Ok I think I just spotted a glaring oversight in the execution of this draft.

The draft order is based on reverse order of standings as it should be.

However, some owners swapped teams/rosters this offseason.

I'm pretty sure Kevin (leppardkev, former Nationals owner) carried his entire roster over to the Rangers but has the #5 pick from the old Rangers orphan roster??? Thus leaving the orphan Rangers with an unjustified lower pick??? It doesn't bother me a ton but it is unfair and other owners closer to those draft positions might not be too happy about it.

Are there any other swaps we are missing or is there something I'm missing???

I know Cris swapped Rockies to Royals but that's accurately reflected in this draft.

Brian went from Giants to Reds which is not reflected in this draft but I don't know if he carried his roster over as well.

Not sure if there were others...

I don't know what was agreed upon beforehand but if the trade is eligible then my vote is....

Bit of a steep price to pay for an expensive player in Ramirez but considering this years salary is covered entirely the trade makes sense 

I meant to post in the previous thread discussing the proposal of the new active lineup that, if I remember right, reduced the hitters to 9 (position players plus 1 DH) while having pitchers at 12 (5SP and 7RP)

I didn’t vote in that thread because I had some concerns about imbalance of hitter and pitcher spots and wasn’t sure. Somebody in that thread made a good point and got me thinking and I looked into it further and I’m satisfied it’s a good idea.

Last year there was 605 hitter and 730 pitchers who accrued points (positive or negative) which makes sense as teams use more pitchers than hitters as pitchers seem to be more injury prone, volatile year to year (especially bullpen) etc.

So based on what’s actually available for our teams in the way of points accruing players, the most even balance is 10 hitters to 12 pitchers. That said, 9 is close and a nice clean baseball number.

I’d be happy going to the lineup proposed before as a way of ensuring some teams are able to fill their hitting slots providing the change takes place starting in 2020 of course to give people time to adjust.

I agree this is all around a good idea. Mimics real life, reduces admin workload, prevents owners selling the future when they just quit months later, etc. Perhaps most importantly, like said above it better ensures parity.

I voted no but I’m on board with some slight changes in the proposed rules.

I don’t think you can do a blanket 4 years in minors before being eligible for rule 5.

What about the 16yo kids we sign in international??? If I’m a competing team I’m not gonna want to use up a bunch of my roster spots (and start the arbitration clock!) on 20yo kids who won’t see majors for another 2-3 years maybe.

However, if I’m a rebuilding club why not take all the 20yo international kids from every competing team using rule 5 and stash them at min salaries on 40man until 3 years later when they are in majors and I’m competing or I can then trade them back at premium prices. Then all these players (which would be most prospects because how many actually make majors by 20yo?) would all be FAs in AFB at the ripe age of around 23. There’s major pitfalls in this.

Also, what I just described above goes against the spirit of the rule IRL. It’s meant to prevent hoarding of prospects who are ready to play in majors but not given a chance by their team. In our league, as proposed, it would be used to pillage prospects who are still not close to being ML ready by teams who are happy to fill a roster spot with a non points accruing player (which takes us back to the tanking issue....)

IRL the rule is not eligible until after 4 years of minors if acquired when older than 19. And not eligible until after 5 years of minors if acquired when younger than 19.

I would argue that because of the fantasy baseball loophole I described above that we would need to be more restrictive than real life, not less.

Perhaps 6 years for intl players and ones drafted out high school and 4 years for drafted out of college. If worried about keeping track and the admin work associated (which is why I’ve originally not been on board with this when brought up the last few years) then maybe make a blanket 6 years until eligible and a single column in sheets that counts the years in minors without having been on a 40man.

Sorry for the mega response but there’s a lot going on in this league right now and while I appreciate everyone’s passion, I’ve been in this league too long to see a bunch of changes go through without people thinking things through and the repercussions.