Armchair Fantasy Baseball


Author Topic: Rule Change Discussions  (Read 2023 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline chrisetc21

  • League Moderator
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 14383
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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
:HOU: 2014 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:GS: 2014-2015 NBA Finals Champion - Free Market Kings
:HOU: 2015 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU: 2017 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU: 2017 World Series Champion - Armchair Fantasy Baseball
:HOU-NFL: 2017 Super Bowl Champion - The Gridiron Franchise
:HOU-NBA3: 2017-2018 NBA Finals Champion - Title Town

Offline Jss0062

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Posts: 2513
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 5834
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2012
  • Posts: 861
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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

Offline kidd5jersey

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 952
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 14383
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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
:HOU: 2014 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:GS: 2014-2015 NBA Finals Champion - Free Market Kings
:HOU: 2015 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU: 2017 World Series Champion - American Baseball Legion
:HOU: 2017 World Series Champion - Armchair Fantasy Baseball
:HOU-NFL: 2017 Super Bowl Champion - The Gridiron Franchise
:HOU-NBA3: 2017-2018 NBA Finals Champion - Title Town

Offline RyanJames5

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 5834
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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: 2513
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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.

Offline kidd5jersey

  • Veteran
  • **
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 952
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :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.

Online ldsjayhawk

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2011
  • Posts: 6690
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :CLS:
    • :Kansas:
    • :SKC:
    • View Profile
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

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

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

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • indiansnation: Daddy a phillies fan i really feal bad for u lol
    June 21, 2018, 06:25:18 PM
  • Daddy: Im a proud Phillies fan
    June 21, 2018, 07:26:43 PM
  • Daddy: I still believe Franco & Williams can pan out. Crawford im not so sure. Lots of hype for Domonic Brown 2.0
    June 21, 2018, 07:28:19 PM
  • Daddy: Mickey Moniac? We may as well drafted Mickey Mouse.
    June 21, 2018, 07:28:58 PM
  • Daddy: And Brian dont feel bad for me, i could be a Cleveland fan but God spared me.
    June 21, 2018, 07:30:14 PM
  • Daddy: Toronto has 5 draft picks available for trade in Bush and no suiters? Cmon draft loving guys.
    June 21, 2018, 08:10:20 PM
  • indiansnation: So do lol i want to move all mine lol
    June 21, 2018, 09:07:39 PM
  • indiansnation: Hey daddy u know what difference between phillies and indians ?
    June 21, 2018, 09:08:35 PM
  • indiansnation: Phillies wont be like indians come playoff time they will be at home watching
    June 21, 2018, 09:10:08 PM
  • indiansnation: Lol jk
    June 21, 2018, 09:10:14 PM
  • indiansnation: Vic pm
    June 21, 2018, 10:04:34 PM
  • Vik: back at you
    June 21, 2018, 10:21:37 PM
  • Daddy: The difference in Phillies & Indians is WS wins
    June 21, 2018, 10:24:10 PM
  • Daddy: Not that we are super rich. I do hope the Indians get one this year for you.
    June 21, 2018, 10:36:16 PM
  • Daddy: Browns stock is up. Cavs stock down though. Cant have it all i guess.
    June 21, 2018, 10:36:59 PM
  • indiansnation: Up date u on lbj its cavs or lakers no other team know
    June 21, 2018, 11:17:39 PM
  • Daddy: We will see
    June 21, 2018, 11:58:34 PM
  • silogical: 1
    Yesterday at 09:00:02 AM
  • silogical: 4 min to trade #5 if you want to move it.
    Yesterday at 09:08:46 AM
  • Daddy: PM Vik
    Yesterday at 02:21:38 PM
  • Vik: back daddy, post it up when you can
    Yesterday at 03:06:14 PM
  • Daddy: Posted Vik...pleasure as always sir.
    Yesterday at 03:12:48 PM
  • Vik: Like wise... you making it sound like Ogle is the next Sale lol
    Yesterday at 03:19:34 PM
  • Daddy: All on fun :rofl:
    Yesterday at 04:11:22 PM
  • Daddy: Big flashy headline...like the real media does everyday ;)
    Yesterday at 04:12:23 PM
  • Flash: Cubs available in FGM
    Yesterday at 05:55:46 PM
  • kidd5jersey: Oh man.... cubs are available? But I built TB LOL
    Yesterday at 06:14:00 PM
  • kidd5jersey: Am I allowed to go the Maddon route?
    Yesterday at 06:16:14 PM
  • RyanJames5: :HOU: available in Bush League
    Yesterday at 07:29:09 PM
  • indiansnation: Hey ryan
    Yesterday at 11:10:59 PM
  • indiansnation: Yo vic pm massive trade offer lol
    Yesterday at 11:11:24 PM
  • Daddy: Jp must have left the site...thats too bad.
    Today at 12:49:57 AM
  • Daddy: That Houston team is stacked.
    Today at 12:50:22 AM
  • indiansnation: Yea
    Today at 10:27:15 AM
  • ldsjayhawk: kidd, not in FGM.  They will not let you change teams.  I inquired when KC was available
    Today at 10:27:21 AM
  • ldsjayhawk: Looking for some help in Bush.  Anyone looking to trade
    Today at 11:20:44 AM
  • Thecliff: Hey, JP was on site yesterday (Houston)
    Today at 11:30:28 AM
  • Thecliff: Oh, ok, reviewed the big picture.
    Today at 11:44:29 AM
  • janesvilleaces: Padres are lds
    Today at 11:46:26 AM
  • janesvilleaces: Kovalchuk signs with kings
    Today at 12:31:51 PM
  • indiansnation: Yea he got 3 yr contract
    Today at 12:42:40 PM
  • indiansnation: Vic trade posted
    Today at 12:42:52 PM
  • Daddy: Kovalchuk is a friggin beast
    Today at 02:22:13 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Hanafin and Lincoln to calgary
    Today at 02:52:12 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Lindholm
    Today at 02:54:45 PM
  • Jonathan: Yeah, that is an odd trade. I would of rather moves Faulk, but they did get Dougie back + fox, who I like.
    Today at 03:40:34 PM
  • Jonathan: Skinner and Faulk are the other 2 to get shipped out.
    Today at 03:45:27 PM
  • Jonathan: next....
    Today at 03:45:32 PM
  • Jonathan: Patches to SJ
    Today at 03:48:12 PM
  • janesvilleaces: Tavares is going to meet with 5 teams
    Today at 03:55:47 PM