|
|
Post by Marlins GM (Anthony) on Jun 1, 2017 10:40:40 GMT -5
Figured I'd start a thread to keep things clean in the FA thread. Feel free to voice your opinions below.
Mine personally...
So long as a player is on a ML roster and logged inning(s) he should be available for FA bidding. In the offseason, same rules apply though (50/150), but this idea that a non rostered player and in most cases, RP should have to wait until he logs 50 innings seems a bit excessive. RP'ing is a huge part of this league and RP's debut all the time and often times come out of nowhere. In some cases, it could take a whole season for some of these guys to eclipse the 50 inning limit.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstrosGM (Matt P) on Jun 1, 2017 11:26:01 GMT -5
As long as they are signed via a SB, I have no problem with it Anthony. In a league similar to this one, where it had prohibited anyone with less than 150 ABs/50 IPs from being signed, it was year that Yangervis Solarte went nuts for the Yankees. When he finally surpassed 150 ABs, he was signed to a ridiculous $13.5M for 4 years contract that owner nearly instantly regretted. As it stands now, Wandy Peralta's contract when he comes available will likely be batshit crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marlins GM (Anthony) on Jun 1, 2017 12:13:19 GMT -5
As long as they are signed via a SB, I have no problem with it Anthony. In a league similar to this one, where it had prohibited anyone with less than 150 ABs/50 IPs from being signed, it was year that Yangervis Solarte went nuts for the Yankees. When he finally surpassed 150 ABs, he was signed to a ridiculous $13.5M for 4 years contract that owner nearly instantly regretted. As it stands now, Wandy Peralta's contract when he comes available will likely be batshit crazy. Yeah, there are pitfalls to a FA structure similar to this one where it's very life like and a bad contract can really restrict what you can do w/ your roster moving forward. That said...if an owner is foolish enough to give out huge contracts to either guys w/ no track record, or marginal track record then that's on them. |
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM (Brad) on Jun 2, 2017 14:45:05 GMT -5
First off, I am open to this idea. I'm in other leagues where we use the signing bonus structure in weekly, in-season free agency for guys under the 50/150 qualifiers, and it works well. But here are my issues... - Competitive balance - The SB rule gives further competitive balance to the most active owners. We want to promote activity, of course, but it means that a minority of franchises will be able to monopolize controllable, ML assets to an even further extent than they already do.
- League differentiation - There is drift among a core of leagues towards having the same rules. The argument comes up "in this or that league this is how it works, and it's great" which is a perfectly reasonable position to take, but keeping some differences is important, imo. Different rules lead to differences in most effective strategies and tactics.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstrosGM (Matt P) on Jun 2, 2017 15:16:02 GMT -5
First off, I am open to this idea. I'm in other leagues where we use the signing bonus structure in weekly, in-season free agency for guys under the 50/150 qualifiers, and it works well. But here are my issues... - Competitive balance - The SB rule gives further competitive balance to the most active owners. We want to promote activity, of course, but it means that a minority of franchises will be able to monopolize controllable, ML assets to an even further extent than they already do.
- League differentiation - There is drift among a core of leagues towards having the same rules. The argument comes up "in this or that league this is how it works, and it's great" which is a perfectly reasonable position to take, but keeping some differences is important, imo. Different rules lead to differences in most effective strategies and tactics.
Competitive balance - usually, the guys who would be eligible for SBs in season are the guys that aren't on the prospect radar and need to be PP as they are the type of guys that need to have the option to store in the minor leagues. RPs, 5th Starters, and UT/off the bench hitters. While these guys can make a good team better, and is some cases like Wandy Peralta, be a valuable long term asset, it likely isn't a guy who will be a superstar. The most successful teams I have found have won through the draft and through RFA, not via in season SBs. League differentiation - If you want the league to be different, how about extra once a month SB period where only assets with more than 1 AB/ 1 IP and less than 150 ABs/50 IPs are available to bid, and have a schedule of these set at the beginning of the season. Less active teams will at least be made aware of these opportunities, and you have less players stuck on the waiver wire with no way to acquire them. |
|
