|
Post by Penumbraville Panthers on Dec 11, 2014 10:35:04 GMT -5
My preliminary thoughts on all:
1. Expand DL to as many spots as possible. No real good reason not to, especially since we have a salary cap. 2. Again, no real good reason not to make these players available. I think it is detrimental to the competitiveness of the league. One thing mentioned was that it disallowed people to hoard these players for loyalty purposes, but it was also mentioned that this was for league startup purposes, and is relatively irrelevant now. 3. I don't think that a trade deadline is a huge deal. We didn't really see too much action in the last month of the season, did we? If anything, it gives people something to talk about right up until the end. I know I had a couple trade talks in September that I wouldn't have had in any other league. 4. For the sole reason that benches in this league are very shallow, I'm all for this: After August 17, if a player is announced by a reputable source to be out at least two weeks, I think they should be allowed to be "released" on ESPN, but the team remains in ownership of them. They can just be added to their DL on the roster on this forum . The reason I proposed August 17th, is because that is the last day where real-life teams can place a player on the DL and get them back before real-life rosters expand. Sometimes, a player will be injured in late August, and real-life teams will not place those players on real-life DL, since they know rosters expand in a few days, even though they are out for two weeks or more.
|
|
|
Post by gandrus on Dec 11, 2014 19:30:07 GMT -5
Not sure that I have any expiring rookies, but didn't pay any attention to this when making a couple of trades this year. Guess I'm not matching.... Suggestion for matching rule. Match 1: First round minor league pick that (at least) matches owners original minor league slot, i.e. a 5th pick must be 5th or better if there was a trade. Match 2: Second round minor league pick that (at least) matches owners original minor league slot, i.e. a 2nd round, 5th pick must be 2nd round, 5th or better if there was a trade of draft picks. Alternately, any first round minor league pick could be used as compensation. And just so I'm clear, if I had Mike Trout (don't I wish) and his rookie contract was expiring, I wouldn't even have to waste the time (or spot on my draft list) of bidding on him in a draft, because I'd just know that I was going to match whatever someone bid for him. Is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by Brooklyn Cobesters on Dec 12, 2014 1:39:00 GMT -5
I think you still have to bid on the player. You could put them at the bottom of the list and decide whether to match after the 1st bidding round if you don't win the bid. If you win the bid no need to match and lose a pick.
|
|
|
Post by Penumbraville Panthers on Dec 12, 2014 10:03:26 GMT -5
^What he said.^
|
|
|
Post by bbozorth on Dec 12, 2014 15:16:46 GMT -5
I agree.... a 1st & 2nd...
|
|
|
Post by bbozorth on Dec 12, 2014 15:20:07 GMT -5
So where do we stand on the other proposed rule changes?
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hulse on Dec 12, 2014 17:04:08 GMT -5
I think you still have to bid on the player. You could put them at the bottom of the list and decide whether to match after the 1st bidding round if you don't win the bid. If you win the bid no need to match and lose a pick. The rules don't specifically address this, but I agree with Scott's assessment - any expired rookies you intend to match need to be on your bid list. Otherwise, you could have six expiring rookies plus 15 bids for a total of 21 players. By requiring the rookies be on the bid list, it ensures that everyone gets to bid on 15. And, like with the loyalty list, your intended matches can be at the bottom of the priority list.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hulse on Dec 12, 2014 17:12:33 GMT -5
One difficulty with requiring that the forfeited match option draft pick be equal to or higher than the matching team's original draft pick: During a current season, no one knows for sure what the draft order is going to be. An owner could inadvertently screw himself out of a match option because the draft picks he traded moved position after the trade was made.
Considering that several people made trades during the 2014 season, and could be retroactively harmed by this new rule, I'd suggest that if this becomes a rule, it not take affect until after the start of the 2015 season. Alternatively, if it is going to be enforced for spring 2015, then it needs to be a unanimous vote by the owners. (BTW - my team is not one of the ones that would be affected by this - I'm already excluded from match options for 2015.)
|
|
|
Post by Penumbraville Panthers on Feb 1, 2015 0:49:35 GMT -5
So where do we stand on the other proposed rule changes?
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hulse on Feb 2, 2015 23:21:09 GMT -5
There have been no decisions made. Will put up the various issues for further discussion and vote during February.
|
|