Consider the following waiver claims:
Budget = $16
1. $16, Add A, Drop X
2. $16, Add B, Drop Y
Say I get A and now my budget is $0. Will the second claim be cancelled? Or will it realize that I really want player B and adjust my bid to the maximum amount that it can that is below my original bid, in this case $0? I ask because I can think of a situation where if A isn't available, I'd want to throw my whole budget behind B, yet I don't want them to replace the same player (which would avoid any issue) because, say, I need to keep my roster balanced in terms of positions. The system doesn't currently allow me to add a third claim with $0 that's identical to claim 2, so this would be the only way.
Why couldn't it be made to work the way I describe? It seems like that would be useful, i.e. interpreting bids as "$X or remaining budget, whichever is greater"?
The system will penalize you for using your budget up
Why? The "penalty" _is_ using the budget up. It's not like I can't add the player later for $0. I don't know why it has to prevent me at this stage as some kind of "penalty." I can see only a positive increase is the flexibility of the system in making this change. I hope you will consider it.