ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: Archives => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: FGM Commissioner News & Tid Bits => Topic started by: Colby on November 17, 2009, 05:11:56 PM
-
This was discussed before the forum crash. I am proposing a one-time event, prior to free agency, where teams get to move players that never played an MLB game to their EDR. As the EDR rules state, $500k of their salary will not count towards the cap.
-
This was discussed before the forum crash. I am proposing a one-time event, prior to free agency, where teams get to move players that never played an MLB game to their EDR. As the EDR rules state, $500k of their salary will not count towards the cap.
I remember discussing this before the crash as well and I thought it would be any player lower than AA could would be able to be transfered to the EDR? Either way I like the proposal.
-
I'd vote for this, but we should remind teams that they currently have a maximum of 10 players on the EDR - come the Entry Draft, teams will either be forfeiting picks or moving guys back to their 40-man roster (and making space, $ for them)
-
I remember discussing this before the crash as well and I thought it would be any player lower than AA could would be able to be transfered to the EDR? Either way I like the proposal.
As a reminder, I think there was also some discussion to only allow prospects that are currently affiliated with the MLB team in real life (not prospects a team has acquired via FA or trade).
-
As a reminder, I think there was also some discussion to only allow prospects that are currently affiliated with the MLB team in real life (not prospects a team has acquired via FA or trade).
I'll agree with this.
-
It would be okay, but like ben say every team must know you only are allowed 10 players to that roster. If this is going to pass, the sooner this is done the better. im sure teams are dropping player .... to make some room for some other free agent players.
-
I understand and agree. A player like Dayan Viciedo would be eligible?
One question I do have concerning the Entry Draft- Will the pool be strictly those players selected in July 2010 or will minor league player not currently on our rosters be eligible also?
-
I understand and agree. A player like Dayan Viciedo would be eligible?
One question I do have concerning the Entry Draft- Will the pool be strictly those players selected in July 2010 or will minor league player not currently on our rosters be eligible also?
I think the rules state that the draft is limited to players who were drafted in the real MLB draft (which goes 40-50 rounds deep).
-
As a reminder, I think there was also some discussion to only allow prospects that are currently affiliated with the MLB team in real life (not prospects a team has acquired via FA or trade).
This would be an unfair advantage to the more active teams. After all, it does not say in the rules that you cannot trade players on the EDR. The only way one becomes ineligible for the EDR is if they play in a major league game, correct?
Anyways, after we clear through this discussion, I think it is suffice to say that we all agree on this and that a deadline should be set as soon as possible (and before FA).
-
Jake and I are on board with this. Ben needs to address his issue of already traded players. Chad and MJ need to chime in. After that, we'll set a deadline for this (before FA) and let it rip.
-
sorry guys on vacation hunting, but I do agree on this. :iatp:
-
This would be an unfair advantage to the more active teams. After all, it does not say in the rules that you cannot trade players on the EDR. The only way one becomes ineligible for the EDR is if they play in a major league game, correct?
The EDR Rules currently state that only if you draft the player yourself are they eligible - the player cannot be acquired by trade or FA, and cannot have any MLB experience.
- Only players drafted by the current team are eligible for the EDR, players acquired via trade or free agency are not
- Only player that have never played an MLB game are eligible for the EDR.** As soon as a player on the EDR has 1 MLB game played, they must immediately be moved to the 40-man roster or released. If the player is moved to the 40-man roster, they are subject to standard prospect contract rules. Players on the EDR may be traded, but the acquiring team must place them on the 40-man roster
-
Good point Ben. We have to treat the EDR as if it has been there all along. Either way, this one-time transfer is a bonus. I support the ruling as Ben prescribed with a deadline of January 1st, 2010.
-
great point.....agree!
-
So is it set in stone?
Just so I have it right:
1.) Eligible players must have been on their original MLFB team. Player aquired in trades are NOT eligible
2.) Must not have played in MLB game.
3.) This summer's draft pool will be limited to those selected in the 2010 1st year players draft. Players currently on minor league rosters that are not on MLFB teams and not Fantrax FA's are not eligibile
-
The rule as it is written now gives an unfair advantage to those owners who have been in the league since it started. The owners who took over teams that did not participate in the draft will be further penalized by the change. It seems like there should be a way to let all teams benefit from the change....maybe just x number of players who have not played in a major league game are elegible for the EDR. I believe if the rule is passed in its present form it should be done after the 2010 draft.
-
The rule as it is written now gives an unfair advantage to those owners who have been in the league since it started. The owners who took over teams that did not participate in the draft will be further penalized by the change
There was no entry draft last year.
-
Well it does seem to give an unfair advantage to those who have been more active.
-
Well it does seem to give an unfair advantage to those who have been more active.
It does give an advantage to the more active owners who were here last year. Those of us coming in this year did not have a chance to pick up players who were drafted in 2009. The Cardinals had absolutely no legitimate prospects and no players from the draft so we had to trade for prospects. There are probably other teams who were in the same position but we will struggle through it.
-
It does give an advantage to the more active owners who were here last year. Those of us coming in this year did not have a chance to pick up players who were drafted in 2009. The Cardinals had absolutely no legitimate prospects and no players from the draft so we had to trade for prospects. There are probably other teams who were in the same position but we will struggle through it.
That's a good point.. then in that regard Ben's version of this ruling is completely fair. :toth:
-
It does give an advantage to the more active owners who were here last year. Those of us coming in this year did not have a chance to pick up players who were drafted in 2009. The Cardinals had absolutely no legitimate prospects and no players from the draft so we had to trade for prospects. There are probably other teams who were in the same position but we will struggle through it.
Cardinals, I think most of the RC agrees, that is why we made this thread, to discuss a one time transfer of prospects to compensate for owners who have no been with their team in its entirety. I support a one time transfer of prospects with no MLB experience.
-
Excellent point coming from St. Louis. Ben doesn't represent the Cards (M.J. does), but he is doing it here. I support Ben's version of the rule with the 1/1/10 deadline.
-
I support Ben's proposal. We'll need three more YES votes to push this one through. :toth:
-
I'll confirm.
-
ill confirm
-
I support Ben's proposal. We'll need three more YES votes to push this one through. :toth:
:iatp:
-
It is settled and an unanimous decision (4-0). :judge: It's a temporary part of the rules, so it won't go into the rulebook, but I'll post it in the deadlines.