commish, if yahoo lets you...can you copy/paste the list of stats that can be used for the game? i looked at it before transferring to you, dont recall any sabremetric stats.
Post by ex-Pittsburgh Pirates on Feb 21, 2011 21:02:50 GMT -5
Games Played Games Started At Bats Runs Hits Singles Doubles Triples Home Runs Runs Batted In Sacrifice Hits Sacrifice Flys Stolen Bases Caught Stealing Walks Intentional Walks Hit By Pitch Strikeouts Ground Into Double Play Total Bases Putouts Assists Errors Fielding Percentage Batting Average On-base Percentage Slugging Percentage On-base + Slugging Percentage Extra Base Hits Net Stolen Bases Stolen Base Percentage Hitting for the Cycle Plate Appearances Grand Slam Home Runs Outfield Assists Double Plays Turned Catcher Interference
Post by ex-Pittsburgh Pirates on Jun 5, 2011 13:54:51 GMT -5
Suggestion for a rule change...If you lose a high priced Free Agent, you get a supplemental draft pick in the next year's entry draft.
Reasons why we might like this rule: 1. It would help mitigate the 'salary dumping' of lower teams to higher teams later in the year. 2. It would reduce the 'cut and resign end of contract guys' problem. 3. It's similar to the real life MLB rule.
How would it work? I see creating 2 classes of players...Players making $10m or more are Class A. Players making between $5m and $10m are Class B. (No draft pick considerations for players making less than $5m.
If you lose a Class A free agent, you get a supplemental pick that would come between the 1st and 2nd round. The supplemental pick order would be based on the salary of the player lost (highest paid lost player is first pick and so on).
If you lose a Class B free agent, you get a supplemental pick after the 2nd round. Again the order is according to the salary of the player lost.
I'm thinking supplemental picks cannot be traded. Use it or lose it.
This would not make any difference unless the maximum # of minor league years (currently 75) is increased or eliminated, or we allow teams to drop an unlimited number of minor leaguers. We dropped 2 rounds out of each draft because too many teams were maxed out on their minor league years and are talking about limiting the # of minor league drops to be allowed. Now we would be adding more players back into the draft. Seems contradictory to me.
Post by ex-Pittsburgh Pirates on Jun 6, 2011 16:29:00 GMT -5
Sounds like most people are against the rule. (I'm not necessarily for it, just throwing it out there as a proposal.)
I do want to make 1 point though...the concern isn't only that teams will try to cut and resign players at a discount. Generally, I have no problem with that. You take the risk, you reap the rewards.
The problem is that when end of contract players are cut and go into the blind bid process, they never get into the free agent process. many teams (usually the teams making a push for the penant) are close to the cap in salary during the season...especially near the end of the season. Allowing teams to cut and resign players gives those teams with low salary during the year a huge advantage in that they dont have to compete with the teams tight against the cap to resign those players. so the whole point of having limited term contracts (allowing teams to have a fair shot at the free agent pool) is defeated.
for example, take hanley ramirez. (no please, take him). how would you feel if you were competing for the pennant in mid september, tight against the cap, and suddenly i decide to cut him so i could resign him to a long term contract instead of losing him to free agency? instead of competing against all the teams during the free agent period, id instead only have to compete with a couple of teams who were already out of the pennant picture and had the salary cap space to make blind bids.
im not saying that the above proposal is the answer to this 'problem.' just something i threw out to start a discussion. id like to hear what people think about the situation i describe. i you agree it is an issue, id also like to hear some ideas for rule changes that could help. or if nobody thinks it is a problem, then like most items, this one will die in committee.
you can always pm me if you dont want to post in public.
pitts is correct. this would and is a problem. all the big name players need to be free agents at the end of the year. they also need to be bid on in the open market. that is what this league is based on, a salary cap with free agents. who cares if some cuts delmon young and he gets signed to minimum 5 year contract but if puljos, fielder, miguel cabrera, h. ramirez get cut i can't bid because i'm against the cap. that's not how the system is designed to work.
what i propose is the top 50 (75 or 100 or ?) players listed on yahoo at the start of the season, of those players who are in the last year of their contract in this league, gets cut they can only be signed for the remainder of the year. that way all the big name players will be free agents in 5 years or less. the list can be posted on the messageboard at the start of the season.
this will work. the list will change a little from year to year but all the big names will be out there. i really don't think anyone will cut a superstar with more than 1 year remaining.
Post by newyorkyankees on Jun 6, 2011 16:47:57 GMT -5
Isn't there a rule that if you cut someone you have to wait an entire bidding cycle to bid on them again?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding things. It happens. My ex wife once said she had an itch and I clearly heard her say she was a b i t c h and so agreed, and well, um nevermind.
So in the case of a Brian McCann say I wait until right near the end of the season to release him. Even if only 1 other team had any cash at all, even 500G they could sign him even if I had 20M because I'm forced to wait am I not?
pitts is correct. this would and is a problem. all the big name players need to be free agents at the end of the year. they also need to be bid on in the open market. that is what this league is based on, a salary cap with free agents. who cares if some cuts delmon young and he gets signed to minimum 5 year contract but if puljos, fielder, miguel cabrera, h. ramirez get cut i can't bid because i'm against the cap. that's not how the system is designed to work.
what i propose is the top 50 (75 or 100 or ?) players listed on yahoo at the start of the season, of those players who are in the last year of their contract in this league, gets cut they can only be signed for the remainder of the year. that way all the big name players will be free agents in 5 years or less. the list can be posted on the messageboard at the start of the season.
this will work. the list will change a little from year to year but all the big names will be out there. i really don't think anyone will cut a superstar with more than 1 year remaining.
My only question with that would be that the top 50-75-100 at the beginning of the year are not necessarily the same as we get to the end of the season. Someone less heralded who is in the last year of their contract suddenly blossoms during the year and can be considered a full blown stud so they don't fall under these guidelines.
What might be better is to set a date, say September 1 of each season where anyone "released" can only be resigned till the end of the current season. Anyone already in FA can be signed for whatever. This way ther is no need to quantify whether they rate the star player tag or not.
its kinda self-policing. you wont do it for the very reasons you mentioned. and if you do cut him there is no guarantee you will be the highest bidder....then you just 'give' him away. take that chance? tight against the cap? (sell me some draft picks.) no $$$, thats the way you played it. stuck with hanley? cut him and be sure that i'll drop rollins and save $10mil to get hanley. no problems. we havent really had any problems with this, have we? i suspect you want to drop that slug for salary reasons and then acquire other players. go on drop him to me. i'll be waiting.
[edit] philly, i'm not familiar or remember that 1 week waiting rule. is there a post about it somewhere in here? thanks.
Post by torontobluejays on Jun 6, 2011 18:23:53 GMT -5
Chicago is right about those who put themselves tight against the cap. I think I am the owner with the least cap room and I know I did it to myself. If I can't bid on a FA that is available, it is my fault. I have no complaints with the current system. The system has not be abused and I see no reason to change it.
Post by ex-Pittsburgh Pirates on Jun 6, 2011 19:46:36 GMT -5
1 last thing...the rule that 'you cant bid on your own dropped player until the next cycle' does limit this a good bit. BUT...if i get wind of any collusive dropping (hey phillies, you drop player X and ill drop player Y and we can then bid on them) i will come down hard. (not that i ever suspect anyone here would try that.)
run your team any way you want. but collusion to subvert the rules is a no no. ive been in leagues where that kind of stuff went on and im very glad we have a great group of guys except for baltimore. that guy is a jerk.
being up against the salary cap in midseason doesn't not mean you should be penalized. no one would ever plan on not spending money in order to sign midseason free agents. i'm 60 million under the cap next season. that was planned. that's where all the free agents bids happen, in the offseason.
the system has not be abused? that is because all the superstars were signed to 5 years contracts and are free agents this year. this is year 5 for the league, if you were not a superstar at that time you have a great player with a cheap salary (joey votto). if you were a good player at that time but now stink chances of your original contract still in effect are zero (alfonso soriano). no one is cutting joey votto but sorianso was already cut and maybe was cut twice.
the system has been abused. jonathan broxton was cut last year when learned he was out for the year. was signed the next week, never made it to free agency.
what about carlos pena?? went out for the year in september. 2 teams bid over $18 million to sign him to sit on their bench to make sure he was a free agent next year.
2 cases, very minor but they still happened.
hanley is a good example for poor play but lets say "he's out for the year", pittsburgh should be allowed to cut hanley and his $19 million dollar salary to make room for a replacements. hanley never gets to be an open market free agent thus 13 teams lose out on an opportunity to sign a great player and build a team around. it's not beating the system but a loop hole. pitts shouldn't be penalized nor would he have done something wrong.
if you can't see why it's a good idea to have your best players become free agents in a league that's designed to have offseason free agent bidding then you'll never understand. the plan i put into place assures all of us that we will have a chance to get a stud player in the off season.
