2018 Roster Discussion
- Thread starter The Toe
- Start date
Worth noting that Mata signed a big new contract with TAM which is not reflected on that.
Also, Harrison should have graduated from Generation Adidas. I don't think we seen an actual announcement for that, but we wouldn't have had to protect him during the expansion draft if he was still GA
There hasn't been an official article about it, but I've found this graphic from MLSsoccer.com
Sands is only listed for a half season, still as a HG, he won't count against the cap. Harrison has graduated and will count against the cap.
D
dummyrun
Guest
This is helpful, thanks. Harrison is still listed as Generation Adidas on the NYCFC First Team page but you and LionNYC are right that he's not listed here so I guess I'll take him off GA status. Are there any details out there on Matarrita's contract other than this announcement?
Medina is 19. His budget charge should be $150k based on 2017 rules.
Also, we currently have 10 internationals (you didn't list Ring or Chanot). And we have 9 spots 8 + 1 from DCU.
D
dummyrun
Guest
Nah, he turns 21 on April 30. If I understand the birth year rule correctly, that should bump him up to the $200k DP bracket.
I don't think so. I think it was just inferred that if the team was able to use TAM for his new contract he was given a sizable raise, and had to be making above a certain amount
D
dummyrun
Guest
So here's a legalistic wrinkle I'm struggling with right now. The rules say:
- Clubs may re-sign an existing player provided he is earning more than the maximum salary budget.
- Clubs may use a portion of or all of the available Targeted Allocation Money to convert a Designated Player to a non-Designated Player by buying down his Salary Budget Charge at or below the maximum salary budget charge. If Targeted Allocation Money is used to free up a Designated Player slot, the club must simultaneously sign a new Designated Player at an investment equal to or greater than the player he is replacing.
But Matarrita's extension was announced on December 4 and Medina wasn't announced until January 1. Assuming those two things weren't simultaneous, then (5) didn't happen in Matarrita's case. The only way I can see that being permissible under the rules is if (2) and (3) also didn't happen—that is, if Matarrita was simultaneously brought up to the max budget charge and his salary paid down with TAM without him ever achieving temporary DP status.
If you can skip straight from (1) to (4) without having to involve (2), (3), and (5), then it would be easy to repeat the same trick with Ring and Chanot. That would use most of our league-allocated TAM and leave us with over $300k cap space, like so:
Repeat one more time with Tinnerholm to spend down the remaining $208k in TAM and we'd be looking at more than $500k cap space.
This overpay-players-to-spend-TAM strategy is familiar to MLS execs. But if it's that easy to work around the TAM restrictions without signing a new DP each time, then the restrictions don't appear to accomplish a whole lot besides making work for lawyers.
Which I guess wouldn't be unheard of in the weird world of MLS rules?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Last edited by a moderator:
MLS Season ended on December 8th. Pirlo would have counted as a DP until then, so it would have been impossible to sign Mata as a DP on December 4th.So here's a legalistic wrinkle I'm struggling with right now. The rules say:
In Matarrita's case, both bullet points seem relevant. The process would go: (1) his contract extension bumps him up to a maximum salary budget, (2) at which point he presumably becomes a DP, but (3) the club can immediately convert him into a non-DP and (4) buy down his budget charge to $150k using TAM provided they (5) simultaneously sign a new DP.
- Clubs may re-sign an existing player provided he is earning more than the maximum salary budget.
- Clubs may use a portion of or all of the available Targeted Allocation Money to convert a Designated Player to a non-Designated Player by buying down his Salary Budget Charge at or below the maximum salary budget charge. If Targeted Allocation Money is used to free up a Designated Player slot, the club must simultaneously sign a new Designated Player at an investment equal to or greater than the player he is replacing.
But Matarrita's extension was announced on December 4 and Medina wasn't announced until January 1. Assuming those two things weren't simultaneous, then (5) didn't happen in Matarrita's case. The only way I can see that being permissible under the rules is if (2) and (3) also didn't happen—that is, if Matarrita was simultaneously brought up to the max budget charge and his salary paid down with TAM without him ever achieving temporary DP status.
If you can skip straight from (1) to (4) without having to involve (2), (3), and (5), then it would be easy to repeat the same trick with Ring and Chanot. That would use most of our league-allocated TAM and leave us with over $300k cap space, like so:
Repeat one more time with Tinnerholm to spend down the remaining $208k in TAM and we'd be looking at more than $500k cap space.
This overpay-players-to-spend-TAM strategy is familiar to MLS execs. But if it's that easy to work around the TAM restrictions without signing a new DP each time, then the restrictions don't appear to accomplish a whole lot besides making work for lawyers.
Which I guess wouldn't be unheard of in the weird world of MLS rules?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't think that's right -- the contract wouldn't have started until 2018, no matter when it's announced. Players are only paid in-season, so a contract being signed for next season shouldn't have any impact on the previous season's salary situation.
Well sure, that's probably right. But that's the point; while Matarrita's contract extension was announced in December, it probably didn't impact any roster scenarios until Jan. 1.
The maximum salary has increased to approximately $505,000 for 2018, so that is the budget charge for senior DPs.
If we paid any acquisition costs for any of our new acquisitions or even for Matarrita* and those push the total costs for that player over $505,000, then we can spend TAM on that player.
I think you are getting a little too technical around renegotiating Matarrita’s contract and the timing of when players are being signed. I am confident we can use TAM for Ronald if his numbers qualify (and the Club has said he is getting TAM), and I am confident everyone else only counts toward 2018.
Overall, good work. Hope you keep this updated.
* - We only bought 50% of Matarrita’s contract originally, but could easily have purchased the rest as part of this restructuring.
If we paid any acquisition costs for any of our new acquisitions or even for Matarrita* and those push the total costs for that player over $505,000, then we can spend TAM on that player.
I think you are getting a little too technical around renegotiating Matarrita’s contract and the timing of when players are being signed. I am confident we can use TAM for Ronald if his numbers qualify (and the Club has said he is getting TAM), and I am confident everyone else only counts toward 2018.
Overall, good work. Hope you keep this updated.
* - We only bought 50% of Matarrita’s contract originally, but could easily have purchased the rest as part of this restructuring.
D
dummyrun
Guest
"The maximum salary has increased to approximately $505,000 for 2018, so that is the budget charge for senior DPs."
$504,375, to be exact. Thanks for the heads up!
"If we paid any acquisition costs for any of our new acquisitions or even for Matarrita* and those push the total costs for that player over $505,000, then we can spend TAM on that player."
Yup. But acquisition costs are factored into DP designations too, so the question is about when exactly DP status is attained and what the knock-on effects are.
"I think you are getting a little too technical around renegotiating Matarrita’s contract and the timing of when players are being signed. I am confident we can use TAM for Ronald if his numbers qualify (and the Club has said he is getting TAM), and I am confident everyone else only counts toward 2018."
Oh, I was definitely getting too technical the minute I started making a spreadsheet for this stuff, let alone trying to parse the rules. No doubt that we can and did use TAM on Matarrita. I'm just trying to figure out what that tells us about how TAM restrictions work.
"Overall, good work. Hope you keep this updated."
Thanks! I'll post updates from time to time.
$504,375, to be exact. Thanks for the heads up!
"If we paid any acquisition costs for any of our new acquisitions or even for Matarrita* and those push the total costs for that player over $505,000, then we can spend TAM on that player."
Yup. But acquisition costs are factored into DP designations too, so the question is about when exactly DP status is attained and what the knock-on effects are.
"I think you are getting a little too technical around renegotiating Matarrita’s contract and the timing of when players are being signed. I am confident we can use TAM for Ronald if his numbers qualify (and the Club has said he is getting TAM), and I am confident everyone else only counts toward 2018."
Oh, I was definitely getting too technical the minute I started making a spreadsheet for this stuff, let alone trying to parse the rules. No doubt that we can and did use TAM on Matarrita. I'm just trying to figure out what that tells us about how TAM restrictions work.
"Overall, good work. Hope you keep this updated."
Thanks! I'll post updates from time to time.
Good stuff.
As an FYI, if you hit the "reply" button on someone else's post, it'll automatically quote their post within your own, so you don't have to do all the copying and pasting. You can even quote multiple posts within one.
You'll find a lot of appreciation for spreadsheets in this forum.
Similar threads
- Poll
