|
|
Post by Dodgers GM (Rob) on Mar 19, 2015 17:04:19 GMT -5
Hey Everyone,
Just wanted to let you know of some changes to the rules:
1. First Year Player Draft: The order of the draft is random. We will not do a 1st pick to worst record setup in order to discourage tanking to get the top pick. If you have to rebuild because you don't like your team that is fine, but do not expect to get the first pick of the First Year Player draft with this strategy.
2. Free Agent Prospect bidding: This will be done during the All-Star Break. Each team will put in there bids and I will review them on that Friday of the All-star break and post the winners. Players who are drafted in the First Year Player Draft for the current year are not eligible for the Free Agent Prospect bidding. You must wait until the end of the year to draft those players.
3. Protected Prospects (PP) Players: When a minor leaguer accrues 150ABs/50IP they still cost nothing for that current year. It is not until the next season that they start costing $0.5M. This is to prevent teams to have to do some shuffling just because a minor leaguer they have crosses the 150AB/50IP threshold.
4. Bid increments for FA: I added that the lowest denomination in bid increments is 100k. Any bid that has a 10k, 1k, 100 etc. will not be accepted. So if you bid .25 on a player that bid will be invalid. The only way to see .25 or something like that is if you take a players real life contract.
5. Free Agent bids: I have not put this in the rules yet, but I will still state it here. For Free Agency I will only take one PM per team per round of Free Agency and will only take the first PM you send me. The only way I will take a new PM for bids is if you state you would like to change your bids in another PM or if you want to add a player you to your current list you must also submit the original list. This can alter your bids since if you tie someone else can get the tie breaker since they submit there bids first.
These are the changes for now. If you have any questions about the rule changes feel free to PM me, Tim or Scott and we will be happy to clarify the rules for you.
Thanks,
Rob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2015 18:59:37 GMT -5
1. I think having a random draft order for first year draft is not a good route. That makes no sense to me. Idc if we did like a lottery or like the bottom 10 records are random, but the draft being random is, in my opinion, not good for the longevity of the league.
2. Having a rounded bidding system is fine, but I think having it to the hundredths place is not too difficult. Seems like the more bids you have that are rounded to the Millions place will have more ties meaning more tiebreakers. Idk what the tiebreaker is but if it is whoever put the bid in first that puts those who can't get on at often at a disadvantage.
This are just my initial thoughts on these rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angels GM (Scott) on Mar 19, 2015 19:12:19 GMT -5
Rounding to the tenths is fine. If an AAS bid of 15.6 beats a 15.4, then so be it. How many people are going to tie someone else's bidding exactly to the tenth. I sort bids in another league where 100k increments are it and ties are extremely rare.
|
|
|
|
Post by z - Tim on Mar 19, 2015 19:13:50 GMT -5
The draft won't be completely random, those were just rules summaries above, not the full rules so I can add a little detail. We will have a lottery for all the teams that do not make the playoffs to determine draft order. All playoff teams will be at end of the draft order by their finish in the playoffs. So the truly top teams will still pick at the end of the draft. But for the non-playoff teams there will be no incentive to tank to try and get a high pick. All the non-playoff teams will enter a lottery for pick order. None of the playoff teams though will be in that lottery, so its not fully random here, the top teams are going to be put at the back.
|
|
|
|
Post by z - El Guapo - retired on Mar 19, 2015 19:22:46 GMT -5
Guessing the ordinary peones in the league have no vote on this. We see no reason to do a random draft. Seems double punishment for the bottom teams -- bad finish and then a meh pick. This sort of approach seems more punitive than preventive - won;t stop teams from gambling to getting a high pick and yet further cripples bad teams by not giving them a high-ranked pick they deserve (ala MLB baseball approach and just about every league we've ever played).
If a team is bad enough to finish at the bottom, it deserves to receive a top rank pick, not a lotto pick.
Why stick this wrinkle in now, after the draft is pretty nearly finished? You have bad day or something?
|
|
|
|
Post by z - Tim on Mar 19, 2015 19:31:09 GMT -5
Guessing the ordinary peones in the league have no vote on this. We see no reason to do a random draft. Seems double punishment for the bottom teams -- bad finish and then a meh pick. This sort of approach seems more punitive than preventive - won;t stop teams from gambling to getting a high pick and yet further cripples bad teams by not giving them a high-ranked pick they deserve (ala MLB baseball approach and just about every league we've ever played). If a team is bad enough to finish at the bottom, it deserves to receive a top rank pick, not a lotto pick. Why stick this wrinkle in now, after the draft is pretty nearly finished? You have bad day or something? Just clarifying stuff before people can start trading off the majors etc. Seems to be the right time to clarify this stuff now rather than wait until people start selling off. As for deserving, its very often the case in these leagues that the teams with the worst records are not truly the worse teams, they are often very talented rosters, so those teams don't "deserve" the picks over less talented rosters simply. A lot of times, teams have bad records in these sorts of leagues simply because they choose to tank and not have any or few MLBers at all (there are no fans to buy tickets unlike real ball). Its not about being punitive, we just aren't going to reward teams for tanking, and correspondingly punish those teams that don't tank but are actually worse teams talent wise. If the least talented teams actually had the worst records, a reverse finish draft works fine, but usually that's not the case in these sorts of leagues. So no, there will be no reward for not tanking. |
|
|
|
Post by Angels GM (Scott) on Mar 19, 2015 19:32:01 GMT -5
The idea was to implement this before people could start trading away for minors, so that everyone knows ahead of time and has a fair shake at evaluating whether or not selling off is something they want to do. Would be bad form to do this after people start trading away their major leaguers for future minor leaguers.
And what does the current draft have to do with this? If you drafted with the intent to lose then that's on you.
|
|
|
|
Post by z - El Guapo - retired on Mar 19, 2015 19:34:17 GMT -5
So the bottom team could get the #11 pick in the draft and the team that finishes 11th could be rewarded with the Rd #1.1 pick? Makes no sense whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angels GM (Scott) on Mar 19, 2015 19:35:05 GMT -5
Also, I would assume the lottery is pretty heavily weighted towards those that finish last. The NBA and NHL do lotteries and the bad teams still get high picks.
|
|
|
|
Post by z - El Guapo - retired on Mar 19, 2015 19:45:27 GMT -5
It's probably not about drafting to lose so much as drafting smart to build a team. If you manage your team well, your team improves and consequently drafts further down the draft. We don't see that as a problem that needs fixing.
We already assessed our club as poorly conceived. Our option is to trade our talent for prospects or remain mediocre. Now you are telling us we don't won't have a great pick, either. That seems punitive. Sounds like a system to have clubs mired in mediocrity?
|
|
|
|
Post by z - El Guapo - retired on Mar 19, 2015 19:45:48 GMT -5
It's probably not about drafting to lose so much as drafting smart to build a team. If you manage your team well, your team improves and consequently drafts further down the draft. We don't see that as a problem that needs fixing.
We already assessed our club as poorly conceived. Our option is to trade our talent for prospects or remain mediocre. Now you are telling us we don't won't have a great pick, either. That seems punitive. Sounds like a system to have clubs mired in mediocrity?
|
|
|
|
Post by z - Tim on Mar 19, 2015 19:55:54 GMT -5
There's nothing punitive. You can sell off all you major leaguers for minor leaguers if you want. We just aren't going to reward teams with a high draft pick for doing so. You can still trade for prospects if you want to. But we are trying to set the system up to remove any reward/incentive to tank.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2015 19:57:33 GMT -5
I agree that a lot of times teams that finish near the bottom are loaded with minor league talent and are in pretty good overall shape. I support this rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angels GM (Scott) on Mar 19, 2015 19:57:45 GMT -5
Also, you are making an assumption that you are gonna get a bad pick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2015 20:06:31 GMT -5
Who changes rules after the draft?  So team like Rangers which lost Top players to injuries already and probably will lose more players to injury. So team like that who tried to compete but because of unlucky injury bug finishes last and because of random lottery gets to pick in 20's. Not fair. I would prefer consolation playoffs rather then a mystery lottery that no one here will see. This is not NFL or NBA where rookies contribute right away. |
|
|
|
Post by z - Tim on Mar 19, 2015 20:17:06 GMT -5
well serge, we're tying to tie up all the loose ends here mostly before mlb-milb trading begins and draft order was one of them.
as for finishing last, finishing last has pretty low correlation to how bad your team is in leagues like this. the "bottom 5" teams in a league like this is usually stocked with a number of teams who are talented but whose records were bad because they chose to tank the season and sell off their major leaguers. people don't finish at the bottom because of injuries but because they choose to sell off. given that we know that, if we give those teams pick priority we are just rewarding them for selling off, we're not giving them a pick because they have no talent on their team. its very often in these leagues that the least talented teams finish the year before 10th from the bottom or so. so if only give them pick 10 instead of chance at no1, how fair is that. why should we punish those teams for not selling off. in any case, if the least talented teams actually had the worst records, it'd be different, but that's very much not the case. all giving the worst record the no1 pick does is create a race to the bottom get the pick. it doesn't give the least talented teams more help, it just gives the teams that tank the best a better pick.
we are definitely open to comments here. but we want a system that gives the actual least talented teams a chance at the top pick rather than just the teams that sell off all their major leaguers. straight reverse order is rewarding tanking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2015 20:24:26 GMT -5
100% against the rule change.
The worst record should receive the highest draft pick.
Period.
There's absolutely no reason to change this now.
It's terrible.
I've played in dynasty leagues for over a decade and there has never been a serious issue regarding tanking.
The League polices itself and if somebody is not starting there full potential MAJOR LEAGUE lineup...a warning and punishment is assessed.
BUT THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF A DYNASTY LEAGUE DRAFT MUST REMAIN WORST RECORD FIRST AND BEST RECORD LAST.
Parity and the integrity of the League depends on this structure.
Potential lineup tinkering can be dealt with thru vigilance and clearly stated sanctions in the rules.
Fucking with the structure of the draft is simply terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angels GM (Scott) on Mar 19, 2015 20:28:56 GMT -5
Tim makes a good point here. A team like the Rangers who has injuries actually benefits from this. The only way a team like the Rangers doesn't benefit is if they choose to sell off all their viable parts and starts to tank. A team competing, even with several injuries, will still always finish ahead of a team that starts nobody because they only have specs.
This isn't changing a rule after the fact... Unless someone wants to step forward now and honestly say they have already started tanking and working towards getting a better draft pick. And if that's the case, please explain what you have done to purposely tank, because we havnt allowed trading of MLB for specs yet. If you are already drafting, during the initial draft, with the intent to lose then this is a poor strategy for tanking anyways since you'd have less valuable MLB players to trade away for future assets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2015 20:29:14 GMT -5
What if it's like this: random among bottom 5, random among next bottom 5, random among next bottom 5 until we reach the playoff teams?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2015 20:29:43 GMT -5
And let's define tanking here:
Tanking is only when u choose to not start your optimum Fantrax lineup(MLB roster).
IT IS NOT WHEN A GM TRADES AWAY ASSETS DURING THE SEASON OR AT THE TRADE DEADLINE.
That's called strategy and it's employed by smart GMs in almost every sport.
It's none of our business and not our place to dictate to teams what to do with their major and minor league assets.
It IS our duty to the League to ensure they start a reasonably full Fantrax lineup.
Just my two cents here.
|
|
