RFA Tags / Arbitration

[Colby]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we seem to have arbitration even if it does not go by that name.  We allow the extension of expiring prospect contracts at far less than market value for up to 5 years.  Isn't that what arbitration really is?

I agree with Roy.  We already have a simple replacement of an arbitration system with prospect contracts and prospect extensions.

[Colby]

Our current three year clock for prospect contracts for the league minimum is a direct reflection of the first three years of arbitration eligibility, where players get pretty much nothing.

Correct.

I think we just need to fine tune the rules on expiring contracts and the sign-and-trade window.

[Canada8999]

I agree with Roy.  We already have a simple replacement of an arbitration system with prospect contracts and prospect extensions.

We have the first three years of arbitration mimicked, and rules for extensions that cover a small number of cases where teams buyout the arbitration years (maybe 5-10 players in MLB?).  We don't have the year-to-year arbitration for years 4-6 that is the norm for MLB players.  We have RFA's to replace years 4+, but it is very different from MLB rules.

I agree that we have a working system, and cleaning up the sign-and-trade rules will help.  However, if the current MO is to mimic MLB then why keep patching our system instead of adopting the real one?

[rcankosy]

Full blown arbitration is intriguing, but I'm not sure it's workable or necessary in this league.  For one thing, it would contradict rules we already have in place such as minimum years for free agents since players only get 1 year contracts in arbitration regardless of amount.  Personally, I think we did a great job with prospect contracts, prospect extentions, and free agency in general.  I brought up the sign and trade issue becasue I thought it was a flaw in a good rule.  It was never my intent to suggest we create an entirely new system of generating contracts.

[Dan Wood]

I think the best thing to do is just get rid of trading guys who are no longer under contract. Either resign them, or take the pick. I think the prospect extension does the job of what arbitration does, with the discount going to the owners if they choose to resign their prospects at said rates. The only other thing to suggest is making prospect contracts 4, instead of 3 years. But even I am not too enamored with that idea. I think it best to keep it as simple as possible. Two weeks, to clear cap space if you plan on resigning said player, or let him go off to FA, with an RFA tag. However I do think if we get rid of the RFA tags, we could just value FAs based on type A or B status, and reward the teams losing FAs accordingly.

[Colby]

Here is an idea... go with Dan's suggestion of eliminating RFAs, using he type A and B system for all FA, amd having a short period for resigning.  We could give longer periods for small market teams and shorter periods fo big market teams.  Years 4 to 6 of arbirtration are already naturally replaced by prospec extensions.  We could always add a special 1-year arbirtration contract a market value for those years.

[Dan Wood]

Here is an idea... go with Dan's suggestion of eliminating RFAs, using he type A and B system for all FA, amd having a short period for resigning.  We could give longer periods for small market teams and shorter periods fo big market teams.  Years 4 to 6 of arbirtration are already naturally replaced by prospec extensions.  We could always add a special 1-year arbirtration contract a market value for those years.

 

[Colby]

Here is an idea... go with Dan's suggestion of eliminating RFAs, using he type A and B system for all FA, amd having a short period for resigning.  We could give longer periods for small market teams and shorter periods fo big market teams.  Years 4 to 6 of arbirtration are already naturally replaced by prospec extensions.  We could always add a special 1-year arbirtration contract a market value for those years.

Do we want to vote on this?  Ben, Jake, and Roy - what are your thoughts?

[lp815]

Do we want to vote on this?  Ben, Jake, and Roy - what are your thoughts?

Can you be more specific on the time periods for small market and big market teams?  Also, what would be the divider between the two (cap amount)? 100m?

[Colby]

Can you be more specific on the time periods for small market and big market teams?  Also, what would be the divider between the two (cap amount)? 100m?

Right now, teams have about three months to trade expiring contracts.  I agree that is a bit excessive, but the availability to do this is good for a fantasy league.  We have six tiers... why not do the following.

Tier #1 (the Yankee tier) = 0 weeks
Tier #2 = 1 week
Tier #3 = 2 weeks
Tier #4 = 3 weeks
Tier #5 = 4 weeks
Tier #6 = 5 weeks

We could also employ an arbitration extension that signifies the player is in year 4 (year after Prospect Contract ends), year 5, or year 6.  These can be 1-3 year deals using the current contract extension market values.  They basically take the term restrictions and throw them out the window.