|
|
Post by yankeegm2011 on Jul 10, 2011 9:25:11 GMT -4
Free Agency Suggestion:
1) When the season is over a team must choose which free agents that team owner plans to resign or to release. (A date to be set by the league commissioner (Should be sometime after the World Series).
2) When a team’s player becomes an unrestricted free agent you have the first option to resign that player for the salary amount and terms that they actually sign for in MLB free agency.
3) If a team owner choses to release a player and not intend to resign him that player will be added to the Free Agent Folder on Pro Boards to go up for bid and can be won to the highest bidder under the bidding rules set by the league commissioner.
4) When making any decisions on any free agent whether the free agent is on your team or an unrestricted one, the team owner must bid and show intent in good faith. Your team must have the ability to resign that player based on your current salary cap with all raises in contracts from your others players in mind. If you do not do this in good faith the league commissioner can make a ruling to prevent the bid or intent to sign. The commissioner may decide to award the player to the second place bidder or re-enter the player into free agency to be bid on again.
5) If a team loses a Type A Free Agent or a Type B Free Agent, identified by MLB, the losing team will be awarded a draft pick from the team in which signed your teams free agent player.
Salary Cap Suggestion:
1) The salary cap has been set to top out at 120M by the league commissioner. To keep the integrity of the league and to insure team owners make every effort to compete in good faith I suggest that the league consider implementing a salary floor or minimum salary requirement.
I suggest that the team salary minimum should be 72M or 60% of the salary cap. This will keep the league very competitive with the goal that all teams operate at an average salary of 80-85%. The league commissioner would have to set a compliance date that would be fair for each owner to reasonably comply. The league commissioner can consider the elevating salaries for next season to see if a team is heading toward compliance and make a ruling to consider that team in compliance for the current season.
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 10, 2011 9:41:17 GMT -4
Rick and I agree on some points and not others. The problem with the salary cap at $77 min. is that teams like the Royals only have $38 m. in salaries in real life. There are at least 5 other teams under $50 m. Actually, 11 teams have a smaller roster in reality. In fact the average for MLB is only around $90m, and that number is skewed quite a bit by the Yanks, Phillies, ann Red Sox. There is virtually no way for those teams with lower payrolls to hit $72 without taking on some bad contracts or overpaying for mediocre talent.
I do think, though that all teams should have to field a full team of players.
Free agency, without restrictions, is the only way that the "have-not" teams have a chance to improve, otherwise those that get to pick teams first -Red Sox, yankees, Texas, Philly etc.. will dominate for years to come, not much fun for everyone else. I can see why being able to hold all of one's players is attractive if you begin with a loaded roster, but truly out in the real world, all of those teams are going to have to bid on free agents. Let's keep it real.
|
|
|
|
Post by yankeegm2011 on Jul 10, 2011 10:41:00 GMT -4
In reply to the Indians owner Ben I took in consideration about the lower market and higher market clubs. The reason why I think my proposal is fair because the Yankees have a 210M salary in real life, Red Sox are like 180M and the Phillies are like 170M, give or take a couple million. My point here is that with those 3 three alone giving back 190M worth of salary back into the free agent market (Alex Rodriquez and Derek Jeter for instance) I truly believe that it will not be difficult over time to have a salary for every team capable of competing. There are no have not teams in this league Ben, we all have 120M dollars so free agency is equal to all based on how much money you can spend. Each team will have to make tough decisions on who they can sign and who that cant sign. Remember there is no real cap in MLB only luxury tax rules which is a penalty. The cap and the cap only evens the playing field without any other slary rules in place. In fact franchise tags and other tags is what makes the salary caps the most unfair since you can manipulate salaries to keep players that you can not afford.
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 10, 2011 14:35:46 GMT -4
Rick, fair point about no have nots. My point is that if all of the current "power houses" don't follow realistic free agency, where everyone gets a shot at free agents, then the owners who got here first, and picked the strongestbteams will dominate for a long, long time. By putting true free agents into the market we will create our own economy over time.
Your two proposals are incompatible in that folks won't release anyone worth spending money on, so having minimum expenditures will not work, especially without true free agency. I understand why keeping a team intact is appealing if you had a strong team going into the league, but it does not take much management strategy, if you keep everyone as long as you like. The league should be won by the best manager, not the managers that happened to show up first, year one, obviousy those that arrived first and were able to pick the stronger teams will dominate, but under current rules I think you will see new teams competitive as soon as year 2 and certainly by year 3. The challenge for those with multiple expiring contracts will be to decide whether to try to move some of them now, or wait. It actually mirrors reality remarkably well.
I do think that every team should be able to field a team of major leaguers, perhaps 15 min. If we were to start that next year, it should not impose a hardship on those that dumped players in anticipation of free agency this year.
I think if a manager does not appear to be using a strategy that has any merit, the Admins should discuss that with them, and then determine their future in the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by yankeegm2011 on Jul 10, 2011 16:44:45 GMT -4
In all do respect real MLB teams with multiple expiring contracts can chose to resign them. In this league you can chose to completely protect just one player. Teams that started with lessor major league players can sign any unsigned players that cash strapped teams could not afford (again like Arod, jeter, etc.) or they can utilize young prospects and trade them to get more proven players. The beauty is every team has the same amount of cash to spend. So if a manager is good he will utilize his resources well and yes within the second or third years will be significantly better. As far as my own personal team is concerned it does not matter either way. I can release all the guys and have tens of millions to bid with so the only difference is I have to release them and then bid on them as opposed to just resigning that in the real world. The problem will come in when poor managers overpay to ridiculous proportions and saddle a team with horrible unrealistic contracts and the league gets stuck with teams that no new prospective owner would want. Does defeat the purpose of being labeled a specific team name in a dynasty format if there is going to be large amounts of turnover each year with the top players. Why not draft clean then every year and give managers a mulligan to do better every season.
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 11, 2011 0:17:23 GMT -4
Of course I'm a numbers guy, I spend a lot of time doing financial analysis.
So taking a quick look at AL only (I figured it would be enough)
total current payroll: $1097M
top 4 payrolls $437M
Remaining 10 Teams $660m ($66M average)
Unallocated salary Cap: $583M
In my opinion there are not unallocated players that could use up a significant amount of the remaining excess payroll. What this means is that at the moment there is no way for the 10 teams with the lower payrolls to hit $72M.
It also means that when free agency hits, we are going to see some big numbers hit the board. I am just unsure that if I pay a lot for a particular player, that I am "over paying", I may pay over market to ensure that I have certain gaps filled.
Do I think certain managers are going to grossly over pay for players? Sure! but in real life Posada is making $13M, I would be surprised to see any Manager here make that kind of mistake.
I respect the fact that Rick is trying to help improve the league, and the fact that he has articulated his points systematically, I think is great, I just have a different opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by yankeegm2011 on Jul 11, 2011 8:13:45 GMT -4
I have a lot of respect for Ben, Indians, for it seems he is doing his homework and appears to care a great deal about the welfare of this league, for that I want to commend him. I think there have been many fair points made about the current free agency system some for some against etc. I still fall upon the side that the integrity of this league will be in jeopardy long term if in fact free agency is remained a free for all if you will. In real life money counts, business' can go under and those constraints go far for real life owners in making solid decisions to improve the welfare of there team. In a monopololy money system folks may and I emphasize may saddle there teams with enormous contracts and in theory destroy the value in that player for the whole league for the duration of the contract. For this reason I am convinced that the league should consider some rules of some kind to control free agency to some degree to not hurt the value of a player for years to come (ie: ridiculously long contacts, enormously high salaries, etc.) To think without rules on these issues this will not be a problem means that we ahve all learned nothing so far. Thought being proactive with discussion beat the hasty possibility of changing the rules during or after oa problem arises. Some disagree with my free agency suggestion, I'm OK with that, but to do nothing seems a little bit of a gamble on the leagues part. So if anyone has some other thoughts on how to have some control over the process please note them in the suggestion box. If you feel that wide open is the best system than thats OK as well. I was using this forum only to voice my opinion on the subject. Like many of you I have been in many MLB Fantasy leagues in my life and I am trying to look out for the well being of this league because quite frankly I believe it has the potential to be the best one going forward. All of your suggestions are appreciated and I personally would like to thank all of you who care enough to be involved in the discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 11, 2011 10:24:15 GMT -4
I think Rick and I agree on some key points:
Ridiculously long contracts are not realistic: my suggestion is a 5 year limit
Each franchise should be able to field a full starting Roster of major league players: institute this beginning next year
Some managers are going to be unable to compete well: up to the Admins to watch, and at least ask what the strategy is for an unusual action, and regulate accordingly
Final note, Rick obviously cares about the integrity of the league, and my disagreeing with him on some points does not lessen my respect for him, and his willingness to actually put forward new ideas.
|
|
|
|
Post by danks231 on Jul 12, 2011 13:09:43 GMT -4
I really appreciate both of your suggestions and will make a point of looking at each one thoroughly and seeing if we can implement some of these ideas into the league to try to improve... i am well aware that we may have some issues with free agency and cap and would like to do our best to head these issues off before they become too much of a problem... thanks for looking out for the league
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Jul 28, 2011 20:14:25 GMT -4
Still seeing a lot of discussion about how to improve the league. My two cents:
P. Free agency is going to get a bit crazy, and could take some teams out of contention for a long time.
S. Set the franchise limits, and make those the upper limits for a player's position. A tie goes to the team that currently rosters the player. This will at least let people bid fairly, but things shouldn't get too crazy. Not perfect, but does set some boundaries. Remember, we have roughly 1 billion more than is spent in MLB, so we can expect salaries to increase.
As suggested previously 5 years is the maximum contract length.
P. The "PP" system, odd system, but it works as well as any, creates artificial highs and lows.
S. Owners need to be able to drop any player that is in "PP" with no penalty, because many are not worth $2.5M or $5 M. This will also enlarge the free agent pool. Tough to make too many changes here because some folks built teams based on the existing salary structures and time lines. Changes here should be small and simple.
P. Fantrax
S. Either Change platforms, or upgrade to Premium version
P. Bad trades
S. Any owner can "object" to a trade, submit his reasoning in writing to the admins, both owners involved in the trade must then respond defending the trade. Responses will be reviewed by the Admins or a Trade Committee, and a verdict returned. Process should not take more than 48 hours. 24 to give owners a chance to review the trade and object, 24 for Trading Owners to respond, and the Admins to make a decision. It will generally be obvious whether the owners involved in a trade know what they are doing.
A couple of points..often the devil we know is better than gambling on an unknown improvement, so we need to "make haste..slowly", when it comes to changes. We have around 20 active managers, most of whom are reasonably good, that's darn good for a mid-season startup league, it's important to keep those engaged, and not implement changes that make the strategies they have employed moot.
It's a good league, with lots of potential
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakland GM(Jeff) on Aug 10, 2011 20:13:02 GMT -4
Just an observation but I think if you win a free agent or prospect claim you should claim the player on fantrax. This would help with determining what players are available.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakland GM(Jeff) on Aug 26, 2011 11:31:54 GMT -4
Since this league is pretty much going through a rebuild. I think the claiming minor league free agents process should be addressed.
I think there should be no waiver list. Just a 24hr waiting period between claims. Then when a team gets to their max roster number they will be in a culling mode. This way everyone will have to do some research to find players. Doesn't seem fair to put in the time and then lose the players. At this point I'm pretty much done starting claims. Probably doesn't help activity but maybe that will change.
my 2cents
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Aug 29, 2011 10:15:01 GMT -4
I agree with Jeff. I am much less active now then I was for a while. When I realized most of the players I was researching and claiming were going to other people who were not putting in the time, I just quit doing it. So I have been keeping fantrax up to date, and will still try to compete, but I'll treat it more as a keeper than I dynasty league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rays GM (Dennis) on Aug 30, 2011 11:17:04 GMT -4
I agree that the system is flawed. I had to put up 5 - 8 minor league guys at a time knowing full well that I would lose a high percentage of them. Because so many of the top and mid-range prospects have been taken it comes down to finding possible gems in the lower levels. I would like to scrap the waiver list for next season and come up with a new one that does not penalize the owners who do the research.
I would like to see this addressed by other owners and get some ideas on a workable system.
Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
Post by ben on Aug 31, 2011 8:42:37 GMT -4
I'd say let's treat minor leaguers as FA signable at the standard minor league salary, on a first come first served basis. Any minor league players "culled" to make room, would go on standard waivers for 72 hours, and if unclaimed would then fall back into the minor league free agent pool.
|
|
