ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Armchair Fantasy Baseball => MLB Leagues => Armchair Fantasy Baseball: Archives => Topic started by: kenny on January 12, 2012, 06:14:54 PM
-
Free agency to start 2/2/12 8pm ET.
Rules in the league constitution to be followed with the following exceptions:
- 48 hr hold time for final offers instead of 24 hrs.
- Players who had expired contracts (listed in the “2011 New FA” worksheet) will be divided into 6 rounds (Rounds 1-5 has 35 players each, and Round 6 has the remaining players). There is no fixed length for each round, but a new round of players will be released for bid every week.
- Players who were released and are free agents (listed in the “Free Agents” worksheet) may be bid on at any time after bidding begins.
- Free agents not listed (such as international players) fall under the 2nd category.
If there are any questions or concerns, please make them known now.
1/29/12 EDIT:
- There are no more No Trade Clauses.
1/18/12 EDIT:
I will be adding the following unless somebody doesn't think this is best:
Minor league free agents with more than 6 years MLB service time will be limited to a one year contract.
-
Do we know which positions we're starting with for the first week?
-
The plan right now is to just start from the top of the list, unless a consensus is reached to do it otherwise.
-
Did I read correctly, the minimum increase is 500k above the previous bid?
-
Correct. If someone puts in a bid for 1 year $2.25M, the next bid must at least be 1 year $2.75M.
-
Revised 1/17. See first post.
-
Personally, my opinion is that you inherit the team the way it is, NTCs and all. Bids will be won based on them. I could see a scenario where they could offer a buyout by paying the difference the Ntc is equivalent to against their cap.
-
Personally, my opinion is that you inherit the team the way it is, NTCs and all. Bids will be won based on them. I could see a scenario where they could offer a buyout by paying the difference the Ntc is equivalent to against their cap.
:iatp:
-
Sorry if I'm asking a stupid question but whats the point of a NTC? I dont understand how it would work.
-
NTC adds value to the contract for the player.. The goal of this league is to make as much like reality as possible and in reality, players hold NTCs as fairly valuable.
NTC = No Trade Clause
... A team isn't allowed to trade any player with a NTC in their contract.
-
No Trade Clauses certainly do add value to the player, and it does add a level of realism. But I agree that they should be HEAVILY limited. Because of the massive effect that the NTC can have on negotiations, they will most likely be used in almost every free agent bidding process if left unmitigated. The negative externality that comes along with the realism is the fact that a substantial amount of players will come out of each free agency period with NTC's including every top tier player. This is going to heavily restrict transactions within the league going forward.
-
I know what it is I just didnt realize how they would work in the league. So I'm assuming a player offered a little less money but with a NTC/a longer NTC is gonna get rewarded to that team? A NTC is gonna have higher value over a few million dollars? (All depending on the amount.)
-
There's a fine line between being realistic & fun and being too realistic & not fun. Because of the "carryover effect" in this league, we have to take into consideration the interest of future GMs as well as current ones. We can't let a bad GM destroy a team so much that new ones won't take them over. The first season hasn't started yet and I'm already looking for the 60th GM to join this league.
-
There's a fine line between being realistic & fun and being too realistic & not fun. Because of the "carryover effect" in this league, we have to take into consideration the interest of future GMs as well as current ones. We can't let a bad GM destroy a team so much that new ones won't take them over. The first season hasn't started yet and I'm already looking for the 60th GM to join this league.
I agree completely with this assessment. I'm all for realism, but No Trade Clauses will contribute zero activity to the league and will ultimately become a huge hindrance toward finding new GM's.
On another note, I'm shocked that there has been that much turnover. Granted, there has not been a ton of activity in the off-season, but the GM's that I have dealt with so far have been top flight.
-
I am neither really for or against the NTC, I just don't really see the point...
Yes in "real life" a player would prefer a NTC in their contract and would consider it more valuable. But in this league we are not negotiating with other people, we are simply bidding on a free agent with the highest bidder wining. Meaning there is no prefrence among free agents except total money. So because of this my understanding would be in order for a NTC to really have value it would need a monetary equivalent attached to it, that would not be a paid salary but would represent the weight a NTC would hold with a player and providing a benifit to the team. The team would not pay that amount but it would hold weight in negotiations.
I know this is written kind of confusing so here is a couple examples.
Example 1:
NTC has no value
Team A bid- 10 yrs $100 mil with a NTC
Team B bid- 10 yrs $105mil
Team B wins and is not stuck with a player for 10 years if they decide to go a different direction
Example 2
NTC is worth the equivalent of $2mil/yr
Team A bid- 10 yrs $100mil with NTC
(because of NTC, the offer is equivalent to $120 mil, but the team only has to pay a total of $100 mil. but is now stuck with the player for all 10 years unless they want to eat the salary)
Team B bid- 10 yrs $110 mil without a NTC
Team A wins in this example
This allows the NTC to hold some weight and also help the team out as well by saving on their salary cap. But because of limitations and the prospect of being stuck with a player for a long time with no way of getting rid of him means GM's must be judicious when handing them out.
Unless there is a real reason to give one out (ie. a salary cap break) I don't really see a need for them them. Why would a GM give one out if they aren't getting anything in return, they are only losing. It ties the team to a player, limits a rosters flexability and from a league wide standpoint will hurt transactions and activity.
We want this league to be as realistic as possible. In real life GM's don't just give out NTC from the goodness of their heart they give them because they are getting something in return (like getting a player to sign for less). I don't think there is a need to have them just because they do in MLB.
-
The current league constitution already puts a value of $2M per year for the NTC.
-
Thanks Kenny, I should probably brush up lol. Haven't read it in a couple months
-
I will be updating the PDF file of the league constitution (hopefully) Saturday. It'll combine all the changes that have been made since the last publication, including what we decide on here.
I'm anticipating starting free agency early to middle of next week. The number of free agents per round will be increased due to the loss of this past week.
-
I know I'm joining the party a bit late; my opinion on full NTC's is that they are no good for Roto. I could see putting a partial NTC on free agent signees in the form of NTC61 (No Trade Clause/ No Wavier Clause till June 1) that would be June 1 of the year the player is signed, this helps control the way free agent signing is done in that you the GM has to make sure your signing someone you want and will use for at least the first half of the season, your not just signing someone to flip them on April 2 for a package that will have no effect on your squad for a few seasons. The player could still be DL'd within league rules and procedures, he just can't be traded or waived till June 1, the reason for June 1 is so that the signing team is making a commitment to field said player, but should they decide they would like to move him at or before the trade deadline they have roughly 2 months to do so.
A full no trade clause can become very crippling to a organization in Roto, unlike real life we do not have insurance policies with lords of london on our players, we can't afford to shelve a 40 million dollar bust & just add payroll to make up for that ill advised signing. a full NTC puts a huge burden of risk on the owner who if he/she makes to many of these errors & the squad becomes a tot al nightmare, they bail & we the league have to try to find a new owner whose willing to work with in a bad situation not of their doing. I've been doing Dynasty Leagues for a few years & I've seen guys taking over horrible squads & they very rarely last a season.
WEll this is my 2 cents on this subject.
Well that's my two cents on this subject
-
I know I'm joining the party a bit late; my opinion on full NTC's is that they are no good for Roto. I could see putting a partial NTC on free agent signees in the form of NTC61 (No Trade Clause/ No Wavier Clause till June 1) that would be June 1 of the year the player is signed, this helps control the way free agent signing is done in that you the GM has to make sure your signing someone you want and will use for at least the first half of the season, your not just signing someone to flip them on April 2 for a package that will have no effect on your squad for a few seasons. The player could still be DL'd within league rules and procedures, he just can't be traded or waived till June 1, the reason for June 1 is so that the signing team is making a commitment to field said player, but should they decide they would like to move him at or before the trade deadline they have roughly 2 months to do so.
A full no trade clause can become very crippling to a organization in Roto, unlike real life we do not have insurance policies with lords of london on our players, we can't afford to shelve a 40 million dollar bust & just add payroll to make up for that ill advised signing. a full NTC puts a huge burden of risk on the owner who if he/she makes to many of these errors & the squad becomes a tot al nightmare, they bail & we the league have to try to find a new owner whose willing to work with in a bad situation not of their doing. I've been doing Dynasty Leagues for a few years & I've seen guys taking over horrible squads & they very rarely last a season.
WEll this is my 2 cents on this subject.
Well that's my two cents on this subject
:iatp:
I agree 1000%. In the current scenario, I would envision every single Blue Chip free agent being hit with a No Trade Clause to keep salaries down. This would mean that Pujols, Fielder, Reyes, Cano, etc. etc. would all be locked onto a roster for half a decade. And then next year it would happen to several more, and so on and so on until almost every major player is locked on a roster. It seems like there is no benefit to the league in having these in place since it would do nothing but stymie all transactions moving forward. For what it's worth, my vote is on the elimination of NTCs or at the very least adding extreme limitations to them.
It could be my obsession with trading players, but I wanted to second Doug's thoughts on this matter.
-
Well, I for one would never offer a NTC. It burdens a team too much if the player gets injured. I also agree that it can spiral out of control if too many NTC's are giving. I read something about 3NTCs per team per year and as many as possible in a team. I would say perhaps it should be limited to one per year and have a maximum of two or three players with NTCs on any given roster. This would allow the NTCs to be used more to franchise one or two players than to be used merely for bargaining purposes.
Also, I would propose that - like in real life- the NTC could be waived if the player agrees to it. This could be simulated in cap hits. I would propose two and a half times the value per year of 2m. So say I want to trade a player with 3y remaining in his contract and a NTC. I would be able to trade him if I take on an additional cap hit of 5m during each year of the contract. This would allow a minimum degree of flexibility while imposing a harsh enough penalty to make it unattractive.
-
Well, I for one would never offer a NTC. It burdens a team too much if the player gets injured. I also agree that it can spiral out of control if too many NTC's are giving. I read something about 3NTCs per team per year and as many as possible in a team. I would say perhaps it should be limited to one per year and have a maximum of two or three players with NTCs on any given roster. This would allow the NTCs to be used more to franchise one or two players than to be used merely for bargaining purposes.
Also, I would propose that - like in real life- the NTC could be waived if the player agrees to it. This could be simulated in cap hits. I would propose two and a half times the value per year of 2m. So say I want to trade a player with 3y remaining in his contract and a NTC. I would be able to trade him if I take on an additional cap hit of 5m during each year of the contract. This would allow a minimum degree of flexibility while imposing a harsh enough penalty to make it unattractive.
I agree that NTC's burden the team heavily. But the restrictions would be put in place to prevent GM's that are not so committed to their teams from putting down NTC's on every FA they bid on and then abandoning the team. This would put future GM's in a position where they cannot win or rebuild.
I would definitely endorse a plan of 1 NTC per team with buyout clause. And actually, the 2.5x cap hit per year is a great way to do it. This would make it an effective negotiating tool without devastating the free agent market in coming years.
-
I agree 1000%. In the current scenario, I would envision every single Blue Chip free agent being hit with a No Trade Clause to keep salaries down. This would mean that Pujols, Fielder, Reyes, Cano, etc. etc. would all be locked onto a roster for half a decade. And then next year it would happen to several more, and so on and so on until almost every major player is locked on a roster. It seems like there is no benefit to the league in having these in place since it would do nothing but stymie all transactions moving forward. For what it's worth, my vote is on the elimination of NTCs or at the very least adding extreme limitations to them.
It could be my obsession with trading players, but I wanted to second Doug's thoughts on this matter.
:iatp:
Agreed...
-
It doesn't seem like the potential benefits of a NTC in this league is worth the potential risks (to the league). We won't be using them in this league.
-
Will trades be automatically approved in this current period without a trade committee? Or could Kenny act as temporary one-man trade committee until a new one is established?
The reason I ask is because both of my trades have been made with free agency in mind and my FA strategy would change if one or more of the trades didn't go through or had to be altered.
(I posted this question originally in the thread of one of my trades but realized that this is probably a more appropriate place.)
-
Any word yet on when we might be starting free agency?
-
Probably as soon as we find a GM for the Rockies.
-
Hey guys,
It's been a while since I've heard anything, so I figured I would put out a message to make sure you guys are still alive out there. If we are still waiting on an owner for the Rockies, I have a friend who will take the team. He's new to this sort of thing, but I could help him along since the Rockies aren't a bad team to build from. Is that the last hurdle to cross before we get into the FA process?
-
I have somebody interested who PM'd me last night. Waiting to hear back. Also have a backup in case he falls through.
Yes, that would be the last hurdle, assuming no surprises.
-
I have also a friend ROBMOL he is looking for teams
-
Does the next round of free agency start tonight?
-
at 8PM ET, Id guess.
-
International free agents from this upcoming 2012 summer will be bid on in the 2012-2013 off-season, with payments being made during the 2013 season.