Start posting here

[Minnesota Twins]

1st is there a rule where you can't bid on your own cut guy? Can we get the rules section updated if they aren't because I don't remember it (which means nothing) 2nd I don't see why it is a problem if Hanley was cut he would get a huge contract. We are not going to have a shortage of players for Free Agency. We have to limit it to only so many so it doesn't run forever. I think people are worrying for no reason, but that's just me...

[torontobluejays]

I believe this is the 4th season of the leauge. Next year is when many of the original 5 year contracts expire. There are alot of stars with 4 year contracts that expire this season.

There are reasons why owners do not max out their salary caps. It allows them to make trades for the higher priced players mid-season. If everyone was maxed out at the salary cap mid-season, it would be difficult for owners to make trades. Also, it allows owners to bid on those FAs who were not signed during the off season but are having good seasons. It just follows that those who save money during the season, should not be penalized for their fiscal control.

Also, your example of Hanley is wrong. Pittsburgh is not penalized because he can cut Hanley at any time. If he gets cut by Pittsburgh, he is on the open market. All 13 team have an opportunity to sign him. The timing of his being cut just determines who may be in a better position to sign him. Waiting until the off season just means those teams with most money in the off season have the best chance to sign him as opposed to those owners with the most money during the season.

There will be plenty of great FAs available during the off season. Even under your system, not everyone has the chance of getting a stud player. An owners ability to get a stud player in the off season will still be determined by their available money. Those with the most money will have the best chance to sign the stud players.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

Re: Minnesota - Yes, I think there is a rule that if you cut a player you can't bid on him until the next FA blind bid session. I will search the forums to make sure we agreed to that and will update the rules. I will, EVENTUALLY, get all the rules on 'paper' in one place. Just super busy...might not be until off season. (I've got 3 kids age 2-4-6 and my wife works like 80 hours a week, plus my 9-5 job.)

Good stuff here guys. Thanks to everyone who weighed in. Everyone's opinion does count and is heard!

[newyorkyankees]

Jun 7, 2011 8:24:24 GMT -5 ex-Pittsburgh Pirates said:

Re: Minnesota - Yes, I think there is a rule that if you cut a player you can't bid on him until the next FA blind bid session. I will search the forums to make sure we agreed to that and will update the rules. I will, EVENTUALLY, get all the rules on 'paper' in one place. Just super busy...might not be until off season. (I've got 3 kids age 2-4-6 and my wife works like 80 hours a week, plus my 9-5 job.)

Good stuff here guys. Thanks to everyone who weighed in. Everyone's opinion does count and is heard![/quote

3 kids, 2 year intervals. Time for another one. Soon you will have your own minor league system to draw from.

[newyorkyankees]

Something I had been thinking about and kept forgetting to post:

In my Dynasty Hockey League we have a process where we are responsible for 50% of a waived/released players contract until it expires based on what it was when we drafted/signed/traded for him or whatever.

If that player is subsequently picked up by another team our responsibility for the players contract terminates at that point with the new team of course being responsible for full contract.

We use real salaries and do not bid but I was wondering if this was ever considered for implementation. I haven't checked but I am sure there are a handful of players who have a few contracts in our league, with former teams and current teams.

Might open up a little cap room for some teams?

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

i dont like it for 2 reasons:

1. it would make some players completely un-ownable. for example, if i cut hanley, who is going to pick him up knowing they have to pay him $20m this year? so a player like hanley becomes unownable.

2. add to the administrative nightmare. it already requires 2 very involved people to run the league.

thank you for the suggestion though. keep them coming!

[torontobluejays]

Here is an off season rule change. The off season gets boring between the end of the FA bidding and spring training. I would propose that we bid on ALL FA's, not just the main players. This will keep the off-season interesting longer. With the 12 hour rule already in place, those players no one is interested in will be done quicker in the past. It's just an idea.

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

in the past, we have always been liberal about allowing owners to 'nominate' a player for bidding. how about instead of having to go through the commish, at the end of the 'regular' list of players, there is a period where people can nominate anyone they want to bid on.
the list of potential players is endless. there will always have to be some arbitrary cut-off.

[torontobluejays]

i agree that there is a potential for an endless list of players. We can set an arbitrary limits on ABs and Innings similar to that of Rookies. Any player who had 150 AB or 50 innings pitched is automatically up for FA bidding. These numbers can be a starting point, I think that the innings pitched should be lower because of RPs. But this is an idea to discuss.

I don't think it is a good idea to have owners nominate anyone that they want to bid on after the regular list. Why would an owner want to call attention to a FA that they want to get and run the risk of another owner either running up his cost or getting him altogether. If they wait until the regular FA bidding, they can get a FA alot cheaper.