ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: Rules Changes => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Clarifications & Discussion => Topic started by: Anthony on November 20, 2019, 03:14:41 PM
-
I’d like to formally propose the removal of the 60 day waiting period to trade players. If you take a look at our previous vote (http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=325462.0) as many people voted to abolish the rule as there was to keep the rule, so after a year and having new members, I believe it’s worth bringing back up. The following reasons are points of why this rule change is needed:
1. Easier for the commissioner
1. Not having to check trades to make sure players who fall into this rule saves Flash time, as well as not having to put the “sign date” on the rosters for every player
2. Mirrors the MLB
No reason to keep a rule that they don’t abide by in the MLB which really has no affect on our league
3. Hurts Activity
This one is self-explanatory. More restrictions = Less trading
4. In a free league, simpler is better
Why make anything harder than it has to be.
5. It’s not achieving what it’s supposed to prevent
Players subject to the rule will be traded regardless, it will just delay it from happening. These players will be judged with the same criteria whether it’s today, or in 60 days.
I can expand more on my thoughts. I believe this is the best route of action and I'm sure I'm not the only one who believes that.
-
Since this is a discussion thread, I want to offer this:
1. Easier for the commissioner
I think it is safe to say I will not be Commissioner forever, so leaving me out of it, if thinking about future Commissioners, abolishing the 60 day rule will not be a significant change it terms of time saved. Although I whined about it in another thread, entering and removing signing dates is not a big deal and should not even be considered when weighing the merits of the 60 day moratorium.
2. Mirrors the MLB
This facet of FGM really needs to be seriously considered because it is something our league has always prided ourselves on. I agree that in MLB, contracted players can be traded at any time (except between the trading deadline and the end of the World Series). With that, MLB got rid of August waiver trades and so did we—and there wasn’t any pushback on that issue. I know we all run our teams differently, but are we acquiring free agents to improve our teams or are we acquiring them as trade bait? Either way, waiting 60 days to trade them away doesn’t seem like a giant obstacle. Given injuries, roster changes, and whatever else happens on the MLB level, all of the players on our 40 MLB/20 MiLB are not limited by a 60 day moratorium.
As for players acquired in the FYPD, our 60 Day trade moratorium does mirror MLB, but is not nearly as stringent. MLB teams abide by the rule and it is certainly enforced. However, since we hold our FYPD in November and not June, we have modified the rule because if we held our draft in July (after the June draft), the FYPD would drastically affect our competitive rosters (in-season as opposed to off-season). So our 60 day moratorium is a compromise of a sort and upholds the spirit of the current MLB rule of 90 days or after the World Series.
“A player who signs after being selected in the MLB Rule 4 Draft (First-Year Player Draft) or who was eligible for selection in the Rule 4 Draft but was not selected and who signs with an MLB club as a Non-Drafted Free-agent (NDFA) cannot be traded for at least 90 days or until after the conclusion of the World Series (no earlier than 9 AM on the day after the final game of the World Series), whichever comes last.
NOTE: Previously, a player signed after being selected in the MLB Rule 4 Draft could not be traded until the first anniversary of the player signing his first contract.”
In the last vote I advocated for the abolition of the June 1st free agent freeze because it did not mirror anything in MLB. Abolishing the June 1st date and keeping the 60 day trade moratorium was a compromise to be sure, but I still don’t agree with the premise that it isn’t warranted because of the inevitability of a player being traded. Interrupting immediate gratification isn’t really a solid reason for a rule that has worked for the 11 years this league has been in existence. This is free league but not a free for all when it comes to league participation.
Finally, as far as activity, trading is great, but looking back throughout the years, only a limited amount of GMs actually negotiate trades. Some are very active and some have never been a part of any trade in FGM. Activity in free agency during the off-season and throughout is a gauge of actual activity. Changing Fantrax lineups and monitoring MiLB promotions to the MLB are other forms of activity.
Getting rid of the 60 day rule for FYPD players is not warranted from my perspective. As for newly signed free agents, I am still on the fence.
-
I'll give my support on this as 1 of the 8 required GM's to back a vote on a rule change
-
“A player who signs after being selected in the MLB Rule 4 Draft (First-Year Player Draft) or who was eligible for selection in the Rule 4 Draft but was not selected and who signs with an MLB club as a Non-Drafted Free-agent (NDFA) cannot be traded for at least 90 days or until after the conclusion of the World Series (no earlier than 9 AM on the day after the final game of the World Series), whichever comes last.
At the moment I only want to address this current point, and it has been previously bought up: our draft happens after the world series, so I would feel that we're already kind of waiting the 90 days as is.
that being said, I wouldn't be opposed to making FYPD ineligible to be traded until after the draft, in the spirit of not trading draft picks if that makes things easier.
-
At the moment I only want to address this current point, and it has been previously bought up: our draft happens after the world series, so I would feel that we're already kind of waiting the 90 days as is.
that being said, I wouldn't be opposed to making FYPD ineligible to be traded until after the draft, in the spirit of not trading draft picks if that makes things easier.
How are we already waiting 90 days when we haven't even completed the draft and we don't know who will end up on our teams? Trading the FYPD draftees immediately after the draft is simply saying there is no 60 day trade moratorium at all. Is that the current point--the complete elimination of the 60 day draft moratorium?
-
I am good with doing away with the 60 day for drafted players. The 60 day for free agent and resigning I feel should stay.
-
The whole premise of the FYPD is to supply teams with a good farm so that every team can compete long term. If you look at other leagues, owners are not committed for 3yrs let alone ten. The 60day rule protects teams from themselves. Because teams don't do grueling rebuilds, they get desperate and trade top talent for playersin deals that seriously affect the future.
However, I will agree with the majority of the vote. If you guys feel this will improve the league then I'm for it.
-
The whole premise of the FYPD is to supply teams with a good farm so that every team can compete long term. If you look at other leagues, owners are not committed for 3yrs let alone ten. The 60day rule protects teams from themselves. Because teams don't do grueling rebuilds, they get desperate and trade top talent for playersin deals that seriously affect the future.
However, I will agree with the majority of the vote. If you guys feel this will improve the league then I'm for it.
That's not what the rule does, it only stops them from trading them for 60 days, once day 61 hits those prospects are as good as gone. Protecting GM's from themselves should be the job of the TC and voting on trades with the good of the league as priority number 1
-
How are we already waiting 90 days when we haven't even completed the draft and we don't know who will end up on our teams? Trading the FYPD draftees immediately after the draft is simply saying there is no 60 day trade moratorium at all. Is that the current point--the complete elimination of the 60 day draft moratorium?
Our version of waiting 90 days is the fact that our draft happens more than 90 days after the real MLB FYPD. I believe that the timing of our draft upholds the spirit of the MLB rule.
The current point is the complete elimination of the 60 day no-trade rule and its entirety, including free agent signings, extended players, and drafted players.
-
The current point is the complete elimination of the 60 day no-trade rule and its entirety, including free agent signings, extended players, and drafted players.
Is this what the vote would be on?
Or would there be differing stipulations between FYPD, FA, and Re-Signs...?
I would say if there's a vote, to avoid all confusion, do away with the whole "can't trade players for 60 or 90 days" thing.
Which I think Anthony, is what you're going for here.
Seems like others are okay with eliminating one thing, but not the other.
-
Is this what the vote would be on?
Or would there be differing stipulations between FYPD, FA, and Re-Signs...?
I would say if there's a vote, to avoid all confusion, do away with the whole "can't trade players for 60 or 90 days" thing.
Which I think Anthony, is what you're going for here.
Seems like others are okay with eliminating one thing, but not the other.
Yes, abolish the rule entirely. I don't think my proposal unintentionally specifies a group and is meant to be taken as getting rid of the entire rule.
-
The rules in place now are working well. I see no reason to give GMs the opportunity to trade away their assets earlier in order to win and leave a mess for others to clean up.
-
What if we set a date that drafted players could be trade? Like midseason?
-
What if we set a date that drafted players could be trade? Like midseason?
We used to have a June 1st trade restriction for free agents signed during the off-season and 60 days for free agents signed during the season, but we got rid of that June 1st tag last season. We kept the 60 day moratorium for newly signed free agents, free agent extensions, and FYPD players.
Anthony is proposing the total elimination of the 60 day moratorium in all circumstances.
-
Anthony is proposing the total elimination of the 60 day moratorium in all circumstances.
:iatp:
The rules in place now are working well. I see no reason to give GMs the opportunity to trade away their assets earlier in order to win and leave a mess for others to clean up.
Isn’t that how championships are won?
I feel like a team that just won a championship wouldn’t up and leave a league...
-
I'm against changing any of the moratoriums particularly the FA one.
This league is built around long term GM involvement developing a team. Trading or buying a team doesn't work. Our draft, much like MLB's, is set up to help the less fortunate teams get a leg up. Trading away assets to "rebuild" is counter productive to this theory. Why rush the process.
As far as FA are concerned allowing them to be traded immediately is a slippery slope I con't think anyone wants to go down. Too many opportunities for "side-deals", etc.
-
I'm in favor of keeping the 60 day rule in place.
IMO, if you're going to draft/sign a player, you should be committed to him for a certain period of time.
I don't know that removing the rule would necessarily hurt the league, but I don't have a problem with how it operates today. So opening an unknown can of worms seems unnecessary to me.
The draft and flip seems excessive...like Jerry Dipoto on PEDs.
-
If you have a problem with GM's trading away assets, that should be handled by the trade committee. If an owner wants to trade a prospect, they'll do it, regardless if it's December 1st or February 1st. I wouldn't be any less likely to trade a guy in my minors 60 days from now.
I don't see a problem with a player being signed just to be flipped to another team, it's no different than if a player is traded to Team A, and then Team A goes ahead and trades that player the next week, and I don't think it'll happen as much as you think. If I have time I'll take a look at some past trades 60 days after the draft/FA and see how many players included were new additions to the team.
-
If you have a problem with GM's trading away assets, that should be handled by the trade committee. If an owner wants to trade a prospect, they'll do it, regardless if it's December 1st or February 1st. I wouldn't be any less likely to trade a guy in my minors 60 days from now.
In thinking about it a bit (since I'm bored and read thru this thread), the one "good" thing that comes of this rule as it stands now, is there should be somewhat of a trading frenzy come late January/early February when all of the recently re-signed players, as well as recently drafted rookies become "available" for trade.
I guess for that matter, there will be another trading frenzy that may occur a bit after that, when any signed FA becomes eligible to get traded in March and April, depending on position.
Overall though, as Anthony did point out, if a trade is going to happen with a certain player, it'll happen anyways. I'm sure as heck going to be trading Tim Anderson, Ryon Healey and Taylor Rodgers. All the rule does is delay that.
But as mentioned, it could be seen as a "good" thing in that it creates a bit more activity during the MLB off-season for us in fantasy land.
The other thing I agree with Anthony on is that despite Flash saying it isn't, it has to be a bit annoying and a little more time consuming writing beside each player when he was re-signed, or drafted (or signed in FA when FA rolls around). [It also messes with my OCD in seeing all those different dates beside each player, especially from the FYPD where they are a day to a week apart haha]
-
Since this has been sitting for a while, I'd like to move to vote on if the referendum can move to a formal vote process. It sounds like I need 8 members to cosign. By the looks of it, it seems that some owners support one rule and not the other, so I'd like to have a vote on each one separately.
#1. Removing the 60-day wait period rule on first-year player drafted players, players become eligible to be traded once the FYPD has concluded.
#2. Removing the 60-day wait period rule on recently signed players, regardless of whether it's an extension or a free agent.
This should make it easier. Just respond saying you support #1, #2, neither or both.
-
I support both rules :iatp:
-
I vote to keep the rules for both FYPD & FA. :police: :police: :police: :veto: :police: :police: :police:
-
Since this has been sitting for a while, I'd like to move to vote on if the referendum can move to a formal vote process. It sounds like I need 8 members to cosign. By the looks of it, it seems that some owners support one rule and not the other, so I'd like to have a vote on each one separately.
#1. Removing the 60-day wait period rule on first-year player drafted players, players become eligible to be traded once the FYPD has concluded.
#2. Removing the 60-day wait period rule on recently signed players, regardless of whether it's an extension or a free agent.
This should make it easier. Just respond saying you support #1, #2, neither or both.
I'll support #1 and #2, just to see if it ends up going to a league vote where everyone gets a say.
Doesn't seem like there will be 8 supporters to get things rolling though anyways as this has sat for a while.
-
I'd support both rules to go up for a vote, although I agree, it doesn't seem to have the support.
-
I do not support #1 or #2.
-
I support both 1 and 2 rule change
-
I think the rules in place now are good so do not support either rule change
-
This rule proposal referendum request has been on the board since November 20, 2019, and has not secured enough support to be voted on as a general referendum. Therefore, I am removing this as an open thread.
Maybe it will be revisited in the future, during the next offseason, but for now, our 60 day trade moratorium will remain unchanged.