the system I’m envisioning would look like so:

Team A, B, and C are interested in player X.
A has 12 cap points remaining
B has 10 cap points remaining
C has 50 cap points remaining

Let’s say that player X is Samkin Gado this past week and all three teams bid “max points” in the style of free agency I proposed. The way this would work is that Gado would go to team C for 13 points. Everyone bids as much as they can until they run out or win. Very simple, right?

Let’s say player X is Wilford and A and C bid 10 points and B bids 7 points, the tie between A and C is resolved using the waiver order.

That’s pretty much the entirety of how complex this proposal is. Let’s take an example sent in an email to me (interpreting what “a max bid up to 22″ means under the current rules):

Side note: In regards to Paul’s statement… yes, he is bidding 22 points regardless of how he writes his statement… the 22 is the bid.Depending on who else bids… if no one does, he pays 1 point… if another person with a lower priority number bids 10, he pays 22…. if a person with a higher priority number bids 10, he pays 11…. as it is stipulated in the rules….. it does not mean “+1″ up to 22 points.

That’s pretty complicated, IMHO, and too complicated. Why is it +1 in some cases and the full bid in other cases? It should either be blind bid or always +1, that’s what I was proposing.

So, in all cases, if the owner with the second place bid offers 10, the winner gets it for 11. The phrase max bid would always mean the maximum I can bid before I run out or I win.

If you’ve ever bid on ebay, you know how they do their blind bids. You bid a number, but only pay what it takes to actually win the player.

To process the free agent requests, you simply take all the bids on a particular player, order by bid (ties resolved by waiver order) and then take the bid in second place and charge the winning owner that bid +1.