Free Agency Begins January 17th, 12pm CST

[haseloff]

Quote

    The current system seams fine.  Let people battle it out, close down the position at the end of the week until after all positions have been visited, bring in a few more FA Moderators to assist in identifying winning bids, managers get the player they want at the price they want and have the opportunity to overpay for a career season (Vernon Wells).

Your comment seems to be at odds with your recent complaints about the limited winning bids. 

Explain how? 

Fine, make it 8 winning bids at a time.  No one would want more than 8 Cs or 8 SSs.  Expand it to 12 for SP.  Anything to get away from your '50-player nomination' nightmare scenario.  But 4 during the crossover period between positions sucks.  But 4 during the crossover period between positions sucks.

This '2-bid' monstrosity is your idea so I don't expect you to take any feedback, good or bad for it.  I'm just trying to tell you the effects of it.  In a league where sniping means control of a player for 5 years, it's significant and the winners aren't based on highest bid, it's on timing the bid to be 5M higher than the guy who needs to go to sleep because he doesn't want to wait until the 47th hour.

You also don't want to understand the velocity concept of how a wider market with more than just 4 leading bids gets the player to market value faster.  That's fine too.   I'd have already bid up 4 other players if I wasn't confined to 4 leading bids.  Yes, I got outbid on Choi and I could have stopped him and started another player.  But I would have come back to him in a couple days (before his 48 hour window) to start him up again.  This perpetuates the long drawn out problem you're trying to fix.

I understand it's not just about STICKYing a player when 48 hours is up.  But that's the management part that we can all make very easy for you.  The FANTRAXing and Roster updating doesn't have to be instantaneous.  Rosters can be updated at the end of the week, every two weeks, first of every month, doesn't matter you and JSS already do a great job with it.  The same number of players will still be signed, there will just be more bidding on their nomination thread.

You're the commish.  If you want this policy, put the policy in place.  If you're going to propose it though, don't get frustrated with those of us who dislike it and think it will have negative effects.

I'd just hope that everyone in this league will reread some of this discussion in this thread and chime in on what they think.  By my count, we might only classify half the league as 'very active'.

[chrisetc21]

Your comment seems to be at odds with your recent complaints about the limited winning bids. 

Explain how? 

Fine, make it 8 winning bids at a time.  No one would want more than 8 Cs or 8 SSs.  Expand it to 12 for SP.  Anything to get away from your '50-player nomination' nightmare scenario.  But 4 during the crossover period between positions sucks.  But 4 during the crossover period between positions sucks.

Your direct quotes. 

The current system seams fine.   But 4 during the crossover period between positions sucks.

This '2-bid' monstrosity is your idea so I don't expect you to take any feedback, good or bad for it.

All I've done is ask for feedback.     That's what this is here for. 

I'm just trying to tell you the effects of it.  In a league where sniping means control of a player for 5 years, it's significant and the winners aren't based on highest bid, it's on timing the bid to be 5M higher than the guy who needs to go to sleep because he doesn't want to wait until the 47th hour.

Once again, you fail the understand the concept of a best and final bid.  If you place your best and final bid and someone outbids you then your bid wasn't good enough regardless of when you posted it.   

You also don't want to understand the velocity concept of how a wider market with more than just 4 leading bids gets the player to market value faster.  That's fine too.   I'd have already bid up 4 other players if I wasn't confined to 4 leading bids.  Yes, I got outbid on Choi and I could have stopped him and started another player.  But I would have come back to him in a couple days (before his 48 hour window) to start him up again.  This perpetuates the long drawn out problem you're trying to fix.

You just said and I quote...

The current system seams fine.

If it's fine why are you complaining about it?  You're just all over the place here. 

The problem I'm trying to fix is the fact that free agent bidding has little strategy whatsoever and is a long drawn out process.  Owners simply bid players up to the minimum amount possible over and over and over again in a mindless fashion until the other owner gives up.  Other owners use the 48 hour rule to foil bidding and simply keep players up for bidding.  I've experienced this over and over again in other leagues.  It's dumb.  So yes, we could open it up to 10 winning bids but that's hard to track and manage which is why there's a 4 winning bid limit currently.  I'm looking for some combination of increasing the strategy in bidding, stopping this 48 hour bid foil strategy, and moving the process along more quickly.     

I understand it's not just about STICKYing a player when 48 hours is up.  But that's the management part that we can all make very easy for you.  The FANTRAXing and Roster updating doesn't have to be instantaneous.  Rosters can be updated at the end of the week, every two weeks, first of every month, doesn't matter you and JSS already do a great job with it.  The same number of players will still be signed, there will just be more bidding on their nomination thread.

The fewer people involved with the management the better honestly.  I'd like to run an organized league and that's why I've changed the thread titles and been strict about the bidding rules/formats.  Rosters shouldn't wait a week or two weeks.  This stuff should get done within 48 hours and that's my goal.  This league has had 3 commissioners in 3 seasons, let's have a little continuity and structure for a while. 

You're the commish.  If you want this policy, put the policy in place.  If you're going to propose it though, don't get frustrated with those of us who dislike it and think it will have negative effects.

I'd just hope that everyone in this league will reread some of this discussion in this thread and chime in on what they think.  By my count, we might only classify half the league as 'very active'.

I'm not putting anything in place this large without feedback from the league.  That's what this thread is for but you can't have your own facts.  A best and final bid can't be sniped, it can only be outbid. 

[haseloff]

Sure. Play with my words however you like. The current system seems fine; just needs some tweaking. Hopefully that's not too all-over-the-place.

The final 2-bid only system proposed is not fair.  Any objective person can read above what I think will happen under that rule.

Just my thoughts.

[Jss0062]

I personally like auction style, I think it sets the market value on the players fairly accurately.  The prospects are the guys that we've seen go for higher than expected, but they have gone to the teams with the most money available to win them.  I think most of the problems that we have had with rules and the newer owners will be cleared up with experience as we go forward.  going to 6 leading bids should help during position transition.

[chrisetc21]

Sure. Play with my words however you like. The current system seems fine; just needs some tweaking. Hopefully that's not too all-over-the-place.

The final 2-bid only system proposed is not fair.  Any objective person can read above what I think will happen under that rule.

Just my thoughts.

Quoting you isn't playing with your words.  Any objective person can read your posts and see your conflicting opinions. 

What is not fair about people posting their best and final offers in a certain time frame as opposed to endlessly bidding minimum bids for a week?

We've gone to a six bid limit for winning bids so we'll see how it goes.  The discussion is still open here for anyone that wants to add their thoughts. 

[chrisetc21]

I think 5 year contracts for players over 30 is another thing we should address.