Armchair Fantasy Baseball


Author Topic: Rule Change Discussions  (Read 1676 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chrisetc21

  • League Moderator
  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 12159
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige -1
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Rule Change Discussions
« on: August 21, 2016, 11:33:49 PM »
Some things I think we need to look at.

1) Tanking.  In the past we had a 10 player rule for each roster.  It's difficult to enforce as we need to constantly check roster to ensure each team has 10 active players.  I think instead, we go with something like if your team finishes bottom five more than 3 years in a row then your first and second round picks go to the end of each round.  Obviously a team without an owner would not be penalized. 

2) Trading of picks.  I think we need to put a limit on the number of consecutive years you can trade your 1st,2nd, or 3rd round picks.  It's not good for our league to have teams constantly trading their highest picks.  I think two years should be the limit.  Also, no trading of picks more than 2 drafts away.

3)  Salary cap.  We need to look at raising the cap since many arbitration year salaries are dependent on MLB salaries.  It's not realistic to keep that cap as MLB salaries continue to increase.

4)  Minor league affiliates.  I think it's become a waste of time to keep minor league affiliates.  At this point it may be time to simply list a team's minor league players alphabetically.  The affiliates and levels really serve no purpose at all other than to group your guys how you want.  There's not enough benefit for the time spent doing it.   

5)  Revocable waivers changes.  I think we need to look at having a 48 hour period for the waiver and then a 48 hour period for any claims/trades.  Right now a team can make a claim and instantly post a trade without giving other teams the opportunity to claim.  It's a loophole that exists now that could be problematic.  Also, we need to treat revocable waiver claims to regular waiver claims in terms of the order.  You make a claim and your team goes to the bottom of the list in terms of priority.  Right now a team with the worst record can win every claim they want in revocable waivers.  That's a problem. 

:BOS: 2014 World Series Champion - Title Town
:HOU2: 2014 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:GS: 2014-2015 NBA Finals Champion - Free Market Kings
:HOU2: 2015 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU2: 2017 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU2: 2017 World Series Champion - Armchair Fantasy Baseball

Offline Jss0062

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 2338
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige -1
    • :HOU:
    • :DAL:
    • :SA:
    • :Blank:
    • :Texas:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2016, 01:09:55 AM »
1) Cap penalties might be a better option.

2) Depends on the situation, I don't think we have a problem with trading a pick later than the following year draft but yes a rule limiting traded picks to the current year draft and following year draft should be in writing.

3) Agreed but not yet as big a problem as it may seem.  Average MLB payroll for 2016 was $130M up 3.9% year over year, so we are not really out of line at $125M.  Possibly make the the following year's cap the previous year's MLB average + an extra 5% to cover the rest of the players on the 40man.

4) No-brainer in my book.  Should be a depth chart style.  Advocated for this a couple years ago.

5) Agreed, although in season waivers are not supposed to roll a winning claim to the bottom that's only for offseason claims.

I would add
6) removing one of the outfield spots to be replaced by an additional pitcher, also consolidate the CI and MI postions to make room to add a flex UT/P position.

Offline RyanJames5

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 5426
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige 1
    • :BAL:
    • :BAL-NFL:
    • :WAS-NBA:
    • :WAS-NHL:
    • :NorthCarolina:
    • :PHI-MLS:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2016, 07:36:14 AM »
1) I agree that I think a cap penalty would be better.

2) I don't think dealing picks is a huge issue, But wouldn't be opposed to some sort of rule being put in place.

3) I think a progressive increase like what was proposed is a great idea since our salaries are so tied to real life.

4) agreed on depth chart minors

5) I think the in-season waivers should continue to work like the real MLB with the worst record in league having the first crack at a claim. Off-season should roll with each claim made.

6) this is a huge one for me. Very difficult to ask people to fill full rosters when we play more players than teams roster. I this what was laid out in the previous post makes sense.
:STL: 2017 FGM NL Central Champion
:KC: 2017 ABL AL East Champions
:KC: 2016 ABL AL East Champions
:STL: 2016 FGM Wild Card
:WAS: 2016 Bush League NL East Champions
:PIT: 2015 Wild Card Baseball World Series Champions
:KC: 2015 ABL AL East Champions
:OAK: 2015 Bush League AL Wild Card
:OAK: 2014 Bush League AL Wild Card

Offline firemanx

  • All-Star
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2012
  • Posts: 782
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige 1
    • :NYY:
    • :MIA:
    • :MIA-NBA:
    • :FLO:
    • :MiamiFL:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2016, 09:23:37 AM »
definately think we need a small cap increas to maintain compettiveness

Online kidd5jersey

  • All-Star
  • **
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 850
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige -1
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2016, 02:28:18 PM »
1) I agree cap penalty would be better. 

2) I think picks should only be traded for current draft and next year following.  Two years out can damage a team pretty bad especially if the current owner resigns.  I think picks should be eligible to be traded as many years in a row as possible due to competition.  Teams currently competing generally do not need top picks as much as current players.

3) Salary Cap- I say do either the median salary ($114M- 2015) or an average ($130M in 2016)   I am fine with either, but if we use median it will cut the cap some.  As a result I would wait a year or two so teams could be compliant.  I think that average salary is a better method going forward.

4) Minor League Affiliates-  It is easier to track players but we can do it on our own if need be (which I will in that event).  It is a lot of work at the end of the year for the commissioners so if we keep it please do it early so they do not get slammed with 1000 requests.

5) I agree.  It should take 48hrs and highest claiming team receives negotiation rights.

6) Lineup- MLB teams generally carry 13 position players and 12 pitchers.  I think our lineup should reflect that. As a result, I like the current setup due to the realism.  It also makes it easier for non playoff teams to move players at the deadline for prospects etc. 

My new proposals:
7) Rule 5 draft.  Players that are in the minors and not on 40man after six years service time become eligible to be drafted to 40man rosters of other teams.  This will prevent top teams from stockpiling talent and essentially blocking everyone else for that player's career.  It also allows the lower teams to pick up fringe guys who could play.

8) International Signing needs a tweek.  I am new, but I looked at the transactions from years past.  First bid has to be doubled as a 'discovery' charge.  However, top 20 or top 30 players are already known.  So basically, the first person who bids can lock out the other teams with say a $2M bid or so.  I think top international free agents set by MLB, Baseball America, or one good source should not be subject to that rule.  That allows all teams to be able to bid for the top international players.  Some people work, have kids, etc and I don't think it is fair to essentially punish someone because they didn't hear someone signed first.

9) Qualifying offers.  We should set a qualifying offer (same as MLB charge) to impending free agents.  If that player is signed via free agency, the signing team has to give their first draft pick to the team losing the player (however, it is top 10 protected).  In the event a team does not have 1st pick, then a 2nd round is passed.  If a team signs multiple qualified players, then it gives the picks to the teams in chronological order to whichever player is signed first.

Offline chrisetc21

  • League Moderator
  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 12159
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige -1
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #5 on: August 22, 2016, 03:55:26 PM »
Tanking teams don't really care about their cap space.  Might as well call this the White Sox rule.  They have $90m in cap space. 

The kind of cheap impact players a team needs to be a winning team are much more likely to be found in the draft than in minor league free agency and a tanking team wouldn't sign mlb free agents until they were ready to win anyway.  I'd gladly pay a $10, $20, or $30 million cap penalty every year to get a top five pick in the draft.  A cap penalty doesn't deter tanking at all for me. 
:BOS: 2014 World Series Champion - Title Town
:HOU2: 2014 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:GS: 2014-2015 NBA Finals Champion - Free Market Kings
:HOU2: 2015 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU2: 2017 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU2: 2017 World Series Champion - Armchair Fantasy Baseball

Offline RyanJames5

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 5426
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige 1
    • :BAL:
    • :BAL-NFL:
    • :WAS-NBA:
    • :WAS-NHL:
    • :NorthCarolina:
    • :PHI-MLS:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #6 on: August 22, 2016, 04:28:53 PM »
That's very true and my team would be a great example of that.  If I was tanking and not trying to build, while putting some sort of product on the field, I wouldn't have used any of my cap space this off-season and would have just left my lineup void of MLB players.  I think that the key is that it has to be obvious that tanking is occurring and not just a team that was left in a really bad place. 

I also really like the idea of a Rule V draft.  I am in another 30 team league that has a 100 player minor league system and it has a rule V draft every off season.  We run it 2 rounds just like in the majors and generally see some players that can contribute being drafted.  I do realize that it does however, create additional work for the person running the spreadsheet because 6 years of service time isn't something that can looked up.  That clock starts from the time that a player is signed in free agency or drafted and isn't tied to any real life number, so it definitely creates extra work. 
:STL: 2017 FGM NL Central Champion
:KC: 2017 ABL AL East Champions
:KC: 2016 ABL AL East Champions
:STL: 2016 FGM Wild Card
:WAS: 2016 Bush League NL East Champions
:PIT: 2015 Wild Card Baseball World Series Champions
:KC: 2015 ABL AL East Champions
:OAK: 2015 Bush League AL Wild Card
:OAK: 2014 Bush League AL Wild Card

Offline Jss0062

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 2338
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige -1
    • :HOU:
    • :DAL:
    • :SA:
    • :Blank:
    • :Texas:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #7 on: August 22, 2016, 09:04:41 PM »
A rule 5 system wouldn't be terribly difficult to track going forward. Just list the year signed in the empty Level column. Back dating would be more difficult and not really worth the trouble. Starting the system with the first draft being years out I'm fine with.

I like the international system. Really outside of the top 5 guys they are all virtually unknown and it takes a good amount of homework to find gems cheap.

A QO is a bet with the player. w/o a player I don't think it will work. You will see most of the players with a QO go unsigned.

Online kidd5jersey

  • All-Star
  • **
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 850
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige -1
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #8 on: August 22, 2016, 11:17:24 PM »
Leave Rule 5 to individual teams. If they draft ineligible player, that's on them.

QO is pretty expensive to resigning team. It gives team losing player a chance to recoup a prospect. Teams cannot offer QO unless cap compliant. Top players are generally worth sacrificing that pick, and team losing top player isn't hurt as bad.

Offline ldsjayhawk

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 6211
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
  • Fantasy Prestige 3
    • :KC:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :CLS:
    • :Kansas:
    • :SKC:
    • View Profile
    • Buy me a soda
Re: Rule Change Discussions
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2016, 12:21:24 AM »
1) Tanking - I find this a hard rule to enforce any way you go.  I disagree with the practice, but there is not a good way to police it.  I disagree with penalizing a team just based on where they finish in the standings. 

2) Trading picks - I agree with limiting how far out we can trade draft picks, but I do not support limiting the trading of draft picks.  I don't see how it is bad for the league when teams trade away their top picks, unless they are doing it frivolously and then isn't that where the trade committee comes in?  Ideally you have a top team trading a top pick for players that help their team now. 

3) Salary Cap - We should consider amending the salary cap every so often based on % increase of salaries in MLB or average annual salary cap.

4) Minor League Affiliates - I support eliminating the affiliates.  We need to keep the workload down on those who administer this league.

5) Waivers - I agree the change should be made to the 48 hour period.  However, the with the lowest record during the regular season should retain priority on claims.  That is how MLB is designed and it is done to help the teams that need improvement.

6) Roster Changes - I support changes to the rosters to allow more teams to field a roster, but we also need to be careful to make sure we do not tip the balance of the league too heavily toward pitching.

7) Rule 5 Draft - I Support the Rule 5 draft.  Recording the year they are drafted or signed would not be difficult.

8) International - No opinion here.  Although, how is the pool determined?

9) QOs - This is probably going to change this year in the CBA anyway, however, I think we need to review the free agent compensation / extension rules.
:KC: #30

:SEA: 2017 FGM Champion
:COL: 2016 AFB NL West Champs
:KC: 2015 / 2016 Bush League AL Central Champs
:KC: 2012 AFB AL Champs

 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
Last name of MLB all-time HR leader:
New England Patriots QB last name:

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • WestCoastExpress: Vasilevskiy for Kucherov straight up.... Who you got?
    Yesterday at 12:03:57 AM
  • WestCoastExpress: Team with Vas also has: T.Rask, D.Dubnyk, C.Anderson, C.Helleybuyck Is currently 4-1
    Yesterday at 12:04:30 AM
  • WestCoastExpress: Team with Kuch as in G: B.Elliot, M.Smith, A.Raanta, F.Andersen Is currently 2-3
    Yesterday at 12:04:47 AM
  • indiansnation: West pm
    Yesterday at 12:46:39 AM
  • WestCoastExpress: Thanks Brian
    Yesterday at 01:14:28 AM
  • Daddy: Vasilevsky
    Yesterday at 04:35:11 AM
  • Vanadio: :TOR: OTC in Armchair
    Yesterday at 08:00:20 AM
  • snugerud: I think i would need more information on scoring etc. to realy weigh in Cally. Thats a lot of goalies per team
    Yesterday at 08:51:28 AM
  • Vanadio: and :CHC: OTC in Bush
    Yesterday at 08:51:36 AM
  • ldsjayhawk: bhows pm
    Yesterday at 10:25:54 AM
  • WestCoastExpress: 1 year league, no keepers and all that
    Yesterday at 04:15:42 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: I have Vas. Just wondering if I can do ok goalie stats leaning on Dubnyk, and hope Helly keeps it up and also hope Rask turns it around. Anderson is good for spot starts depending on matchup
    Yesterday at 04:16:51 PM
  • izaman3: Depending on your forward group, I would jump at Kuch. You have really solid goalies. Is anyone as stacked at G as you are? I'd look at how much you are willing to downgrade at G or have a major upgrade at RW.
    Yesterday at 04:22:07 PM
  • Rob: how many goalies do you start?
    Yesterday at 04:22:42 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Got decent scoring. Burns, Karlsson, Klingberg, Carlson on D with Phaneuf/Boychuck for peripherals. Giroux, Pavelski, Schwartz, Brown headline forwards do not a ton of firepower. Middle guys like Zucker, Brassard, Hornqvist,
    Yesterday at 04:32:14 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Kreider, E.Kane, Hichier, Horvat. Built the team grinders with D and goalies haha
    Yesterday at 04:32:51 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Rob - start 2. So usually sitting a guy or just playing matchups
    Yesterday at 04:33:16 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Wish your darn Bruins would figure it out and play some D for Tuukka though....!!
    Yesterday at 04:33:34 PM
  • izaman3: Cally, are there like 4 guys in the league or what? lol
    Yesterday at 04:34:32 PM
  • Rob: Cally, Claude Julien isn't walking through that door anymore...
    Yesterday at 04:47:12 PM
  • Rob: and Torey Krug sucks at defense
    Yesterday at 04:47:46 PM
  • Rob: He's really just good at PP, otherwise he's a negative on the ice.
    Yesterday at 04:47:58 PM
  • Rob: Chara is a shadow of his former self
    Yesterday at 04:48:08 PM
  • Rob: a couple good young grinders, but otherwise their core is crap.
    Yesterday at 04:48:26 PM
  • Rob: McAvoy being the outlier
    Yesterday at 04:48:31 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Iza - nah I’m just good at drafting. 10-team league. Got lucky with Brown/Schwartz and also Vas (he was my 3rd goalie haha). Also Karlsson dropped to round 2 because of his injury. Took Burns/EK 1-2 picks haha. Followed by Duby/Rask. Pavelski was my first forward taken lol
    Yesterday at 05:39:39 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Also got lucky with Giroux falling. Love when Yahoo ranks players lower than they should. Lots of guys rely too heavily on the Yahoon ranks! Brown’s been a home run tho, he was close to a last round pick
    Yesterday at 05:40:48 PM
  • izaman3: I like to look and laugh at yahoo's rankings, and even fantrax's projections. I almost wish they would just stop lol. Brown's resurgance has been key for the Kings. I know people have been complaining about his contract for years. I'm also a big Giroux fan, so I like him lighting it up on the wing. Though I sold low on Courtier earlier this year in FNHL and am half starting to kick myself and half skeptical that he keeps it up.
    Yesterday at 05:53:36 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Yeah there’s always the few surprises - that’s what helps you win the 1-year leagues. So far I’ve gotten lucky with some picks but so have other guys.
    Yesterday at 06:15:04 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: So should I accept this Kuch for Vasilevskiy deal? Think I’ll be alright with Duby/Helly holding the G stats down, along with Rask/Anderson? Realistically it’s kind of silly to have 5 goalies. 4 is a lot too if they’re all starters. Scooped Helly from FA for free tho :)
    Yesterday at 06:16:25 PM
  • indiansnation: Looking to trade in wcb2,armchair,abl
    Yesterday at 07:24:25 PM
  • blkhwkfn: Toronto on a severe power outtage in FNHL
    Yesterday at 10:56:26 PM
  • Donfraze: maydab-pm
    Yesterday at 11:07:16 PM
  • Daddy: Toronto is having an ok week.
    Today at 01:56:59 AM
  • Daddy: Boston is on a severe power outage week.
    Today at 01:57:52 AM
  • Daddy: @izaman3 the Courtier trade was stout. He looks really good.
    Today at 02:00:55 AM
  • indiansnation: Hey daddy
    Today at 02:08:59 AM
  • indiansnation: Hey daddy
    Today at 02:09:11 AM
  • blkhwkfn: Hellebyuck was the only thing i had going for a sec. No goals 1 assist 8 shots finally someone bent the twine
    Today at 06:59:21 AM
  • snugerud: Yes, take that deal.  Helly and dub will hold the fort enough for what you will gain in getting kuch
    Today at 11:18:22 AM
  • snugerud: and if not, you still have rask and anderson who could both heat up.
    Today at 11:25:31 AM
  • snugerud: My moto is when you have an option between getting some kouch and vaslene, you take the Kouch.
    Today at 11:26:39 AM
  • WestCoastExpress: Showing another side of you Snug, haha
    Today at 01:39:44 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: Accepted the deal. Kinda worked for both sides. I needed goalscoring and PPP and he needed a goalie badly. FreddyAnd with Smith, Raanta,
    Today at 01:40:39 PM
  • WestCoastExpress: And Brian Elliott
    Today at 01:40:56 PM
  • Flash: :COL: available in FGM
    Today at 04:26:12 PM
  • Daddy: Hello Brian, sorry I had signed off before. I hope all is well my friend.
    Today at 04:37:37 PM
  • indiansnation: Hi. Daddy
    Today at 04:50:11 PM
  • indiansnation: Hey flash
    Today at 04:51:04 PM