Post by New York Yankees on Mar 8, 2019 9:47:32 GMT -5
I kind of like Jays idea, it would force teams to remain competitive or face fines. That team would be less inclined to Dump players for fear of not reaching minimums.
Rethinking my earlier post about tanking, I think it would be a better idea to use a plan similar to our failure to reach the minimum innings pitched. We set a minimum number of points for the season. If your team fails to reach the limit, you lose $ for each point under minimum. This allows a good last place team to not be fined, but would also allow multiple teams to lose $ if they fail to reach the minimum points.
Only catch is that it would limit teams from “rebuilding” the way they might want or be able to. Take Texas for instance. That Stanton contract (amongst other things) is killing his ability to rebuild and remain competitive. And, now your going to penalize him if he doesn’t reach a certain points level? I don’t like it.
We should be thinking the other way. Rewards to teams instead of penalties.
Post by ChrisMac777@aim.com on Mar 8, 2019 19:04:59 GMT -5
I like one of the two Pitts ideas. Like Philly said, any evidence someone is throwing games to chance for the 1st overall pick, anywhere from a fine up to exiting from league (ie not starting players in your Yahoos). Against Jays idea, sorry. I'm with Detroit on this. I might want to rebuild my team towards end of season with an eye towards next year, and dont need to worry about a penalty.
We are always going to have winners and losers. Coming up with a system that forces competitiveness but at same time takes away my ability to tweak my roster the way I want (What I see as creating competitive team might differ from your idea, nuance in everything)-I am against.
I am not so against Jays idea that I would leave because of it, if it got voted. You have my commitment that I am here if voted one way or another. Everyone's intentions are good all around. But I just think this is not a way to go. Pitts original 1st post in this thread, I like either idea.
Post by ChrisMac777@aim.com on Mar 8, 2019 19:14:09 GMT -5
Also, one suggestion. Whatever idea we land on. Let's trial the thing please for like a year or two before making it rule of the land, and come back to it for a vote again to make it permenant (if it's something dramatic at least of a change)
Only catch is that it would limit teams from “rebuilding” the way they might want or be able to. Take Texas for instance. That Stanton contract (amongst other things) is killing his ability to rebuild and remain competitive. And, now your going to penalize him if he doesn’t reach a certain points level? I don’t like it.
We should be thinking the other way. Rewards to teams instead of penalties.
