|
Post by Brooklyn Cobesters on Oct 5, 2017 13:44:00 GMT -5
Now you want amnesty after Bouncing Billy is off my cap? lol
|
|
|
Post by Penumbraville Panthers on Oct 6, 2017 11:38:33 GMT -5
for peoples concern on the save vs holds. what about making holds worth 0.5 saves / holds category. kinda like using the half point per reception. I'm not sure if this is possible, but it is a suggestion to at least look into.
|
|
|
Post by Penumbraville Panthers on Oct 6, 2017 11:53:58 GMT -5
I'm mainly in favor of these rules adjustments because I believe they are more in line with real life baseball than we are now. The category change to Saves+Holds, as well as bringing players with outlandish contracts back into play, rather than them languishing between the active roster and released list of the team with the albatross contract.
Ultimately, we'll bring all of these to a vote (if necessary). When I post the polls, I may list more than two options for some. If that is the case, we might have a couple of rounds of voting on each issue, in order to perfect any rules changes. We have four months to talk this out, and I will email the league to get voting done as efficiently as possible.
I read everyone's comments since mine earlier this week, and took them into account when responding below. While not everyone may agree, or be interested in the rule(s) changes, we should at least discuss/vote. Most of the discussion has been done, and I will set up voting in the near future.
Buyout Option: There was never any rule definition in the other league of player usage after the buyout, but the suggestion of not allowing the player to be used by the buying out owner is a decent idea. It is easy to keep track somewhere on each team's roster the buyout dollar amount for the season (and the following season if a 4-yr contract is bought out to two years), for purpose of calculating salary cap. It could just be a number to the right of the salary cap total.
One option could be to basically "void" the contract of the player upon the buyout (the team is still obviously responsible for the buyout amount), allowing him to become a 1/1 Free Agent for anyone to use (even the buyout team). There would be a spot on the roster of the buyout team noting the buyout dollars counting against the cap, and he would be noted on someone's roster as 1/1 if anyone adds him. That might sound complicated, but it really isn't.
So as to affect current salaries as little as possible, Saves + Holds would not be added as a category until 2019 at the earliest, maybe even 2020. When deciding whether or not anyone is in favor of adding this category, please don't look at it from how it will affect your team, please look at it solely as if Saves+Holds is a better category in this league than just Saves. As I discussed earlier this season, a limited number of players would be affected by the category change, and in the next few months, we can talk about a way to correct the effect it would have on the current salaries of players.
Partial Salary Trades: Just like the suggestion I made about the buyout option above, with regard to people's concerns about the complexity of keeping track of the salaries, there would be a location on the original owner's page of the portion of the salary that the team was responsible for, and the team that trades for him would be responsible for the agreed to portion of the contract. In effect, that amount would become the player's salary going forward. For instance:
Team A's Player X's contract is 10/2, and as part of a trade, Team B offers to take on 2 of the 10. On Team A's roster, there would be a notation somewhere that they were responsible for 8/2 toward the cap for Player X. Upon completion of the deal, Team B would have Player X on their active roster at 2/2 and be responsible for that contract. If team B ever released Player X, any team in the league could add Player X at a cost of 2/2, including the original team that traded him. Players can only be involved in one partial salary trade for the life of their current contract. Along with this, I would also suggest we discuss a trade deadline, along the lines of MLB's July 31 (non-waiver) or Aug 31 (waiver) deadline, or somewhere in-between. This would stop the possibility of teams trying to complete a trade in order to free up cap space in the last month of the season.
Again, it may sound complicated, but it would be extremely easy to keep track of these things on the roster pages.
|
|
|
Post by Soultakers on Oct 6, 2017 11:56:03 GMT -5
for peoples concern on the save vs holds. what about making holds worth 0.5 saves / holds category. kinda like using the half point per reception. I'm not sure if this is possible, but it is a suggestion to at least look into. yeah i dont know for sure but i think that might have been an option
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hulse on Oct 6, 2017 12:32:21 GMT -5
Now you want amnesty after Bouncing Billy is off my cap? lol Look on the bright side, Scott. You’ll be able to re-sign him for a lot less next spring.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hulse on Oct 6, 2017 12:46:52 GMT -5
One part I don’t understand. If I double a player’s salary to cut his contract term, why isn’t he still mine to do whatever I want with him?
It doesn’t seem to make sense that he is treated like a leper after the contract adjustment. For example, I might want to buy out a contract of an injury-prone player - for example Tulo. But on the rare times that he’s healthy, he could still contribute. (I know his salary is too high to use him, but it’s just an example.)
|
|
|
Post by The Beast on Oct 6, 2017 13:16:11 GMT -5
Since buyouts in baseball rarely happen, I think it should be looked at how the NFL does salary reconstruction. They cut salary but usually add years and still own the player. So we would add salary and cut years and still own the player
I think the biggest argument against NOT being able to keep the player is for new owners taking over teams. In Deans other league I bought out probably half the roster cause the team was a mess. But it turned out Bauer and Lynn were valuable members of my pitching staff.
Now with Bauer’s second half, I probably would’ve kept the lower salary at more years, but it wouldn’t be fair to me as a new owner to not keep him just because I thought the previous owner gave him too many years, and then he turns in a career year.
(I’ve always LOVED Bauer and I’m so mad that he finally put it all together this year and I’m losing him after next year in the other league lol)
|
|
|
Post by The Beast on Oct 6, 2017 13:26:00 GMT -5
Realistically though, chances are the guys you cut the salary for won’t contribute much. I got lucky with Bauer and Lynn. Besides that I had about 8 other worthless buyouts on my released list.
Now maybe we could meet somewhere in the middle, where you get one designated buyout that you can still have the rights to own. Not one a year, just one period.
Example: I bought out upwards of 10 players in the other league. Lance Lynn now has a salary of 2/2 and Trevor Bauer has a salary of 6/2. Whomever I picked up first would be the only one of my buyouts I could use until their contract ran out. I wouldn’t be able to pick up Lynn this year and then change it to Bauer next year. And any other buyouts of mine are offlimts to me until Lynn’s contract was no more. Then I could have another designated buyout until their contract was up.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hulse on Oct 6, 2017 16:57:12 GMT -5
Yeah, that’s what I don’t understand at all. They are all under an active contract but can’t be used?? Sounds like a silly restriction to me. Why?
|
|
|
Post by Brooklyn Cobesters on Oct 7, 2017 15:25:52 GMT -5
Look at a buyout same way as it is done in MLB. You want the player off your team and don't see it as an active contract from that point on. See it like still being responsible for the $ but not having the player under control. If another owner wants that contract as is then it could either come off for the entire current contract or my preference would be for the new owner getting the player for the minimum and only crediting the former owner with a $1 off their cap. I think that's the way MLB does it.
Majority rules!!! lol Do think adding holds makes the league easier and always enjoyed how much tougher this league is than the other leaguse I play in but think I'm clearly in the minority here. Too many holds available to bid $ on closers if we change the rule. I play in leagues that combone the 2 cats and I always wait for last few picks to get holds and usually forego saves entirely.
|
|
|
Post by Penumbraville Panthers on Oct 8, 2017 6:37:39 GMT -5
Now you want amnesty after Bouncing Billy is off my cap? lol Look on the bright side, Scott. You’ll be able to re-sign him for a lot less next spring. Unfortunately, we don’t have zero dollar contracts available for veterans.
|
|
|
Post by Soultakers on Oct 9, 2017 9:22:13 GMT -5
for the buyout option i think it should be treated like a released player like they do in mlb. you are buying out the contract and they become a free agent. if you want him back sign him like a free agent would be since his old contract was bought out and no longer valid.
|
|