FGM Rule Change

[Daniel]

So... what does this rule change mean? That we can sign players into our EDR? Does the player limit stay the same?

[Daniel]

Also, why is this rule entering into effect immediately? I would say this is a big rule that changes the dynamic of league play and thus should be implemented for the following season like all previous major changes that have been made.

[Daniel]

Finally, I want to say it saddens me somehow as the EDR is one of the best differentiators this league had that set it apart from others. Why do you guys want to make FGM more like other leagues, when it should be the other way around? This has been the most fun league I have ever been in, and there is a reason why so many people want to participate in it. Making it seem more like other leagues is like diluting the brand.

[papps]

I actually disagree. This league IMO has become a little stale the last year or two. To me, having an EDR not means nothing about how good the league is. It's about the level of activity and the quality of the GMs. I think some of the other leagues have passed us by. I think it's good that we change things for the better.

Also, being that it's the offseason I dont think we need a year to prepare for this change. I also think this change is being made more of a big deal than it really is.

Changes are fine but the biggest thing we need is active GMs. IMO that is what will set this league apart.

[VolsRaysBucs]

I actually disagree. This league IMO has become a little stale the last year or two. To me, having an EDR not means nothing about how good the league is. It's about the level of activity and the quality of the GMs. I think some of the other leagues have passed us by. I think it's good that we change things for the better.

Also, being that it's the offseason I dont think we need a year to prepare for this change. I also think this change is being made more of a big deal than it really is.

Changes are fine but the biggest thing we need is active GMs. IMO that is what will set this league apart.

:iatp:
The reasons for people wanting or not wanting to make the change were hashed out and discussed ad nauseam in previous threads.  While I appreciate and respect greatly your opinions Daniel, this ship is not/should not be returning to port.  The EDR was actually one of the reasons many a new or prospective owner cited as reason for not wanting to "stick it out" with the league.  While many of us hardcore GMs may indeed like the added level of difficulty produced by the EDR rules, that same level of difficulty was not conducive to recruiting/retaining new blood to the league and, more importantly, was a great inhibitor to people willing to take on a rebuilding project.  This was evidenced just a few weeks ago if memory serves correct.  Please do not take any of this as a slight or attack, I am just hoping to shed some insight as to, at least in my summation of the situation, why the change was made and is in the best interest of the league moving forward.   :toast:

[Daniel]

I am not part of the rules committee, but as one of the longest standing members of this league I am pretty sure I have a right to post my opinions about these changes. I do not know if anyone else out there cares about this, but I do think that some key aspects have been dealt with very poorly.

For starters, this league is supposed to be for the hardcore crowd. If a new GM does not find the league appealing because it is too complicated he/she can just leave and a new GM will come along.

Regarding activity, I do not see how this league in any way stimulates more activity from owners. In any case it stimulates less activity the way I see it. 

Regarding the timing of the rule, we have done many changes during the off-season that apply for the following season and not for the immediate season because we all know that planning here is not done on a year by year basis and preparing your team to adapt to these changes takes more than just 1-2 months. This is something that affects heavily draft strategy and makes it even harder to rebuild a team than it used to be because it allows the really good teams to maintain a stack of prospects in the MiLB until they are good enough instead of having to use up roster spots and salary or release them to the FA pool. This basically allows rich winning teams to prepare better for the future and gives them yet another advantage in signing the few undrafted FA prospects that become good enough by letting them stow these players away in the MiLB. Losing teams have never had this problem because they would rather have the prospect in their MLB roster than in the minors because any source of points is valuable. 

Also, I was following the 5MiLB extra spots discussion and quite frankly do not thing the final changes that were actually voted on and their implications were discussed thoroughly. Add the fact that the founder of the league voted against the change,  and it looks like I am not the only one thinking that this change goes against the spirit of FGM.

Finally, I do not think I ever read anything regarding when to apply this rule and I do not understand how such an important aspect of the rule was not even discussed.

[BHows]

The statement that this change "allows the really good teams to maintain a stack of prospects in the MiLB until they are good enough instead of having to use up roster spots and salary or release them to the FA pool"   I can make the argument that teams that draft well or are shrewd enough to acquire good MiLB talent SHOULD be rewarded by allowing them to retain that talent as long as possible. Besides, once the player accumulates 50G/40IP he can't be moved back down. As for FA strategy; look at the current pool. Just as in MLB, mostly players 30y/o+ that are too expensive to resign. I don't recall too many MiLB players that are even marginal being part of the FA pool. Te Prospect Extension rule takes care of that.
Also, according to the old rules once a player was promoted and played one game in the majors they must be added to your 40-man roster. So let's use Domingo Santana in 2014 as an example. He came up in July, played in 6 games with the Astros and was optioned back to AAA. HAD HE BEEN on a team's EDR he would be on their 40 man whether he makes it back to the pros or not. This way he can be moved back to MiLB until he accumulates 50G/40IP.
Granted the EDR was a staple here, unique to FGM and I argued this point in the discussion. On the other hand it has always been in FGM's "mission statement" to emulate MLB as closely as possible. MLB has an option system where we had nothing remotely close. I see this not as a wholesale change but as a good compromise between the two.

[joeshmoe]

Dan, youre right. There was never a discussion about how to put this into effect. The rule in general has a giant loophole with no provision against a milb player scoring points. The RC did not do this league justice with this rule. It was jammed through without any real thought about implementation.

Proof, the rule proposal never even had a rewriet. Why? I dont know.

I personally believe the RC should be eliminated.

[joeshmoe]

I am not part of the rules committee, but as one of the longest standing members of this league I am pretty sure I have a right to post my opinions about these changes. I do not know if anyone else out there cares about this, but I do think that some key aspects have been dealt with very poorly.

For starters, this league is supposed to be for the hardcore crowd. If a new GM does not find the league appealing because it is too complicated he/she can just leave and a new GM will come along.

Regarding activity, I do not see how this league in any way stimulates more activity from owners. In any case it stimulates less activity the way I see it. 

Regarding the timing of the rule, we have done many changes during the off-season that apply for the following season and not for the immediate season because we all know that planning here is not done on a year by year basis and preparing your team to adapt to these changes takes more than just 1-2 months. This is something that affects heavily draft strategy and makes it even harder to rebuild a team than it used to be because it allows the really good teams to maintain a stack of prospects in the MiLB until they are good enough instead of having to use up roster spots and salary or release them to the FA pool. This basically allows rich winning teams to prepare better for the future and gives them yet another advantage in signing the few undrafted FA prospects that become good enough by letting them stow these players away in the MiLB. Losing teams have never had this problem because they would rather have the prospect in their MLB roster than in the minors because any source of points is valuable. 

Also, I was following the 5MiLB extra spots discussion and quite frankly do not thing the final changes that were actually voted on and their implications were discussed thoroughly. Add the fact that the founder of the league voted against the change,  and it looks like I am not the only one thinking that this change goes against the spirit of FGM.

Finally, I do not think I ever read anything regarding when to apply this rule and I do not understand how such an important aspect of the rule was not even discussed.

This is all accurate. This rule is a classic case of looking at only one side of the coin. We picked up one side of the stick but forgot to look at the rest of the stick we are picking up.

To compound the issue we implemented a rule with no guidlines and that changed the rules instantly. Bad form

[joeshmoe]

I have been looking at this proposal for another 1.5 hours since I awoke and pulled it up on my iPad while on the thrown.

This time, I am looking at this through the paradigm of a GM. The amount of possible combinations of transactions I can complete has changed the competetive challenge of this league for the worse.

When I arrived in 2010, I took a team that had one piece. Nobody wanted SD. Then I traded that piece, Adrian Gonzalez on a prospect contract for Martin Perez (TJ surgery), Mat Gamel (knee, gone), and Hector Rondon. I then had a terrible first year drafting, horrible, Kolbrin Vitek was my first rounder. But I stuck with it, and now the Padres have some talent and could turn into a winning team shortly. I pulled a zinger on Chris netting Rizzo for Maikel Franco.

Does the argument that this is easier for new Gms make anybody feel good? That is what other leagues are for. This league should be for those who are willing to take projects and build them, a la Corey in NY.

What have we gained?  An easier time to fill the spot. What have we lost? Our unique competetive edge.