offs. If after all that you still can't, well hand the team over to someone else.

Maybe lower the CY reset to 39 wins? Would be halfway compromise. How many teams have gone 40-42 or 41-41 while busting ass and didn't make it

[BANNAK]

Apr 17, 2015 14:23:17 GMT BrazilianDude said:

Apr 17, 2015 14:13:52 GMT BANNAK said:

I would only support a 5th CY year if the team won 35+ games, or some number close to it. CY is just a tool to discourage repetitive tanking and bad GMs. If you win 35+ games in the 5th year, you should get one more season to make it to 42 or play-offs. If after all that you still can't, well hand the team over to someone else.

Maybe lower the CY reset to 39 wins? Would be halfway compromise. How many teams have gone 40-42 or 41-41 while busting ass and didn't make it

Eh. Playoffs or a positive record seems the most logical benchmark of "success", I'd still want the criteria to be 42 wins or playoffs but maybe allow some leeway for GMs that come close with a 5th year CY

Just a suggestion. Personally I'm fine with the system as is

[shorty]

Only other suggestion I can think of for CY is: win improvement. If you make a win improvement of 16 games between your 4th and 5th season, then you stay. Just a thought.

I'm fine with the way things are tho. GMs/Coaches in the NBA get fired in much less time if results aren't shown within 2-3 seasons so giving 5 seems reasonable here.