can't blind bid on someone you cut rule

[Minnesota Twins]

"remember those you cut today, you cant bid on, on the next bid period. (minny--longoria)"

--> I know this is the law of the land, and I am not doing this to try to get Longoria back. I wasn't able to find where we decided it but I accept that it is currently the rule.

With that said my proposal is that we remove this rule for next year. The justification for the rule is so I can't cut a guy (Longoria) in the last year of his deal and 'sneak' a multi-year deal by winning the blind bid on the player I just cut. The likelihood anyone sneaks anything in this league is non-existent. I know I check in daily with the message board, and most owners do I think at least every couple days. Active owners make the ability to sneak anything by obsolete. So what it amounts to is an additional penalty on the cutter of said player. I cut the guy, I pay half his salary for a penalty. That should be enough! If I have Dexter Fowler on an expiring deal and I think he is going to be awesome I should be able to sign him to a long term deal whenever I want to, but to try to do so I have to cut him and risk the blind bid. Right now I have to let him play out his last year, win the triple crown, and then auction bid on him. I knew he was Babe Ruth part duex before but was handcuffed by the rules. If I want to cut a guy, pay half his salary, and then spend more to re-sign him to a new contract I should be able to.

Thank you and good day.

Love,

The Twins

[Deleted]

but then we also instituted the 24 hour free agent rule so that a manager cant sneak a player thru and so that everyone has a chance to bid on a cut player if he accesses the site.
i tend to agree with twinkie on this proposal. those who dont check-in regularly should miss out on 'bargains'.

[Minnesota Twins]

I'm cool with the 24 hour rule and think it is necessary to prevent cutting right before bidding to sneak thru. Also yeah... "bargains" lol

[torontobluejays]

I would want to keep the rule as is. There should be a risk to an owner who drops a player and wants to resign him. If we change the rule, I forsee alot of players not going through the free agent auction in the off season.

[Minnesota Twins]

This again? We only had feedback from 3 Ppl and was 2 in favor. This is my own personal least favorite rule. Say I own altuve for 13.9 mil on one yr but he tears acl and out for rest of season so I cut him, but why shouldnot I be able to bid cheap long term like everyone else.

[torontobluejays]

If Altuve would get injured with a season ending injury, you place him on the DL and bid on him during the FA season. You can still bid on him like everyone else at that time. There should be a risk if you cut someone. If you do not want him, everyone else should have the chance to sign him first.

[Minnesota Twins]

So I'm supposed to just sit on 6 mil (half his contract) for the rest of the season? Too harsh imo

[torontobluejays]

Sorta like being punished to sign a 5 year contract for someone you want to pay $25m when you only want to pay 1 year?

[ex-Pittsburgh Pirates]

It's a good rule I think. What we want to avoid are teams gaming the system to reduce contracts they already own. Mid-season, there are many teams against the cap who cannot bid on guys. It's not a free-market situation. Nobody can afford to pickup a 25m contract midseason. Nobody can afford even a $15m contract. Maybe 2-3 teams can afford $10m.

So let's say you have a $25m player who is underperforming. Let's call him Robin Kano. Cut him. Now you have a $12.5m cap hit. Blind bid him for anything less than $12.5m and you effectively get him at a reduced contract.

Teams can't do this in real life. Baseball of course has guaranteed contracts so if you cut a $25m player, you owe $25. Of course, there is no cap in baseball. But think about capped leagues like the NFL. If you cut a $25m player there, he has to pass through waivers before you can resign him. In other words, every other team has a chance to sign him before he becomes a free agent. This rule tries to approximate that waiver process.

I'm open to further discussion.

[New York Yankees]

I agree that the former team should NOT be able to put a claim on their former player. If u want to risk getting them on FA later, then I'm ok with that.

[Deleted]

league has always been about the movement of players so everyone has a chance to 'own' the superstars. look at what happened when stanton became a fa. lot of excitement about which team could afford him so late in the auction. he would have gone undervalued in a blind.
stay the course

[Minnesota Twins]

I cut Shawn Kelley then next day he bones a closer, but I can't bid on him even if I want to. Stupid rule, dead horse beaten, good day.

[Minnesota Twins]

...becomes, idk where my phone got bones