Vote! - Incentive to compete

[Minnesota Twins]

In discussion this had 4 people on favor and no negative comments. Let's vote. Reply yes or no w reasoning if you like, but no alternative discussions right now.

Goal: Provide incentive for teams who are not in contention to finish with as many points as possible without making it too difficult to dig yourself out of the cellar.

This proposal is inspired by some of the rule changes MLB is tossing around with regard to using revenue sharing as a disincentive for tanking.

The proposed rule change is this... team's will get extra 'in-season' salary cap room depending on their finish in the previous year.

We could create tiers and based on those tiers, you get extra cash to use IN SEASON (not for FA bidding) for the next season.

Example:

Teams 1-2... no extra cash. Flags are reward enough.
Teams 3-8... salary cap goes to $95m on opening day.
Teams 9-13... salary cap goes to $93m on opening day.
Team 14... shoulda tried harder.

I think it's just enough to provide incentive to not finish last, while not enough to make it too hard to move up in the standings

[Minnesota Twins]

It's a yes for me.

[torontobluejays]

I'm in favor of an incentive, but not giving someone extra money for not winning and not sucking. If we take money away from a team for not meeting minimum innings pitched, why not take money from the team that finishes in last place. If not taking away money, take away the first pick associated with the last place finish or take other draft picks.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

I thought I proposed something like this years ago. Of course, I've proposed all sorts of crazy things just to see what people might like.

I'm always in favor of anything that makes more people try to win, and fewer people try to lose.

[[e-mail]]

Sounds good Minnesota. I vote Yes at least for trial run

[Detroit]

Ok, I’m in favor, but I would like to see the structure change slightly.

1 - fake trophy
2-6 - 95k
7-13 - 92.5k
14 - maybe next year

My opinion, only first and last get nothing. Gives last place incentive not to finish in last place.

[Deleted]

I am ok with it.

[Minnesota Twins]

Pitt this is exact copy of your proposal we just never voted for it because a million ideas got mixed in

[Minnesota Twins]

We can even say after 2020 it is enacted for a trial yr to be reevaluated after 2021 season

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

Jun 18, 2019 20:16:52 GMT -5 Minnesota Twins said:

Pitt this is exact copy of your proposal we just never voted for it because a million ideas got mixed in

Glad I didn't say it was stupid.

[Deleted]

If it’s yes or no, i vote yes.

[Deleted]

I don't think we need it. Too many little rules already in this league. Why have to keep tracks of another one. KISS it.

start with 90 million (off season)
cap to 120 million (in season) that's 1/3 of the cap.

Also players cut to 50% of the contract in future years. No relief for signing or accepting a bad contract.

[Minnesota Twins]

Vote is 6 for and 2 against... Anyone else want to weigh in?

[San Diego]

Not sure what exactly we’re voting on here. You give the one example. Is that it or are we voting for a similar structure that will be decided on after vote? And, I believe it was in the Texas chat, we were discussing a Hard Cap and at some other point we were discussing a $90 Mil cap in off season and another $30 or so when season started. Which way are we headed?