S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

All voting on new rules will take place here. No discussion; only voting!
Post Reply

Should we contract the league?

Poll ended at Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:58 pm

Yes -- having so many stewarded teams is not good for the league
14
100%
No -- having 30 teams is better for the league, even if some of the teams are stewarded
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
garbageman
Posts: 8409
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:19 am
PBSL Team: Chicago Bulls
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by garbageman »

A yes vote will result in more polls about how and when to contract the league. A no vote might result in more polls about how to handle stewardship and recruitment now that more teams need active GMs.

Polls close in 3 days from the posting of this poll.

Feel free to discuss pros and cons below.
ImageImage
User avatar
garbageman
Posts: 8409
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:19 am
PBSL Team: Chicago Bulls
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by garbageman »

And remember...if you vote in all the polls this season, you get 3 points. (I voted)
ImageImage
User avatar
digiskunk
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 2:26 pm
PBSL Team: Philadelphia 76ers
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by digiskunk »

Damn... This is such a difficult question to answer.

On one hand, I think stewards are great; they help teams to stay afloat until they find a new GM.

On the other hand, what would we do if it weren't for stewards? I can understand why you would want to remove them but how would you deal with the aftermath (aka having teams with no GM)?
"ass to ass!" —that old guy from Requiem For A Dream
User avatar
drkavarga
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2018 10:33 pm
PBSL Team: Bobcats

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by drkavarga »

I voted yes. It'll be different with less teams but it's the right thing to do long term.
General Manager of the Charlotte Bobcats
N
NickMalone77
Posts: 3631
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 2:36 pm
PBSL Team: New Orleans Pelicans
Location: Greenlawn, NY

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by NickMalone77 »

Voted
Image
Image
f
false9
Posts: 4328
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:13 pm
PBSL Team: Parts unknown
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by false9 »

Voted. If interest ever comes back, we can re-expand. Having all these steward teams really holds things back.
Image

Courtesy of the big homie RPF
N
NOLa.
Posts: 3994
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:21 pm
PBSL Team: Sacramento Kings

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by NOLa. »

Voted. No need to carry excess teams for multiple seasons when we can always add teams later if it came to it. These abandoned teams have been decayed so much that there isn’t anything left to be preserved by stewards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Wombataholic
Posts: 866
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 12:59 pm
PBSL Team: Detroit Pistons

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by Wombataholic »

voted
Image
K
Keepit100
Posts: 770
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:43 pm
PBSL Team: 76ers

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by Keepit100 »

Voted

Quick question with contraction likely and All Star Break approaching - are stewards allowed to use the remaining point banks to train players before they get released via contraction draft/UFA?

If not, some ideas maybe for future discussion would be to pool the points and redistribute them among the remaining teams evenly or give weighted points based on draft order.
User avatar
garbageman
Posts: 8409
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:19 am
PBSL Team: Chicago Bulls
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by garbageman »

Keepit100 wrote: Fri Jan 03, 2020 8:10 am Voted

Quick question with contraction likely and All Star Break approaching - are stewards allowed to use the remaining point banks to train players before they get released via contraction draft/UFA?

If not, some ideas maybe for future discussion would be to pool the points and redistribute them among the remaining teams evenly or give weighted points based on draft order.
I'd say no on steward training. It looks like contraction is going to pass, and one of the follow-up questions is what to do with a team's salaried players and assets. If there is a contraction draft--along with a regular draft--and they're both run in the same order, that's kind of a double bonus for tanking teams. I'll be putting up several more polls to determine this (and other things) for next season.
ImageImage
User avatar
PaulyP
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:50 am
PBSL Team: Indiana Pacers

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by PaulyP »

voted
Pacers Ring of Honor
P.Ewing (90-93, 98) - R.Pierce (90-91) - S.Augmon (91-96) - D.Brown (93-96) - D.Strong (91-97, 99-02) - P.Pierce (98-05, 12-13) - D.Williams (05-17) - I.Shumpert (11-16) - D.Dedmon (13-18) - J.Williams (19-25, 31-32)
User avatar
greepleairport
Posts: 4010
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2019 6:28 pm
PBSL Team: Golden State Warriors

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by greepleairport »

voted
Somehow I manage.
User avatar
garbageman
Posts: 8409
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 11:19 am
PBSL Team: Chicago Bulls
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by garbageman »

As 14 votes is more than half the active team, I'm codifying this into law. The league will be contracted!
ImageImage
T
TheSyndicate
Posts: 3717
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:15 pm
PBSL Team:

Re: S42 Prop 1 - League Contraction

Post by TheSyndicate »

Voted
6 Rings. That's it. That's the tweet.
Post Reply

Return to “#SLOE Polling Place”