|
|
Post by The Commish on Mar 12, 2009 19:49:33 GMT 5
I have placed everyone in a division just by trying to keep it even. I refered to last yrs finishes and current rosters. I would like to try and make it fair for all. If anyone has other ideas or thinks i need to switch it up let me know. Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigers GM (Ken) on Mar 13, 2009 3:14:52 GMT 5
First I'd like to thank Zach for taking the league and trying to move it in the right direction. I think most of the changes will really help the league. I do have a couple of ideas/suggestions that I think may also improve the league. Any thoughts, possitive or negative, to these ideas is welcome.
1. Since this post is about divisions, the awarding of prize money based on them is a bit of a concern. In a roto league you are not ranked by divisions. It's the entire league against each other. Awarding the top 4 teams prize money seems great, but awarding based on divisions could be a bit unfair. You could possibly have the top 4 teams in one division and only 2 of them get any prize money. And depending on the division of the next best teams, you could end up the the top 2 teams in the league getting money and then skipping a couple of teams and the 5th and 6th or 7th place team getting money. I'm not saying it would happen like that, but it is definantly a possiblity. Just seems to be fair and not leave any doubt, it should just be the top 4 teams in the league that win the prize money.
2. I understand that 4 teams will be contracted and a 5 round draft will be held for those players. To accomidate this the roster size is being increased to 45. That seems high to me and I don't see a need to increase the roster size.
It may help a few teams for the expansion draft, but I think it will negatively effect the league long term. Increasing the cap is a good idea. Every league I'm in of this type has a cap of $125M anyway. But none are over 40 players. If a draft pick takes a team over 40 players, they should have to drop someone to add the drafted player. The expansion draft should not be required, meaning if a team only wants 3 or 4 players, he should be able to pass on any remaining picks.
Even at 40, almost every player of any value is owned. In-season (and even now off-season) Free Agency is almost non-existant as it is. And at that size, 10-15 guys will never be played. Also, I think ESPN can only have a roster max of 40. If our roster size is more than that, you run into the same issue that we had on Yahoo. Only half of your players can be on your roster, the rest are in the FA pool, but aren't actually available FA. That can lead to acidental pickups of other teams players and a possible waiting period if you want to play one of your guys that isn't currently on your roster. You would have to drop someone to add that player. Then others may be confused if the player was dropped or released from the team. It just seems like a lot of additional poteintal problems for something that is really unnecessary in the first place.
Just some ideas. Any support/opposition?
|
|
|
|
Post by kennedy on Mar 13, 2009 3:53:32 GMT 5
I think the idea of paying the top 4 is solid, why award arbitrary division winners in a Roto league. I do beleive that, the expansion of rosters is solid...maybe with a 40 man active roster and to accomidate espn and a 5 man farm team that does not count against your cap. The farm team can only consist of players drafted in our MiLB draft. As for increasing cap I'm fine either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigers GM (Ken) on Mar 13, 2009 3:55:44 GMT 5
One other thing, contracts for MiLB players. I'm really not a fan of the rule change from the other league that has MiLB players "protected" for three years. I think they should be a set number of years like the original contracts were, 3, 4, 5 years, whatever. If not, who is overseeing these contracts? These player could sit on rosters for a couple of years. Then you have to know when they reach 150 AB or 50 IP and then set the contract for three years. Seems like a lot of Admin oversight where they should just have set contract lengths. But just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by prhood on Mar 13, 2009 4:27:45 GMT 5
Just a few thoughts of mine:
1. I have no problem with operating with 3 or 4 protected seasons for minors when they lose minor eligibility. It workks quite well in several leagues that I play in.
2. I agree that we don't need to expand the rosters but would suggest that if necessary a team be allowed to drop a player with no penalty.
3. I'd rather see the cap frozen at $115M - it will promote and enhance FA and force teams to moderate their FA bidding.
4. with only 16 teams I see no reason for divisions. develop a suitable payoff scheme that rewards the top 3-4 teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Commish on Mar 13, 2009 4:53:56 GMT 5
1. I thought divisions would help develop a rivalry aspect in this league. The goal was to try and make it different/stand out. We have so many leagues that are the same, I think this league needs something to seperate it from the rest as it has almost shit the bed twice now trying to be like the rest.
2.I like the idea of a 40man roster and 5 ineligible. Like a Lo-minors idea. Deffinently a pollable idea.
3. I was already thinking of leaving the cap at 115 for the near future. I think that is more then enough, especially with alot of the cheap contracts from the beggining. Minors are not on a contract. I thought that rule was updated. You get them 3 protected yrs after 150/50. The first being the one they surpass those #'s.
I can put up polls on divisions and rosters ASAP. Let me know what u think
|
|
|
|
Post by rjbreeze on Mar 13, 2009 22:57:02 GMT 5
So is the cap 115 or 125??
I like the idea of dropping only ONE player because most of us didn't have 40 yet,but like me most have around 36/37,so by adding 5 picks would put us over 40 if we choose the 40 road,if its 45,then i would hope we dont HAVE to get to 45,have a roster between 40-45 or maybe 42-45
Also the fact is,most of us dont have 40+ that will be in the majors during the season,just having A or AA players,so the espn thing about being over 40 might not be an issue...........OR......just make it everyone has to assign 5 players to NOT be used all year ??
|
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM (Paul) on Mar 13, 2009 23:38:25 GMT 5
Cap 115m = GREAT
Divisions in ROTO = Not GREAT
Payout top 4 overall roto points = FAIR
protection years?? 3 total or 3 consecutive starting with the year of surpassing???
40 man roster = PERFECT
1 free drop = I LIKE IT
contraction draft = LIKE BUTTAH!
|
|
|
|
Post by kennedy on Mar 14, 2009 1:49:46 GMT 5
I agree with everything paul said...though I think specs should have prospect protection for 3 years of 150 plate appearances or 50 inn pitched. It's not hard to track these things, half of dynasty league rules are based on the honor system anyway. I'm in 30 team leagues as are most gm's in here that keep track of prospect eligibility, it isn't difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rays GM (Zach) on Mar 14, 2009 2:13:47 GMT 5
Prospect rule is protected 3 yrs after surpassing ab/ip standard. The first being the yr they passed the mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rays GM (Zach) on Mar 14, 2009 2:14:32 GMT 5
Cap is 115, and espn is set up as 40 players and 5 dl. it dont matter if we do 40 or 45. you dont have to use dl spots. i cant change it either or all added players will be dropped.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marlins GM (James) on Mar 14, 2009 3:04:26 GMT 5
Copied Pauls format to save time....
Cap 115m = Agree
Divisions in ROTO = Really dont like
Payout top 4 overall roto points = Fine
protection years?? 3 - starting 1st year after breaking 150AB/50IP
40 man roster = Agree - no need for 45
1 free drop = If we really must - haven't most teams (including mine) already had their chance with this?
contraction draft = Fine - would prefer a random order draft though
|
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM (Eps) on Mar 15, 2009 6:30:04 GMT 5
I'll follow James' lead and copy:
Cap 115m = Agree
Divisions in ROTO = Really dont like, but matters little
Payout top 4 overall roto points = ok
protection years?? 3 - starting 1st year after breaking 150AB/50IP
40 man roster = Agree - NO need for 45
1 free drop = NO way, simply not needed
contraction draft = ok with me
|
|
|
|
Post by Rays GM (Zach) on Mar 15, 2009 6:58:53 GMT 5
So I guess I should give an answer.
Cap 115m = Going to be for a while
Divisions in ROTO = Dead issue aint hppening.
Payout top 4 overall roto points = Keeps the interest
protection years?? 3 - starting the yr they pass 150AB/50IP
40 man roster = Agree - Looks like 40 is going to win
1 free drop = Not going to happen, most of you already had one.
contraction draft = Starting Monday
|
|
