|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 20:47:18 GMT -5
I'll need to split these questions up a little bit. I have a short attention span. Player eligibility? It appears that Fantrax is currently set up to use "default" positions when necessary even if a player hasn't played any games there. So, I'd assume that situations like Piscotty at 3B are possibilities here as well. Hopefully this won't cause any friction in our league. I don't think we can legislate to that level of detail, so hopefully we can just leave that in the hands of the people at Fantrax.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 20:56:40 GMT -5
Rookie eligibility? This gained no traction at the time, but we now have a more well rounded group of owners: "Noteworthy is what MLB's official rulebook states: "A player shall be considered a rookie unless, during a previous season or seasons, he has (a) exceeded 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in the Major Leagues". Most of our rules are copied from another league. I should have researched this earlier. If enough owners would like to switch the rookie eligibility rules to match MLB's definition in this regard, we could put that up for vote. (It would have a minimal impact, but I would prefer the change from 150 to 130, just to keep in line with MLB.)" Read more: mlbbaseballleague.proboards.com/thread/68/upcoming-fa#ixzz3rcD1SRrZI would still be on favor of switching it to 130, but considering that the mistake was already made, it would be simpler to edit the remark in the rules about using MLB's criteria. Unless this gains public support, I'll put it on the agenda that we need to remove the conflicting language from the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 21:05:34 GMT -5
"Primary" FA positions?
You're right it's a very subjective term that has little meaning, and no real consequence. It will be changed to state that auctions are held "by position". (The scheduling will continue be subjective. Checking "games played per position" totals would increase the work of listing free agents immensely with little benefit.)
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 21:20:59 GMT -5
Winning free agency bids?
There needs to be some kind of language in the rules stating that the amount of the bid serves as the player's salary for the duration of the contract. Regardless of the length of contract offered, the highest monetary amount wins the player. (There's usually very little incentive to offer a contract beyond the minimum, but considering that we have no mechanism for terminating guaranteed contracts other than retirement or death, it's not such a bad thing.)
For all it's flaws, the league this was copied from maintains a very simplistic style, which I believe creates a little distinction from most 30 team leagues. There's no amateur draft. A team can thrive even with very little prospect knowledge. There are no escalating free agency salaries, no removable guaranteed contracts, and no salary exchange in trades. It's a lot of little things that open the door to many potential owners (like myself) who would be overwhelmed if we truly tried to replicate the complete MLB experience.
My reason for mentioning this is that it makes perfect sense that length of contract should influence free agency contract value in an auction. The only real argument against it is simplicity. Maybe in time we'll trend more toward realism. For the moment, keeping things simple is high priority.
|
|
|
Post by gepetto69 (Stuart, LAD) on Nov 15, 2015 21:24:38 GMT -5
I have a question about the bidding, how many "open" bids may a team have at any given time? For example when the C's are posted may I bid on four of them?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 21:32:18 GMT -5
Platooning/streaming?
At the moment, there's nothing in the rules to prevent a team from streaming players on their hometown team. I expect the possibilities for this are greater at the moment since each team has an overwhelming number of players from their home team.
If you have the courage to do so, and the time to type all the protect/unprotect threads, then it can be done. In my mind it's similar to stacking a roster in H2H with all speedsters, using SP eligible relievers, or leaving a position completely blank. It's an option relevant to fantasy but not realistic. (I've already determined that I don't have the guts to stream Keuchel and Altuve.)
If it's a concern for many in the league, then there are possibilities to address it.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 21:33:22 GMT -5
I have a question about the bidding, how many "open" bids may a team have at any given time? For example when the C's are posted may I bid on four of them? There is no limit other than cap space.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 15, 2015 21:39:56 GMT -5
Thank you guys for pointing out some corrections that need made, particularly in the rule book.
As Stephen said, please continue to help us find ways to be more consistent.
The last thing I need to mention is that there are several options under consideration regarding free agency which could alter the way it is run for the current season due to the low participation totals. For example, the FA schedule is likely to be pushed back to mid-December. Other decisions may be made as well to protect the well-being of the unowned franchises.
Thanks for your questions and patience.
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM (TJ) on Nov 16, 2015 3:35:39 GMT -5
Winning free agency bids? There needs to be some kind of language in the rules stating that the amount of the bid serves as the player's salary for the duration of the contract. Regardless of the length of contract offered, the highest monetary amount wins the player. (There's usually very little incentive to offer a contract beyond the minimum, but considering that we have no mechanism for terminating guaranteed contracts other than retirement or death, it's not such a bad thing.) For all it's flaws, the league this was copied from maintains a very simplistic style, which I believe creates a little distinction from most 30 team leagues. There's no amateur draft. A team can thrive even with very little prospect knowledge. There are no escalating free agency salaries, no removable guaranteed contracts, and no salary exchange in trades. It's a lot of little things that open the door to many potential owners (like myself) who would be overwhelmed if we truly tried to replicate the complete MLB experience. My reason for mentioning this is that it makes perfect sense that length of contract should influence free agency contract value in an auction. The only real argument against it is simplicity. Maybe in time we'll trend more toward realism. For the moment, keeping things simple is high priority. Thanks for the clarification. There's still a nuance missing. Does length of contract break ties? If the current high bid for John Jaso were 2 years at $1.4, would a bid of 3 years at $1.4 beat that? Or is it required to increase the annual salary no matter the contract length? I would agree that in most cases, a team would offer the minimum, since the minimum is designed to force teams to make commitments to star players. But a significant difference would be in the case of a star player who suffers a half-season injury in his 6th season. Such a player who might otherwise be a top 5 at his position would likely be outside the top 15 due to missed playing time. Rather than sign him to a 2-year deal and be forced to fend off suitors again in two years, owners might well want to lock him up for longer. And believe me, I appreciate the value of simplicity. I have read more about Pirates minor leaguers in the last 24 hours than in the previous 2 years combined. Simple and clearly stated is fine by me.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 16, 2015 4:51:43 GMT -5
Does length of contract break ties? Or is it required to increase the annual salary no matter the contract length? Simple and clearly stated is fine by me. We are going to appreciate having you here to help with the "clearly stated" part. The parent league does not allow length of contract to break ties. That is what is intended by "- The minimum bid increase is $0.1". However, once again, its not all that clear. Perhaps something like "- All bids must have a minimum increase over the previous high bid of at least $0.1". Barring a change, yes, a valid bid requires a salary increase. Having said that, the idea is intriguing. It wouldn't seem to take much away from the simplicity to allow free agents to use length of contract as a secondary determining factor in the auction.
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Nov 16, 2015 4:56:42 GMT -5
With every team now either having a roster posted or being owned I'm hoping to make good progress on the rules this week. Looks out for a reasonably large overhaul (of the wording, not of the content itself).
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM (TJ) on Nov 16, 2015 5:41:03 GMT -5
First version of my roster is here. Please take a look and let me know if there's something glaringly obvious I did wrong.
Link to 2016 Pirates Update
I listed Steve Lombardozzi in a special category, as he was the only pre-6th-year free agent that was a Pirate last year. He rejected his minor league assignment back in October and is a free agent in MLB at this point. I wasn't positive whether that meant he is in the Free Agency pool for this winter, or if he is just in limbo until another team signs him (or he completes his 6 years of control). If I understand correctly, when I make future changes, I need to update the roster post (so that it remains current), and make a separate "transactions" post in that forum that just lists what is new. Is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Nov 16, 2015 6:21:00 GMT -5
|
|