Armchair: Land of the bottom feeder

[Fourfingerwoo]

  First let me preference this by letting everyone know I am not singling any one GM out and neither am I ignorant to the fact that what is happening is well within the rules established for this league. But we have an issue that needs to be dealt with heading into next season. The art of bottom feeding minor league posts in this league has become a total joke. And I think it s contradictory to what a league of this sort represents. I think that we need to come to terms on this practice for the upcoming season. When an owner spends 1-2 hours looking for up and coming prospects and "one" other owner will bid on every spect posted in the span of 15 seconds  obviously we have a flaw in the process. I don't claim to have the answer but I do believe we have a problem and think that it should be addressed.

[Dre2k19]

Where I totally understand and agree with where you are coming from it seems like you are targeting just a few of us and I know I am one of them. I picked up a club that was in some pretty sorry shape and I am working on bettering it. I yes often times bid on younger players people throw out there and I have also thrown out spects as well for the bidding. So I guess I am sorry for not throwing more out there? Or I'm sorry for bidding quickly with this handy app the site created? Or I'm sorry for bettering my team? But I'll start throwing out more players and try to not be a "bottom feeder"

[kenny]

I think Matt has a point here. If you want to draw a comparison to reality, the current system essentially means that scouting departments announce to everyone who they're going to sign and give the other 29 organizations who they like.  Obviously, that's not how it works.

It sounds like the solution would involve either giving the first organization to bid a bonus or "penalizing" organizations that bid later on. That would be the general concept. The details, of course, would have to be worked out.

I'm going to throw out a few ideas and see if any of them stick:

- The 2nd bid for a minor league contract must be $300k (as an example) more than the 1st bid.

or

- The 1st GM to place a bid on a player gets a finder's fee of $100k (as an example) to be paid by the winning team. If the final offer is over $3 million (as an example), this does not apply, because it probably means the player is well known enough that GM's didn't have to really dig deep into their research to find the player.

I'm assuming others agree that the system requires change. Voice your opinion if you think otherwise.

[Dre2k19]

They both sound like logical alternatives to our current system an fair. I like the second option but both sound fair. I see it as a problem and see this being an issue and I know that I bid on a lot of players so this sounds like a good alternative.

[jrmatt73]

I like the second option better. This rewards GMs a little for extra work being put in to find obscure players

[Lindner]

I like the finder fee more, Kenny.  Another option that we are talking about in Mendoza is give compensation picks sandwiched between a couple picks that are a little later (such as 3/4 4/5 or 5/6).  We could give GMs a pick for every 25 minor league players they post during the season.  Maybe 25 isn't the number, but its somewhere to start.

[mrmetsman]

Handing out comp.Picks for a number of Minors you throw out there doesn't seem the answer to me.
GM's will just throw players out there who they probably don't even want just to reach a number to get a pick.

Rewarding the original poster seems the obvious approach here.
Maybe give them the right to match any highest bid.
Like on a "Restricted Free Agent"

This option gives the original poster the power to decide on the player he did the research on.

[kenny]

Handing out comp.Picks for a number of Minors you throw out there doesn't seem the answer to me.
GM's will just throw players out there who they probably don't even want just to reach a number to get a pick.

The reason GM's won't go crazy with that is they're at risk of getting stuck with the player they put up for bid. Don't forget that roster openings are just as important as money. You can put 25 players up for bid, but there's a chance you'll win all 25 and will have to drop 25 current players in order to make room.

I haven't been too involved in signing minor leaguers, so I'll defer to others as to whether or not the right to match the highest bid is good enough of a trade-off.

[ringb39]

I like the finder's fee idea as well, but for a more significant amount. 

However it seems like this post has done the trick.  I only bid on guys I like, but there hasn't been much bidding action since this post laid a guilt trip on everyone.

[Lindner]

The reason GM's won't go crazy with that is they're at risk of getting stuck with the player they put up for bid. Don't forget that roster openings are just as important as money. You can put 25 players up for bid, but there's a chance you'll win all 25 and will have to drop 25 current players in order to make room.

   My thoughts exactly. 

We could even adjust my idea to only include guys that you posted, but LOST.  If you post a hundred minor leaguers just to build up comp picks, you wouldn't be rewarded unless someone else "shows interest" in them by outbidding you.

I would just be weary of passing out cash because of all the extra work that would be created by recording all the cash transfers on every single minor league signing.  I wouldn't want all that extra work on my plate.

In a way, the comp pick strategy make sense because it gives the GM exactly what they are looking for when they post a player.  They are interested in acquiring minor league talent.  A comp pick is exactly that.