Off-Season FA bidding change

[LA Dodgers]

Taking away the right to trade picks and money would seriously hurt this league. Most teams that have contended or Won this league risked future years to do so. Thats what makes this league far more fun than standard fantasy leagues. Toronto u said "U built your team live with it". How do u think alot teams were built? By trading picks players or money or so forth. If it were just player for player then no one would trade due to everyone valuing the players different.

[Minnesota Twins]

I'm not on favor of discouraging trading at all, trading is the best part!

Not apples to apples but in my other dynasty we have incentives to try...

. Rewards
a. The following are the rewards each manager receives at the end of the season:
i. League Champion: 1st Round Rookie Pick, $3 in permanent salary cap
ii. 2nd Place: 2nd Round Rookie Pick, $2 in permanent salary cap
iii. 3rd Place: 3rd Round Rookie Pick, $1 in permanent salary cap
iv. 4th Place: 4th Round Rookie Pick
v. 5th Place: 5th Round Rookie Pick

[torontobluejays]

LA, I agree with you that this is a very fun league. The owners in this league are great from top to bottom. I am addressing the issues that were brought up. My opinion is the same as it has always been. Do not change the rules, FA or trades. If we are going to make changes to FA bidding, why not make changes to trades. You asked how do I think a lot of teams were built. Many teams were built on trades. Many were built with one year contracts. By making changes to either the FA bidding or trades, we may be taking away someone's option for building their team and make the league a lot less fun.

[Detroit]

I vote no change. I'm not sold that any changes are needed. The current structure may not look great, but it works, for the most part.

[New York Yankees]

Is this an ACTIVE league...heck YES?! Trades, FA Bids, 2 Drafts each year, & Crazy Posts ALL make this a FANTASTIC league!!

My only question then is...If it ain't BROKE, y try to FIX it??? The MORE Rules u make, the harder it is to manage and it usually makes it much LESS fun for all!!!

[New York Yankees]

As long as the competitive balance is there, I see no reason to make changes. In fact, I didn't like the 7-day mandatory promotion/demotion rule change. Let me re-phrase that a little, I think it should NOT be a Hard Rule. In other words, if a player gets injured or demoted in MLB, then u should be able to send down or promote (to cover for another injured player) b4 that 7 day period is over.

[LA Dodgers]

As much as i may like some of the new proposed ideas i would agree if it aint broke dont fix it. Its not prefect and but it has worked for this long.

[Deleted]

I had a big issue with old Boston trading Stanton at the end of April and paying his salary only weeks into the baseball season. I just didn't have time to post about it.

Chicago has a good point and we all know this, too many $20-$35 million 1 years contracts then teams trade them off paying future salary.

Baltimore is correct saying penalties are not severe enough for cutting a player.

How about your are not allowed to pay traded salary? Or if you can the team trading eats a future penalty, next year or multi years
Teams must stay under the salary cup all years? (Toronto's idea I like it)
More severe penalty releasing players (50-75% in future years)

Not sure any of this helps eliminate 1 year contracts

[LA Dodgers]

Not all 1yr contracts are for star players. There is a purpose for them. Picking up a fa during the year for 1yr deal i have no problem with. But the big 1yr deal fa are kinda ridiculous.

[Minnesota Twins]

Definitely I think option B but only in offseason fa bidding, in season rentals are different.

[Deleted]

I would disagree that it is not broke. In a 14 team league when teams in the top 5 are selling out at the halfway point for next year that is a problem to me. Not calling anyone out. I probably would have done the same thing and in fact I sold out in October. I definitely do not want to make trading stop or lower team activity, but I feel the league would be so much better with a incentive or a reason to get 3rd instead of 13th.

[New York Yankees]

Bal, that's a valid point. Also, how do we prevent a team from "playing" for last place just to ensure they get the top pick next year (both drafts) I'm not saying that's the case this yr (sorry Pitt), but if a team knows they r out of it, what would prevent them from tanking?

[torontobluejays]

How about this. Instead of the graduated number of years of contract based upon salary, maybe have blind bidding for the off season free agency. Players auction dates can be scheduled. Several players a day. This forces anyone interested in a player to put their best bid up front. An additional rule would be if two bids are for the same money, but differing years, the more years wins the bid. My guess is that contract values will drop as the result of making only one bid. Not many will want to over pay with a single bid, not knowing what anyone else is thinking.

This way, there are no auctions that go one for days. We avoid the annual complaining about the $100K bid increases. We do not have to wait 24 hours to expire for the auction to end. No team bidding on players that they are not interested in but bidding just to run up the cost. Every morning, everyone awaits to see who won the bids the day before and for how much. The auctions could be spread out so something is going on ALL off season, rather than having a month or two of no activity.

[New York Yankees]

I say we flip the draft order to reward the best teams and to penalize those that tank. In reality, most "Good" teams have already traded their picks away to get better!!!

That's incentive enough to play for 3rd or 4th, instead of not trying n finishing 10th or 11th. Just sayin'

[torontobluejays]

One way to stop tanking is to stop making drafting position based upon the standings. Use the system that Pitts uses for selecting the tie breaker for selecting draft order.