ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Rules Changes => Topic started by: Flash on January 16, 2015, 05:23:26 PM
-
In recent years, there has been sporadic discussion in regards to where to roster players on (P-n/a) contracts. We have some new members who come from other leagues which utilize a minor league roster as a part of their practices. We also have some long-standing members who are familiar with the rules surrounding our current EDR roster.
We understand that FGM has a rich tradition and that the EDR roster rules are a unique part of who we are. Yet, with that, we, as a league, have to periodically review what we are doing to make sure we have something that is in the best interest of our member GMs.
Currently, our EDR roster is reserved for drafted rookies who were selected in our annual Amateur Draft. The players on our EDR rosters must be promoted as soon as they have any MLB action. Once promoted, they must remain on our 40 man MLB rosters. Additionally, EDR players received in a trade cannot be placed on our EDR rosters and must be on our 40 man MLB rosters.
We would like to discuss modifying our EDR roster rules to include 5 MiLB roster spots for players who are on (P-n/a) contracts. We would expand our EDR rosters to 25 (20 for our EDRs and 5 for our MiLBs). The MiLB players would be designated by listing the date they were added to the EDR roster as an MiLB. We have checked with Corey and it is feasible to do this on all our rosters: Fantrax, Profsl and Excel.
The 5 MiLB roster spots would be governed by these rules. It incorporates our rules for issuing a Prospect Contract, but it also is a change for our EDR's who see action in the major leagues.
Any player may be placed in the minors at any time, as long as they fall under the following requirements:
Determining rookie status:
- A player shall be considered a rookie unless, during a previous season or seasons, he has (a) played in 50 games (position player) or (b) accumulated 40 IP (pitcher) in the Major Leagues.
- A player that is over these limits is not eligible to be SENT to the Minors. However, if a player already in the minors hits these limits he may remain in the minors indefinitely. GM's are not forced to promote players that hit the threshold. The limit is only for sending a player to the minors.
- A player must be on a P-20XX contract to be eligible.
- An MiLB player's contract would not count against the team salary cap.
Please give your thoughts regarding these changes. We believe it is a positive change for FGM and can help each GM free up some roster spots to be more competitive.
-
I would be in favor of these changes. Now that we are years into this league and we have new members I think it will help them with more control of what they want to do with the roster. I think the proposed plan is a great idea.
-
In favor.
In fact, I'm in favor with removing the EDR distinction altogether and creating a 20-man minor league roster like Moneyball. I'm sure there were valid reasons at the time to create the EDR rule, but the sense I get is that few people, if any, are in favor of those rules now.
-
I think this is a great proposal. I'm not sure if it's an either/or situation with Roy's idea, but if we aren't going to an all out MiLB roster, this is a fair compromise.
-
A separate MiLB was discussed and tabled due to the amount of work involved incorporating it into the league spreadsheet.
We have had this conversation before; some for the EDR, some against. I think this is a good compromise- It eases some pressure on MLB rosters and keeps the existing EDR intact.
-
I prefer to get rid of the edr overall but till we can do that I'm OK with getting 5 spots.maybe down the road we could expand it to 10 spots and expanding the minors to 30
-
In favor.
In fact, I'm in favor with removing the EDR distinction altogether and creating a 20-man minor league roster like Moneyball. I'm sure there were valid reasons at the time to create the EDR rule, but the sense I get is that few people, if any, are in favor of those rules now.
:iatp:
-
The EDR is fundamentally setup as a place to stash draft picks. That is why it is not for a player signed to a prospect contract through free agency. Signing a player to a contract costs salary. Placing a player on the EDR is free. Allowing players to be placed onto the EDR is a way to circumvent the salary, as it would clear that cap from your roster.
Furthermore, an MLB roster is setup for 25 players. With 40 man rosters we have already built 15 spots extra to begin with. If you choose to fill the 15 slots up with veterans the league shouldn't grant you another 5 slots, you may fill those up and need 5 more, and what then...
Finally, adding a separate 5 slots of Minor leaguers would be detrimental to the parity of the league. If another 5x30 players are added to rosters (150) then parity would severely drop off.
I think this rule change sounds attractive. If everyone got the five roster spots everyone wins. But we as GMs will always want more roster spots. We cannot just change rules because of this natural tendency; or 65 will become 70 and then 80. The reason is that it will create too many loopholes salary wise, I can think of plenty just in a few moments. Also, the parity of the league is at stake. We don't need to lock teams into place more so, by removing an additional 150 players from the pool.
I had to think long and hard about this response as I wasn't sure of my opinion before. Now I am dead set that the consequences of this change outweigh the temorary benefit.
-
The EDR is fundamentally setup as a place to stash draft picks. That is why it is not for a player signed to a prospect contract through free agency. Signing a player to a contract costs salary. Placing a player on the EDR is free. Allowing players to be placed onto the EDR is a way to circumvent the salary, as it would clear that cap from your roster.
Furthermore, an MLB roster is setup for 25 players. With 40 man rosters we have already built 15 spots extra to begin with. If you choose to fill the 15 slots up with veterans the league shouldn't grant you another 5 slots, you may fill those up and need 5 more, and what then...
Finally, adding a separate 5 slots of Minor leaguers would be detrimental to the parity of the league. If another 5x30 players are added to rosters (150) then parity would severely drop off.
I think this rule change sounds attractive. If everyone got the five roster spots everyone wins. But we as GMs will always want more roster spots. We cannot just change rules because of this natural tendency; or 65 will become 70 and then 80. The reason is that it will create too many loopholes salary wise, I can think of plenty just in a few moments. Also, the parity of the league is at stake. We don't need to lock teams into place more so, by removing an additional 150 players from the pool.
I had to think long and hard about this response as I wasn't sure of my opinion before. Now I am dead set that the consequences of this change outweigh the temorary benefit.
Although this proposal has gotten some very favorable reviews by most of the members of the Rules Committee, as the originator of the proposal, it seems only right I should address the concerns that have been put forward regarding its negative impact on the league.
I will begin by saying I do not concur with the analysis that this proposal will diminish the value of our EDR component. I know I was a little apprehensive to even put forth such a proposal because of the EDR Rosters sacred place in the confines of FGM. I recall debating the issue with a former GM, a GM who professed to be one of the originators of the rule, and never really convincing him that EDRs received in trades should be able to be added to our EDR rosters because they were EDRs. This current proposal does not have a provision for such an action, but it does provide GMs with the opportunity to strengthen their 40 man rosters by having five specific types of players added to a MiLB roster.
I do not believe that the parity of our league will be hurt by such a rule change. Granted, the EDR concept is unique to FGM and will continue to be a part of who we are, but the addition of 5 MiLB spots does nothing to diminish the EDR concept. We will still have 20 EDR roster spots, and those roster spots will continue to be dedicated to our EDRs. If we promote, release, or trade away some of those EDRs, their roster spots will left empty until the next Amateur Draft.
As we currently operate, as soon as an EDR sees any MLB action, they must immediately be promoted to our 40 man roster. The proposed rule would allow GMs to keep such EDRs on the EDR roster without having to make an immediate roster change by promoting an EDR and dropping a contributing player on their 40 man roster. From my perspective, this would promote the competitive balance in the league and would not be detrimental in any way.
Further, the five MiLB slots could be used for players who are received in trade who are under the rookie threshold. These are players who will, hopefully, contribute in the future, but are of no competitive value in the present. The proposed rule clearly states that it is only for players under the threshold, and yes, it could theoretically take 150 players out of the player pool, but does that hurt parity or is it a more realistic reflection of what MLB teams do in real life? Do MLB teams keep prospects on their 40 man rosters? Yes they do, but they also have a multitude of minor league teams to "stash" players and those players are governed by option rules. Each MLB franchise has minor league teams at a multitude of levels (Rookie, Class A, A+, AA and AAA)—FGM has none.
Our "minor league teams" are manifested in our EDR rosters, and even with that, we have a prohibitive rule that says we have to promote an EDR to our 40 man roster if he has a single AB or IP. Adding five MiLB roster spots is our answer to the MLB options rule. We have a built in protection against misuse by requiring a player to be on a (P-n/a) contract and under the threshold. Players on a regular contracts are ineligible. Further, if an EDR has a short call up and is under the threshold, he doesn’t have to be promoted immediately.
I know that you have a fundamental belief in the evils of executive authority. You have said on more than one occasion that you believe the Commissioner has too much power. Yet, you are also asking the Commissioner(s) to provide leadership. Utilizing the Rules Committee is, by its very nature, a way to provide positive leadership. We are not always going to agree, but we can certainly come to some consensus on the best way to proceed. Dissent and disagreement does not always breed conflict, it sometimes promotes reflective thinking, but in this particular case, this proposal was presented to the Rules Committee after several years of participation in this league.
As a member of any organization, there are always those who portray the worst case scenarios. Do you really believe we are opening a door to keep adding roster spots so that there are no free agents to be had? While you refer to a “natural tendency” to do so, let me assure you, we are not a league run amok. I think you have to have a little faith in leadership and the Rules Committee. Yes, there are those that say “in this league or that league we do this”, but we’re not talking about those leagues—we’re talking about Franchise GM. We’re not looking to completely overhaul the EDR rule or get rid of it completely. We’re talking about the addition of five rosters spots for players who are not, at this time, contributing players to our weekly fantasy totals. There is no hidden agenda to circumvent the salary cap by adding five MiLB spots. What are we really talking about in terms of cap saving, $2.5m? Is that a significant enough cap savings to say no to the proposed idea?
I, like you, have given this proposal A LOT of thought. This is not a flippant proposal aimed at temporary benefit. This is a proposal that is the result my experiences in this league and is part of a vision for the future.
Finally, I will leave you with this: If you were to go through the FGM Archives, you would see an EDR proposal put forth by our former Commissioner on August 27, 2014. It had three basic changes:
1. Increase the size of the EDR to 30 players.
2. Allow International Free Agents under the age of 18 (Age when signed by FGM team) to be placed on a teams EDR.
3. Allow players on one teams EDR to be placed on another teams EDR when traded.
You were not part of the Rules Committee then, but you offered your vote.
You voted yes, yes, no.
I voted no, yes, yes.
Those questions were never resolved because we got stalled in the back and forth you get from endless discussion. Now, while I encourage such discussion, I believe we need to get a definitive answer to the rule changes being discussed and I think we can do that by going to a Poll Question format—where we each cast a vote of yea or nay. I will utilize such a format in the future. Everyone will get to post their comments and then vote as they see fit.
In regards to the EDR question, the two of us have changed our positions of a sort. However, I believe that what has been proposed is not a radical change, it is really a compromise of a sorts, and is something that can be managed for the good of the league. It is “an attractive rule” because, quite frankly, it is. The argument that GMs always want more is correct, but we have rules in place, and they govern how we play. My salary cap is $93m in 2015, I would like more, like say the $200m the Yankees have, but there are rules in place to govern that cap figure. One of the characteristics of FGM is the ability for GMs to evaluate talent, pick that talent, and be patient enough for it to come to fruition. There are no free drops or special concessions to anyone. At the same time, we all have to be cognizant of our success because our salary caps are directly affected by the success of our teams. The implementation of the five MiLB roster rule will not adversely affect integrity of this league. In my estimation, it will improve the league by giving GMs, under specific guidelines, a chance to improve the competitive level of their teams.
My sense is that FGM is ready to move forward with this rule change. The GMs on the Rules Committee are all veterans of FGM, with a sense of history as to what we are about, and judging by their comments, I would say we’re ready to see implementation. I hope the two remaining RC members who haven’t commented will do so by tomorrow, Friday, January 23, 2015.
-
If it is free to place a player on the minors and can remain their indeinitely they shpuld not be allowed to be used for scoring. That would cause huge issues.
-
Am i the only one who sees that giant loophole?
-
If it is free to place a player on the minors and can remain their indeinitely they shpuld not be allowed to be used for scoring. That would cause huge issues.
The only players who can be used for scoring purposes are players on your 40 man roster. The 5 MiLB players, like the EDRs we currently have on our Fantrax rosters, will be inactive for fantasy scoring purposes. There is no loophole..
I don't want to engage in a "Posting War" over things that simply don't exist. How we utilize the five MiLB roster spots is clearly explained and I'm not sure how much more I can say to ease your fears.
I will reiterate, there are specific guidelines that must be followed in order to use the 5 MiLB roster spots. Our Fantrax minor league rosters will be expanded to 25, 20 spots for our EDRs and 5 spots for our MiLBs--assuming we all have 20 EDRs and 5 MiLBs. Just like they do now, if GMs activate MiLBs or EDRs, they will have to drop a player from their 40 man MLB roster (if they have 40) to make room for the newly activated player and that salary will be added to their cap. GMs cannot simply move players up and down at their leisure without posting something on the Transaction Board.
-
The only players who can be used for scoring purposes are players on your 40 man roster. The 5 MiLB players, like the EDRs we currently have on our Fantrax rosters, will be inactive for fantasy scoring purposes. There is no loophole..
I don't want to engage in a "Posting War" over things that simply don't exist. How we utilize the five MiLB roster spots is clearly explained and I'm not sure how much more I can say to ease your fears.
I will reiterate, there are specific guidelines that must be followed in order to use the 5 MiLB roster spots. Our Fantrax minor league rosters will be expanded to 25, 20 spots for our EDRs and 5 spots for our MiLBs--assuming we all have 20 EDRs and 5 MiLBs. Just like they do now, if GMs activate MiLBs or EDRs, they will have to drop a player from their 40 man MLB roster (if they have 40) to make room for the newly activated player and that salary will be added to their cap. GMs cannot simply move players up and down at their leisure without posting something on the Transaction Board.
Fantrax does allow me to use any player for scoring. There is no way to distinguish between the two is there? I remember this issue from fNHL. So in FNHL prospect rosters were left as free agents and that was super sloppy. I could put a player like Javier Baez on my minor league roster indefinitely, for no cost, and plug him into my starting lineup every day. That's the loophole that doesn't exist existing. Your incorrect Ernie.
And since this can be done, this rule would demand huge resources to monitor everyday that teams aren't starting a player in the minor league roster. The operations would be enormous.
-
Why would you put him on your MLB roster if he's at AAA and not able to score points? If he makes the MLB roster in real life you, by existing rule, have to take him off your EDR anyway.
Maybe I'm missing something?
-
I'm not on the RC, but I feel the need to weigh in. The EDR is a relic and I understand there are some original GMs in this league who want it to remain the same as it was when it was the flagship and first league on ProFSL. However, apparently some of these GMs don't play in other leagues that use a MiLB roster with no issues at all. This might be the flagship original league, but it has been sinking faster than the Titanic due to new leagues utilizing revitalized rules/systems that are new and fresh and make sense. As with anything else, if you aren't changing to keep up, then you are falling behind and that is where FGM is and has been for at least over a year or so.
-
Fantrax does allow me to use any player for scoring. There is no way to distinguish between the two is there? I remember this issue from fNHL. So in FNHL prospect rosters were left as free agents and that was super sloppy. I could put a player like Javier Baez on my minor league roster indefinitely, for no cost, and plug him into my starting lineup every day. That's the loophole that doesn't exist existing. Your incorrect Ernie.
And since this can be done, this rule would demand huge resources to monitor everyday that teams aren't starting a player in the minor league roster. The operations would be enormous.
I guess the loophole you are alluding to is actually outright cheating by an individual GM. If that's the basis of you're objection then I think you're getting yourself all worked up over nothing. Am I wrong to assume we have honorable GMs who will not resort to cheating to win? Do you actually think anyone believes there is any merits to your argument that we will have to monitor GMs because we can't trust them?
Technically, yes, I'm wrong, because even with our present EDR rules we can cheat and use a player illegally. But if you really believe we have to worry about cheating, then I think you're doing yourself, and the league, a great injustice. There is really no reason to reduce this discussion to such a distasteful level.
Please remember we are all members of this league for personal enjoyment. As a leader of this league, I have the utmost confidence that we can implement this rule without incident. As a member of this league, I look at this rule change as a first step towards making FGM better for all.
-
I have to agree with Ernie on this. I don't think a GM in this league would blatantly cheat like that. Nobody wants to get the stain of being a cheater. For what, a few extra points in a week? I think we will be ok.
I would, however, like to put out there that if we have a 5 man MiLB roster then why don't we bring the MLB roster to 35 and have the 5 man MilB roster along with the EDR? This way it saves the 150 players from coming out of the pool and We have more than enough bench spots with a 35 man roster. Just a thought.
-
The rule as proposed by Ernie currently has the votes to pass. Out of courtesy, we are allowing time for all of the RC members to weigh in. Chris has suggested time constraints for future rulings. Unfortunately this came after the the Expanded EDR. Feel free to continue discussion.
I am involved in 5 baseball teams here. Each has it's own set of rules, each a little bit different. That is what I like about this site. As far as I know FGM's ENTRY DRAFT ROSTER is unique to the ProFSL community. It sets it apart from every other league. For that reason alone I am against doing away with the EDR. It has also been a hot topic a number of times and change has been resisted. Personally I would love to see a MiLB set up separate from the EDR and incorporate an "Options" system to more closely emulate Major League Baseball but record keeping restraints make that unlikely anytime soon.
First and foremost, FGM's mission has been to be as close to operating a MLB franchise as possible. Admittedly, this league isn't for everyone. Witness the high turnover in the past few months. I don't think it's because of any of the rules. To quote the recently resigned Astro GM-. "I have no problem taking over a lesser team, but the way this league has progressed, I find it would take multiple seasons of futility to have a remote chance at respectability." Yeah, chance are you won't come in here and win immediately. Just as in the MLB you must have a lot of patients, a high baseball IQ and good business mind, in that order. And, just as in MLB it takes years to bring a team to respectability but we have avenues (FYPD and FA) to help accommodate that.
-
The rule as proposed by Ernie currently has the votes to pass. Out of courtesy, we are allowing time for all of the RC members to weigh in. Chris has suggested time constraints for future rulings. Unfortunately this came after the the Expanded EDR. Feel free to continue discussion.
I am involved in 5 baseball teams here. Each has it's own set of rules, each a little bit different. That is what I like about this site. As far as I know FGM's ENTRY DRAFT ROSTER is unique to the ProFSL community. It sets it apart from every other league. For that reason alone I am against doing away with the EDR. It has also been a hot topic a number of times and change has been resisted. Personally I would love to see a MiLB set up separate from the EDR and incorporate an "Options" system to more closely emulate Major League Baseball but record keeping restraints make that unlikely anytime soon.
First and foremost, FGM's mission has been to be as close to operating a MLB franchise as possible. Admittedly, this league isn't for everyone. Witness the high turnover in the past few months. I don't think it's because of any of the rules. To quote the recently resigned Astro GM-. "I have no problem taking over a lesser team, but the way this league has progressed, I find it would take multiple seasons of futility to have a remote chance at respectability." Yeah, chance are you won't come in here and win immediately. Just as in the MLB you must have a lot of patients, a high baseball IQ and good business mind, in that order. And, just as in MLB it takes years to bring a team to respectability but we have avenues (FYPD and FA) to help accommodate that.
One reason I believe we have trouble retaining GMs is due to the current EDR format and how it is different from other minor league systems used on the site. This difference is a unique feature to FGM but GMs come in expecting the system to work similar to other leagues they have joined on the site and it isn't. The current format has worked for this league for many years, however the main reasons for wanting to keep it are usually that it is different and it has been used for a long time. IMO these are not good reasons to support wanting to keep it. Being different is usually good but only if it is different in a good way. It seems that the current EDR is different in a bad way. It hinders the ability for GMs to shape and mold there team to the vision they have by placing strict rules on player transactions. I know that they main reason behind the EDR has always been to make sure each team continues to build through the farm /draft (see quote from Colby Below). In the MLB teams use their farms in many different ways. Teams like the Tigers trade prospects off for MLB help every year. Other teams like the Rays trade MLB players for Prospects because they have to do this to continue to field a good team. The current EDR seems overly restrictive and IMO the league would be better off going to a full minor league roster. I would be interested to see a poll taken of all GM's in the league on three options: 1) Keep the current EDR, 2) Current EDR plus 5 Minor league spots, 3) Switch to a Minor league system (Similar to Moneyball, New Era, Scouting Department, etc.)
1) Yes - I only vote Yes, contingent on the third ruling not being passed
2) Yes - but only if the international free agent is not a free agent in real life when signed in FGM and is on an MLB team
3) No - The intent of the EDR rule is to promote self-farming and franchise-building, so that people can build talent through the draft over a number of years the natural way without trading left and right
I voted for the addition of 5 Minor league spots because I am in favor of having a minor league similar to other leagues here on PROFSL (Moneyball, Scouting Department, New Era, etc). In the future I would hope that we look at changing to a full minor league roster and get rid of the EDR. I think it would make retaining GMs easier and make the league more fun.
Some questions I have regarding the 5 minor league spots are:
1. How will these roster positions be tracked?
2. Players placed on the minor league roster in Fantrax?
3. Will these players be added to the EDR roster on the PROFSL page?
4. Will they be clearly be identified?
5. What problems will this cause tracking Minor league players vs. EDR players?
6. Who can be placed on the minor league roster? Only players that have never played in an MLB Game? Players I have signed? Players I have traded for?
7. Does a player need to be removed once he plays in an MLB Game?
8. Would it be easier to implement, track and improve the league more by removing the EDR and going straight to a minor league roster (with eligibility requirements) where players can be called up/sent down?
I have to agree with Ernie on this. I don't think a GM in this league would blatantly cheat like that. Nobody wants to get the stain of being a cheater. For what, a few extra points in a week? I think we will be ok.
I would, however, like to put out there that if we have a 5 man MiLB roster then why don't we bring the MLB roster to 35 and have the 5 man MilB roster along with the EDR? This way it saves the 150 players from coming out of the pool and We have more than enough bench spots with a 35 man roster. Just a thought.
I agree that no GM in this league would cheat. The consequences of getting caught would not be worth it.
I don't see how a 35 man roster with a 5 man Minor league roster would improve the league in anyway. You are taking 5 MLB roster spots away from every team in the league and making them use them on prospects. This would reduce parity in the league IMO as bad teams in the league could use these roster spots to sign MLB players that may get them a few points. The better teams would lose a little bit of MLB depth but wouldn't hurt them that bad since they usually have solid players across the board. They would be forced to sign more prospect instead of MLB depth.
-
The current wording in the first post of this thread does not designate players in the minors ineligible to gain points. The edr solves this by mandating 1 at bat or 1 pitch and you need a promotion.
Why not merely adjust the rule to include a provision about scoring, rather than discuss cheating. Cheating happens, and quite frankly if we implement this without a scoring provision after discussing it, then it wouldnt be cheating at all. The rules, knowingly, would be established to allow this.
1 description solves this issue.
-
Some questions I have regarding the 5 minor league spots are:
1. How will these roster positions be tracked?
2. Players placed on the minor league roster in Fantrax?
3. Will these players be added to the EDR roster on the PROFSL page?
4. Will they be clearly be identified?
5. What problems will this cause tracking Minor league players vs. EDR players?
6. Who can be placed on the minor league roster? Only players that have never played in an MLB Game? Players I have signed? Players I have traded for?
7. Does a player need to be removed once he plays in an MLB Game?
8. Would it be easier to implement, track and improve the league more by removing the EDR and going straight to a minor league roster (with eligibility requirements) where players can be called up/sent down?
1. How will these roster positions be tracked?
The MiLB players will be identified with a date stamp similiar to what we use for signed Free Agents.
2. Players placed on the minor league roster in Fantrax?
Yes, we will expand the Fantrax Minor League roster to 25 and they will be there with our EDRs.
3. Will these players be added to the EDR roster on the PROFSL page?
Yes, they will be on the EDR roster with a date stamp label.
4. Will they be clearly be identified?
Yes, they will be identified with a date stamp label.
5. What problems will this cause tracking Minor league players vs. EDR players?
We don't envision any problems other than monitoring if a player passes the threshold. If they are beyond the Prospect Threshold and on the three year cycle, they can remain on the EDR/MiLB roster, but once they are activated they cannot return. A player beyond the threshold, cannot be "sent" to the minors, even if they are in the minors because they do not meet the criteria for a MiLB player. The automatic activation rule for EDRs will no longer be in effect.
6. Who can be placed on the minor league roster? Only players that have never played in an MLB Game? Players I have signed? Players I have traded for?
These questions are answered by the original posted rule change. It would apply to any player presently on your roster, acquired in trade, or acquired in the free agent auction. But once again, here are the specific criteria for placing a player in one of the 5 MiLB roster spots:
Any player may be placed in the minors at any time, as long as they fall under the following requirements:
Determining rookie status:
- A player shall be considered a rookie unless, during a previous season or seasons, he has (a) played in 50 games (position player) or (b) accumulated 40 IP (pitcher) in the Major Leagues.
- A player that is over these limits is not eligible to be SENT to the Minors. However, if a player already in the minors hits these limits he may remain in the minors indefinitely. GM's are not forced to promote players that hit the threshold. The limit is only for sending a player to the minors.
- A player must be on a P-20XX contract to be eligible.
- An MiLB player's contract would not count against the team salary cap.
7. Does a player need to be removed once he plays in an MLB Game?
To reiterate, the present EDR rule for immediate activation will no longer be used. A player can remain on the EDR/MiLB roster as long as he is on a (P-20XX) contract. If a player is on a (P-20XX) contract and is on the three year cycle because he is passed the threshold, he cannot be moved down, but if he is on the EDR/MiLB roster, he does not have to be activated. It is a basic assumption that once a player is past the threshold, a GM will probably activate him at some point to help his team.
8. Would it be easier to implement, track and improve the league more by removing the EDR and going straight to a minor league roster (with eligibility requirements) where players can be called up/sent down?
Regardless of the answer, that is not the question before the Rules Committee.
-
So this proposal would modify the existing EDR by adjusting the current requirement where players need to get called up when they make there MLB debut?
So basically we will have 25 spots. 20 EDR spots that can only be used for players we draft and 5 roster spots that can be used for any player that qualifies for the minor league requirements.
What's the reasoning for keeping the restrictions on the 20 EDR roster spots. Would it be less complex and easier for new GMs if we just went with a full 25 man minor league roster. It seems like this concept will be even more confusing to GMs then the current EDR. Personally I don't see a good reason to keep 20 roster spots as EDR spots.
-
After reading those complicated rules, I am even more convinced that eliminating the EDR altogether and setting up a format similar to Moneyball is the right way to go.
How is it this has worked so successfully in MB, yet I read that it would be difficult to implement in this league?