2017 League Discussion, Rule Changes

[Maydab23]

1. For those that volunteered, thank you. I know we are all busy but this might be the single most important thing for this league. We need to keep working to find owners to add to the strong core of committed great owners we already have.

2. The transaction limit is necessary. Especially as nobody is really able to help with the fantrax and spreadsheet processing. The league is massive work on the admin side. While a transaction limit is less than ideal, having a bunch of outstanding transactions that are not being processed (which we had this year including the lead up to playoffs) is not ideal either. The limit should be something that doesn't restrict owners freedom to promote/demote, only prevent the "im going to promote this guy for one game then demote him just because I can and I'm going for every point I can get"    I commend that type of owner and want those types in this league BUT those types of transactions just aren't feasible admin wise in this league.

3. See above. Chris, Jeremy and myself will keep working hard for the league and appreciate any help somebody can give in the future.

4. I'm mixed. This site has definitely had an increase in issues in the last year or two. Ideally the league remains here but this is something to watch over the next year.

5. I respect some people's desire for realism as that's part of the draw of this league and what makes it unique. Like the transaction limit though, certain concessions have to be made IF the status quo is unsustainable. I feel right now we are teetering on that. This is why recruitment is SO important. If we can get the league to a point where we never have more than around 5 orphan teams then I feel that's a good and realistic place to be. This year we were at nearly 50% orphan rate at one point which is not okay. It's also not realistic to have so many teams being deadwood.

My position is, let's work out asses off recruiting and try to fill this league up with more great, committed owners. However, if we are near a 50% orphan rate again by the next off season then I think that contraction will unfortunately be a necessity.

6. Im mixed on this. Yes, I understand why owners feel frustrated they work hard to find minor league FAs just for someone else to swoop in. However, all this does is help the teams whose owners are most active (which are already the best teams in the league) Therefore, doing this might reduce parity which is was we are trying to avoid. The fact is not everybody has the same amount of time to find these guys. I've been in this league for years now and there were times I was finding lots of guys that were poached away and times in which my personal life was busy and was thankful others were finding and posting because I didn't have time at the moment so I see both sides. The best thing might be a compromise to implement something not too drastic.

[rotodojo]

What do you mean by expansion style protection rules?

Basehock like the Vegas Golden Knights. New owners select players from an unprotected list. I thought it might change the depth and could lower the transactions while also increasing the other teams attractiveness to new owners. However,  the amount of orphan teams is higher than the fantrax owner list suggests and an increase in teams likely raises the transactions back up so I see the need for a limit.

286

What do you mean by expansion style protection y

[kidd5jersey]

1) I could probably get a person or two to join from Wonderboy

2) Transaction limit.  I wouldn't limit yearly transactions.  Lets add a column with MLB options to the sheets.  After the three options are done, they must clear waivers. 

3) I will volunteer to help with sheets.  I think we should look at the daily service time adder as well.  I did it in Wonderboy and it wasn't hard but just one more step. 

4) I agree.  This site is on its last legs it seems like. 

5) Contraction.  I think 30 teams makes it more realistic.  Has the idea of making it a money league ever been talked about?  It always seems people are more competitive if money is on the line.

6) Minor league signings.  Yes, this needs to be increased.  Perhaps allow the 'finding' team a multiplier?  Say like a 50% multiplier where if the finding team closes on the deal, the salary hit is only half of the bid. 

I think there are some other things to look at: 
A) Scheduling.  I have a format for 162 game schedule where it plays out exactly like MLB.
B) Offseason FA.  I am in a hockey league that uses REAL time bidding on Google Sheet.  This will limit the work that has to be done by leaders of league.  It is very, very innovative.  I could share a copy from my buddy Alex. 
C) Draft Pick Trading.  It is not allowed in MLB, and specific owners in the past just trade all of their picks.  This leaves the farm barren. 
D) Salary Caps.  I think winning should be rewarded.  Have variable caps been discussed?
E) 40man active rosters.  That's too many players because not every team will have a playable roster. 

What do you guys think?

[ldsjayhawk]

The version of this league that was a money league has already died.  I don't think it would be more successful as a money league.  And I would be out if it turned into a money league.  I don't play money leagues.

I like having the salary caps the same in the league.  It is the only league that I play in that maintains similar salary caps.  It brings variety into my life. 

[Maydab23]

1) I could probably get a person or two to join from Wonderboy

2) Transaction limit.  I wouldn't limit yearly transactions.  Lets add a column with MLB options to the sheets.  After the three options are done, they must clear waivers. 

3) I will volunteer to help with sheets.  I think we should look at the daily service time adder as well.  I did it in Wonderboy and it wasn't hard but just one more step. 

4) I agree.  This site is on its last legs it seems like. 

5) Contraction.  I think 30 teams makes it more realistic.  Has the idea of making it a money league ever been talked about?  It always seems people are more competitive if money is on the line.

6) Minor league signings.  Yes, this needs to be increased.  Perhaps allow the 'finding' team a multiplier?  Say like a 50% multiplier where if the finding team closes on the deal, the salary hit is only half of the bid. 

I think there are some other things to look at: 
A) Scheduling.  I have a format for 162 game schedule where it plays out exactly like MLB.
B) Offseason FA.  I am in a hockey league that uses REAL time bidding on Google Sheet.  This will limit the work that has to be done by leaders of league.  It is very, very innovative.  I could share a copy from my buddy Alex. 
C) Draft Pick Trading.  It is not allowed in MLB, and specific owners in the past just trade all of their picks.  This leaves the farm barren. 
D) Salary Caps.  I think winning should be rewarded.  Have variable caps been discussed?
E) 40man active rosters.  That's too many players because not every team will have a playable roster. 

What do you guys think?

To touch on the topics you brought up

A) Im interested. Jeremy (Phillies) re-did our schedule already for last year though and it was much better than years past imo. He is our resident schedule expert so I'd be interested to see what he thinks.
B) im definitely interested. PM me more info on this when you get a chance. Worth looking into.
C) I've always wondered this as well but it's a definitely in the fabric of the league. We've recently implemented some rules to prevent teams from just selling off a bunch of future picks. Personally, I would be okay with curtailing it more. Not sure if that would have owners support though.
D) I like the idea of every team having the same. Rewarding winning teams with more money just creates more imbalance and I want more parity in the league not less.
E) Was more of an admin thing. 40man mimics real life. It's only actually 25 "active" roster spots. If you put the 15 extra on the farm it just creates more needless roster shuffling. This helps simplify spreadsheets.

Love the discussion!

[indiansnation]

I can help out with everything but doing spreadsheets. I dont have a computer and just use my phone. I can move topics and add players to their teams.

[chrisetc21]

So it seems there's agreement on a couple of things at least. 

1) Contraction should be put off and have a more concerted recruitment effort. 
2) Some type of benefit for teams posting minor league free agents.  4x or 3x initial bid or 50% off initial poster's bid.
3) Some type of transaction limit to prevent streaming marginal players. 
4) Some help for recruitment, board transactions, and the spreadsheets. 

The real time blind bidding is something that maybe we can take a look at.  I know there was at least one league that tried that here with sending bids to an email address but it presents some problems if it's done poorly.  Hard to stay within your budget if you're not sure if you've won or lost players or even if you won two players of which you only needed one but bid on both because you didn't want to lose out on them.     

As for money league, I don't mind that but perhaps it could be an optional thing.  Those who want to put up some cash would partake in the winnings and those who don't wouldn't.  It's always an issue with rebuilding teams putting up money when they know they won't win for a few years.

Anyway, my thoughts. 

[chrisetc21]

Forgot to mention draft picks.  I feel this is part of a larger discussion which is protecting franchises from themselves.  When it comes to trading picks there is sometimes a bit of an uproar in the league that doesn't exist when a team doesn't sign minor league free agents, or gives bad contracts in free agency, or doesn't use their international money.  If you're not exercising your ability to use all of the mechanisms available to you in this league then you're losing out.  I would say the difference in trading picks is that you're at least getting some value.  I think you will find that some of the teams that have engaged in trading their picks in recent years are the same teams that didn't use their picks in previous drafts.  The drafts are in the history section, you can go see for yourselves.

From a personal standpoint, I can confirm it is incredibly difficult to rebuild an entire franchise in this league.  It's took me 3 years to build mine.  Without being able to get additional picks it would probably have taken even longer.  I think a year or two ago we put in the rule that you couldn't trade your first round pick in 3 consecutive seasons because some teams started trading those picks every year.  Maybe we can upgrade that protection somehow.   

[ldsjayhawk]

On the topic of minor league free agents, here is a suggestion that I have seen come up elsewhere that I have found interesting, maybe it was here.  If the originating team does not win the bid, there is a "fee" paid to the finding team.  It might be an interesting proposal. 

[Jss0062]

To touch on the topics you brought up

A) Im interested. Jeremy (Phillies) re-did our schedule already for last year though and it was much better than years past imo. He is our resident schedule expert so I'd be interested to see what he thinks.
B) im definitely interested. PM me more info on this when you get a chance. Worth looking into.
C) I've always wondered this as well but it's a definitely in the fabric of the league. We've recently implemented some rules to prevent teams from just selling off a bunch of future picks. Personally, I would be okay with curtailing it more. Not sure if that would have owners support though.
D) I like the idea of every team having the same. Rewarding winning teams with more money just creates more imbalance and I want more parity in the league not less.
E) Was more of an admin thing. 40man mimics real life. It's only actually 25 "active" roster spots. If you put the 15 extra on the farm it just creates more needless roster shuffling. This helps simplify spreadsheets.

Love the discussion!

Don't care for a 162 game schedule.