ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: Rules Changes => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Clarifications & Discussion => Topic started by: rcankosy on February 25, 2015, 10:06:27 PM
-
I don't believe that the re-sign values have been extended, since the league was formed. At the very least, perhaps we could update the top 5 salaries to bring them in line with real life.
-
Absolutely this should be done. Maybe we can get a group of guys to each take one roster position?
-
There is currently an issue on the board concerning Compensation for FA Relievers. It might be in our best interest to resolve one issue at a time?
-
Sorry for introducing this, while another proposal was on the table, but I think it's extremely important and has flied under the radar for years.
I wanted to get it out there before I forgot about it.
-
Sorry for introducing this, while another proposal was on the table, but I think it's extremely important and has flied under the radar for years.
I wanted to get it out there before I forgot about it.
Not a problem Roy. In fact, it is directly related to the Compensation issue. I'm just trying to steer the conversation to one aspect of the problem at a time. Hoping we will be more productive that way.
-
Can someone please update me on where this topic stands? Which positions have been updated? Isn't Joe Mauer the highest paid C at 23m per year?
-
Can someone please update me on where this topic stands? Which positions have been updated? Isn't Joe Mauer the highest paid C at 23m per year?
The extension values were updated on October 1, 2015, based on the contracts for each position within FGM. If a player was released prior to the end of the 2015 season, he was not included. All the extensions for each position are listed in the Contracts section of the Rules.
Joe Mauer is no longer a C, he is only a CI. He lost his eligibility as a C after the 2014 season.
-
Was there a vote deciding that FGM contracts be used for extension purposes rather than real life contracts?
-
Was there a vote deciding that FGM contracts be used for extension purposes rather than real life contracts?
There was discussion on it but I can't find it right now. It all started with Compensation for RP and evolved into trying to strike more of a balance between position players and pitching. As for an actual vote, no, I don't recall one. Maybe Ernie can shed more light on it
-
Was there a vote deciding that FGM contracts be used for extension purposes rather than real life contracts?
There was no vote, however, I posted the rationale for changing the Extension Values based on the principle of supply and demand within FGM. As a league, we set the values of the contracts based upon what transpires during free agency. We cannot realistically utilize real life contracts as our extension values because we have a limited salary cap and our league cannot viably support the mega-contract amounts that MLB players are getting in today's market.
With that, I posted extension value scales for every position on the FGM board. I asked for comments and left the on the board during the month of September. During that time, 3 GMs commented, but no one voiced any disapproval after I adjusted the RP scales.
In regards to the Rules Committee voting on this issue, it would seem to me, with the absence of any comment from a single member of the Rules Committee, coupled with the fact that only 3 members voted on the last issue presented to them for a vote (RPs Type A status), there are some things which need to happen under the vestiges of Executive Discretion.
Rick worked very diligently on updating the rules and put them up for approval by a league-wide vote--yet very few members voted on the articles as they were presented.
Overall, I think FGM is moving in a positive direction. We cannot keep repeating the same mistake of dragging our feet when it comes to dealing with pertinent issues. With this issue, I researched, I investigated and I asked a variety of ProFSL leaders, so I could do something for the good of the league. At Corey's suggestion, I decided that the principle of supply and demand was the best way to go. As a league, we don't have to depend on what's done in other leagues because we establish the guidelines based on how we operate.
Rick and I continually ask for input, and I did so with this issue, so as such, we are going with our current extension values--and will continue to update them at the end of each season--so we don't go six years and end up in the same predicament.
-
Perhaps this issue got blurred in the discussion of RP or I missed it entirely. In any case, I will state my concerns with the system as is. Good players on teams with high caps will be under-priced, because they will never hit free agency. For example, Posey should be a 23m per year player based on Mauer's contract when the latter was a C, but the A's will likely extend him in perpetuity based on a contract that was likely signed nearly 10 years ago. The same thing will happen with Stanton, Trout, Harper, or any other top player.
The only way this situation gets fixed is if a top player hits free agency and get bid up. That's not likely to happen in this league based on past history, because few teams have the cap space or the desire to spend 25-30m annual salary on a player.
Do we really want the top players to stay with their current teams at under market salaries for life?
-
Perhaps this issue got blurred in the discussion of RP or I missed it entirely. In any case, I will state my concerns with the system as is. Good players on teams with high caps will be under-priced, because they will never hit free agency. For example, Posey should be a 23m per year player based on Mauer's contract when the latter was a C, but the A's will likely extend him in perpetuity based on a contract that was likely signed nearly 10 years ago. The same thing will happen with Stanton, Trout, Harper, or any other top player.
The only way this situation gets fixed is if a top player hits free agency and get bid up. That's not likely to happen in this league based on past history, because few teams have the cap space or the desire to spend 25-30m annual salary on a player.
Do we really want the top players to stay with their current teams at under market salaries for life?
You should have brought this up four months ago in August when Flash was putting constant posts about changes. I think the ship has sailed on the changes and there is no reason to bring this back up when it was fixed months ago. This comes down to activity in this league. There were almost daily posts made about this as well as PM's from Flash. I think there is no reason to rehash this again. Objections to these changes should have been made when Flash asked the league about it.
-
You should have brought this up four months ago in August when Flash was putting constant posts about changes. I think the ship has sailed on the changes and there is no reason to bring this back up when it was fixed months ago. This comes down to activity in this league. There were almost daily posts made about this as well as PM's from Flash. I think there is no reason to rehash this again. Objections to these changes should have been made when Flash asked the league about it.
Thank you Chris!
I was away this afternoon but I was half way expecting this reaction.
Roy, you brought this subject up earlier in the year and it did have a whole lot of merit. When the time came around and it was addressed- Where were you? Getting involved after the fact doesn't count.
Sorry, Ernie and I have put countless hours into trying to make this league better and I've given up on the political correctness- You get out of it what you put into it. We are trying our damnedest to keep this ship afloat- Either lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.
My apologizes to the rest of the league