Team Option Years

[WigNosy]

Been thinking about suggesting this one for a while and the last couple seasons of Free Agency have convinced me it's time to do so.

The Perceived Problem: Teams are offering "2 years, team option" contracts with no intention of honoring the second year as a way to make their one-year offers look more attractive to Free Agents. In other words, these are "bad faith" offers.

Possible Solution #1: "Team option" years can only be offered on contracts at least 3 years in length.

Possible Solution #2: Teams may only decline one non-rookie team option per year (may still decline any number of rookie option years).

I'm opening this for discussion:

1. Do you think there is a problem?

2. If there is a problem, do you prefer solution 1, solution 2, both, or do you have a third solution I haven't mentioned above?

[Inner_GI]

Are you saying you can only decline one team option (non rookie) and year, or are you saying a gm can only decline one 1+1 team option a year.

[Bowtothebill23]

Would like to add to the debate. I've been going back and forth on this. Devil's advocate: I might sign an old guy to a 1+1 deal so that if he comes in and isn't nailed by TC too bad and contributes more than I thought he would, I can subsequently pick up his option. Not every 1+1 is done with the sole intention of declining the option.

[IamQuailman]

Would like to add to the debate. I've been going back and forth on this. Devil's advocate: I might sign an old guy to a 1+1 deal so that if he comes in and isn't nailed by TC too bad and contributes more than I thought he would, I can subsequently pick up his option. Not every 1+1 is done with the sole intention of declining the option.

Unless your name is Loco.

I don't know if this is the appropriate place to do this, but I think 2 year team option contracts in RFA should be eliminated as well... it's effectively a 1yr deal. Or was this removed already?

[78#]

I'm in favor of keeping it for UFAs. Training camp plays a big role in determining whether to accept options. Plus team options make more trades happen. I would be against changing the rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kucoach7]

I am a big proponent of bad faith contracts. An option is an option and a player knows what that means. I like them and am not sure I see a problem here other than you could think that this as possibly tricking the game. If this is really in need of a "solution" I would go with solution 1. Solution 2 seems extreme. Either way bad faith contracts can still happen though.

[WigNosy]

Training camp plays a big role in determining whether to accept options.

Have to admit, this is a REALLY good argument.

[IamQuailman]

I don't know if this is the appropriate place to do this, but I think 2 year team option contracts in RFA should be eliminated as well... it's effectively a 1yr deal. Or was this removed already?

[LoCo89]

I don't know if this is the appropriate place to do this, but I think 2 year team option contracts in RFA should be eliminated as well... it's effectively a 1yr deal. Or was this removed already?

Sooooo instead of looking you just quote it again?

From the last RFA list thread:

If desired, may designate the final year of a deal of 3 or more seasons as "team option" or "player option" (if neither is selected, the default is "guaranteed")

2 minutes to find and post

[IamQuailman]

I don't know if this is the appropriate place to do this, but I think 2 year team option contracts in RFA should be eliminated as well... it's effectively a 1yr deal. Or was this removed already?

Sooooo instead of looking you just quote it again?

From the last RFA list thread:

If desired, may designate the final year of a deal of 3 or more seasons as "team option" or "player option" (if neither is selected, the default is "guaranteed")

2 minutes to find and post

Thanks for answering the question, Lou!