ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: Transactions => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Invalid Transactions => Topic started by: rcankosy on December 27, 2010, 09:06:59 AM
-
Somehow, I can't help but wonder how loaded this FA class would have been if we had the same rules in place as the major leagues. Guys like Cliff Lee, Gollardo, Prince Fielder, and Jayson Werth would probably have been FAs. Sorry guys, I still believe that we should not allow teams to trade or re-sign their expiring contracts after the season.
-
The ironic thing is that your Rangers would not have a chance at a single guy on this list. I am of the other opinion, it is more fun this way.
-
I'm really on the shelf about this, as I can see both sides.
On Roy's side, allowing expiring contracts to be traded is essentially a 'get out of jail free' card for a team, as it removes any real risk for teams with star players.
On the other side, does the league want to allow more freedom to teams, and not restrict teams because of the varied salary caps. Obviously, I could not afford to keep a Pujols type player on my Nationals team, but an Angels or Cubs team could. At least, keep them and compete.
I guess the bigger question could be long term: are all of our free agencies each year going to be this shallow? They could be, as any smart owner would get value out of their star players, rather than get nothing from them.
-
As usual, I agree with Roy. I feel he has a very valid point. I think our time period needs to be shorter for how long we can hold on to players until they become FAs. Also in the rules, we have 24 hours to get our salary cap straightened out until we incur a penalty. Therefore , by our rules, a team could do a sign and trade once a deal is in place. But I think having players for 2 months on our rosters is a little un-real life like. Since that is what we strive for in this league. I think it needs to be reduced to about two weeks, given that people are more involved with their Fantasy Football Teams, making deal harder to make. I believe in MLB it is 24 hours.
-
I have agreed with Roy from the very beginning on this point. I don't think it is fair for a team to compete with a star player for the full season on an expiring contract and then trade him to another team in the offseason to be resigned. That team should have to make the tough decision of holding onto him and RFA'ing him in the offseason OR trading him at the trade deadline. Just like in real life.
~MTK
-
1) A change is not happening this year.
2) I agree with Rob that is more fun this way.
3) Perhaps we can find some way to balance how this league works and MLB by giving a shorter period as Dan suggested?
-
I'm unsure by what ya'll mean as "more fun." Do you mean making trades including those guys? If so, I just want to point out that I have been apart of several bidding processes and they can be just as fun if not more fun than trades. It is also a way to get most of the league (the teams that have available funds) on and active during the offseason. By the way, that is the "TradeKing" talking. :taco:
~MTK
-
1) A change is not happening this year.
2) I agree with Rob that is more fun this way.
3) Perhaps we can find some way to balance how this league works and MLB by giving a shorter period as Dan suggested?
I wouldn't necessarily recommend absolving trading expiring contracts, but would agree with your third (Dan's) proposal of shortening to time frame to move those contracts. I can't remember what Dan said, was it two weeks after the season?
-
But I think having players for 2 months on our rosters is a little un-real life like. Since that is what we strive for in this league. I think it needs to be reduced to about two weeks, given that people are more involved with their Fantasy Football Teams, making deal harder to make. I believe in MLB it is 24 hours.
Found it :taco:
~MTK
-
Found it :taco:
~MTK
Shortening the period would be a good idea... it doesn't change the fundamentals of the leagues rules, but it has a dampening effect on the number of sign and trades and extensions.
-
Do we take it to a vote now?
-
If it's not going into effect until next offseason, no hurry to vote right? Any arguments against shortening the period? Any arguments for a different time window, or perhaps an alternative approach?
-
We have plenty of time to debate this. I agree with shortening the time frame. You can still trade players you signed or players that were on your roster. But giving teams 2months to make moves for expiring contract players is too long. With this structure i feel that hardly any players will ever hit the free agent market thus leaving teams to over pay for mediocre talent. I do not think that is in the best interest of the league
-
I tend to favor bringing this issue to a vote while it is fresh in our minds. In the past, issues such as revenue sharing and prospect contracts died a slow and painful death. With that said, I suggest the following options:
1. Do nothing and leave the rules as is.
2. Let the contracts expire at the end of the year and do NOT allow them to be traded after the season.
3. Shorten the period allowing trades to 2 weeks.
4. Shorten the period allowing trades to 1 month.
-
I could agree with either #2 or #3, but I am not sure we need a rule for this.
If a manager chooses to hang on to an expiring contract to compete longer, they know the value of the player will be decreased at the end of the season due to negotiating position they have put themselves in. Other managers know this as well.
-
Personally I'm on the fence about this one, since this does not seem to match what we see in MLB (has anyone seen a sign-and-trade, let alone many with star players?). That said, it looks like sign-and-trades could be considered legal in MLB, but players would not want to waive the inherent no-trade clause except in the case of being a Type A free-agent: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090218&content_id=3843216&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090218&content_id=3843216&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb)
-
I tend to favor bringing this issue to a vote while it is fresh in our minds. In the past, issues such as revenue sharing and prospect contracts died a slow and painful death.
That's a fair point.
With that said, I suggest the following options:
1. Do nothing and leave the rules as is.
2. Let the contracts expire at the end of the year and do NOT allow them to be traded after the season.
3. Shorten the period allowing trades to 2 weeks.
4. Shorten the period allowing trades to 1 month.
I don't think #4 would have a significant enough impact.
-
I could see doing 2 or 3. My argument for 3 is that the relative newness of the league to most GMs. We have had a decent amount of turnover. The fluctuating payroll structure, which came into effect this year. I think as we move forward it is something that we should gradually get rid of (the time period) to further emulate MLB.
I would also further argue that it might make sense to get rid of RFAs as well. But, I don't want to overload the topics board at the moment. But it seems like the benefit of having RFAs now is to get the draft pick. A guy who is RFA'd could still go for more than said GM is willing to go. I understand the reason for having RFAs, but I think since we have the draft pick cpmpensation in place, it might make the RFAing a moot point.
-
I think it might be helpful to see MLB rules related to FA, so I am posting it below.
Major League Baseball free agents will be able to negotiate with all clubs when the clock strikes midnight five days after the end of
the World Series, Major League Baseball and the Players Association announced on Thursday.
The adjusted rule, negotiated by labor officials, representing MLB and the union, gives players 10 more days of open negotiations
in 2010 and '11 than they've had in the past. Up until this year, the originating club had a 15-day exclusive period to negotiate
with its player.
-
I would also further argue that it might make sense to get rid of RFAs as well. But, I don't want to overload the topics board at the moment. But it seems like the benefit of having RFAs now is to get the draft pick. A guy who is RFA'd could still go for more than said GM is willing to go. I understand the reason for having RFAs, but I think since we have the draft pick cpmpensation in place, it might make the RFAing a moot point.
Before we settled on the current RFA system, I pushed for an Arbitration system. At the time we didn't have a good foundation for valuing players, but the current contract rules would certainly do the trick. The only problem is the RFA tags are meant to help smaller markets more than large markets, and arbitration doesn't necessarily accomplish that.
-
i really never chim in, but I really would like to see a 1 week rule! makes this more realistic and that is why we are trying to simulate.
-
Before we settled on the current RFA system, I pushed for an Arbitration system. At the time we didn't have a good foundation for valuing players, but the current contract rules would certainly do the trick. The only problem is the RFA tags are meant to help smaller markets more than large markets, and arbitration doesn't necessarily accomplish that.
I agree. I like the RFA for the simple reason of helping smaller market clubs.
Going to a 2 week period at the end of our season would be a huge win for the league. Here is the only downside. You will be forced to make moves on players without knowing there current real life situation. However the positives outway the negatives. It would be more like the real mlb and improve FA.
-
For the sake of realism, I agree that this should be changed. If for no other reason it will keep a steady flow of decent FAs.
The "sign and trade" system we currently have definitely favors larger market teams. A short time period would help this but probably wouldn't eliminate it.
Also,Ben's idea of Arbitration is intriguing and I would like to hear more about how it could be done.
-
I agree. I like the RFA for the simple reason of helping smaller market clubs.
Going to a 2 week period at the end of our season would be a huge win for the league. Here is the only downside. You will be forced to make moves on players without knowing there current real life situation. However the positives outway the negatives. It would be more like the real mlb and improve FA.
Here is my hesitation - you think it should improve FA, but would it? I can tell you that even with only one or two weeks, I still would have traded all of the big names listed in the OP (Fielder, Lee, Werth, Gallardo). I may have received less in return with less time to shop around, but I would not have shipped them before the deadline last year (had championship aspirations), and they would still not have reached FA this year...
-
Here is my hesitation - you think it should improve FA, but would it? I can tell you that even with only one or two weeks, I still would have traded all of the big names listed in the OP (Fielder, Lee, Werth, Gallardo). I may have received less in return with less time to shop around, but I would not have shipped them before the deadline last year (had championship aspirations), and they would still not have reached FA this year...
I agree you would have been able to move them. But others would not have been moved. The class would be a little deeper. Thus more talent and less bad contracts. Your situation last year is why I believe we should have a little time after the season. If we do away with it, and allow all guys to be FA after the year, then in theory your team would have been screwed. Im sure you gave up some good specs to acquire some of those guys and you shouldnt be punished in the long run for making a run at it. Thus you should definately be allowed to resign or trade them. Just not 2 months worth.
-
Here is my hesitation - you think it should improve FA, but would it? I can tell you that even with only one or two weeks, I still would have traded all of the big names listed in the OP (Fielder, Lee, Werth, Gallardo). I may have received less in return with less time to shop around, but I would not have shipped them before the deadline last year (had championship aspirations), and they would still not have reached FA this year...
Exactly, this is why we need to consider the root of the problem instead of trying to tidy up the hedges. It comes down to whether this leagues wants the sign and trade or they don't.
~MTK
-
I agree you would have been able to move them. But others would not have been moved. The class would be a little deeper. Thus more talent and less bad contracts. Your situation last year is why I believe we should have a little time after the season. If we do away with it, and allow all guys to be FA after the year, then in theory your team would have been screwed. Im sure you gave up some good specs to acquire some of those guys and you shouldnt be punished in the long run for making a run at it. Thus you should definately be allowed to resign or trade them. Just not 2 months worth.
I would have been screwed for 2011, but I also would have thought twice before acquiring players with only 1 year left. I was ready to let one or two of them walk for the two 1st rounder RFA compensation, so maybe I wouldn't have traded everyone.
I've split off the arbitration discussion to a separate thread, but it may affect how people want to handle this sign-and-trade discussion.
-
I personally feel that shortening the time period where you retain an expired contract to one week could help the depth of free agents, but I don't think that a quote-unquote star player will ever get to FA under that system. The owner of said impending free agent will almost always move a high-stature player before he ever hits free agency, that's just my opinion. As a result, mediocre or aging players will wind up getting contracts on par with some of the stars, which in the long-term will affect many teams ability to compete or move these bad long-term deals should they try to do so down the road. Shortening the time frame is a band-aid on a bullet wound- in my opinion, the sign and trade is the real problem not the amount of time an owner retains those rights. The contracts of players should expire at the end of the season, just as it does in MLB. MLB clubs do not retain a players rights once the season has ended, just the right of an exclusive negotiating window, which I believe is five days. Just my two cents.
-
MLB clubs do not retain a players rights once the season has ended, just the right of an exclusive negotiating window, which I believe is five days. Just my two cents.
That's another good point, in that we have a significantly longer exclusive negotiating window; teams have months rather than just 5 days. This is in addition to the fact that our league doesn't need time to 'negotiate' as extension prices are fixed. It's not a huge advantage, but teams have significantly more time make moves and clear space then their MLB counterparts.
-
As a result, mediocre or aging players will wind up getting contracts on par with some of the stars, which in the long-term will affect many teams ability to compete or move these bad long-term deals should they try to do so down the road
This does not concern me, as ultimately the supply/demand will balance out; if teams overpay for mediocre FA's this year, there will be less money available for FA in future years. If today's big market teams are spending excess cash on bad contracts, it will ultimately hurt their future cap and drive small/large cap turnover which is a good thing.
-
The more I consider it, the more I like the real life rules of a 5 day window to re-sign, without the ability to trade expiring contracts.
This is true to the real pros, correct?
-
The more I consider it, the more I like the real life rules of a 5 day window to re-sign, without the ability to trade expiring contracts.
This is true to the real pros, correct?
It's true, but MLB teams can offer any player arbitration to try to keep them if they don't settle within the short window. For players with fewer than 6 years experience, they retain them automatically - for players with more than 6, it is similar to our RFA rules in that they receive pick compensation if they leave.
-
its actually 15 days i believe. and if this was agm all big names might be in the fa pool.