Has there been any thought to changing the way the waivers system works? In my opinion the way it is set up now (organized by rank, doesn't put you at the back if you pick up a player, and resets weekly per the standings) is pretty broken.. So essentially one team (Ex: Nats last year) could have claimed every player if they wanted to. Basically if you are below the top 5 you aren't getting a player all year long.. Ex: If I place a claim at the #20 spot and no other claim has been placed, a team in front of me can jump up and block the claim by putting one in themselves (and still stay ahead of me in priority)..
I would think a system that is organized off of last years standings, that never resets - and if a team makes a claim goes to the back of the pack is the way to go.. I realize that we want to help the teams that are at the back of the pack, but they already get really good draft picks for being at the bottom..
Thanks for the feedback on this Jarrod. Not sure there's a perfect system, and here's why:
1. It's extremely rare that a team like Nats exists. Normally, there's fluidity in terms of who's last in the standings, particularly when you consider that we compete in 14 categories per week. That allows for many teams to go from last to middle of pack fairly easily. So to me, this is a rare thing.
2. If it does happen, helping them through waivers - even if it is for the entire season - is exactly what we should want. Firstly, they have to drop what they deem to be a lesser player, which enters waivers and they can't bid on (keeps them involved in evaluating their team's assets) and it increases the chances that a team will become competitive again.
3. I'll never feel sorry for a team that's top of the standings not getting a shot at waivers. It's the nature of success in this league, and as you just saw with Zach Duke getting picked up by Yankees, sometimes you get a player you never expected to nab.
4. This league was set up to reflect MLB as much as possible. Can you imagine the best team in MLB getting the top player in waivers?
5. I completely understand that not getting to nab players as often as you'd like can be frustrating, but you should take more consideration in ensuring league viability in this case. It's already obvious who the strong and weaker GMs are, but it's always harder to compensate GMs that are simply having a hard year due to injuries and unforeseen occurrences (suspensions ect..). Allowing them a shot at getting replacement players makes a ton of sense.
It's pretty rare that Waivers results in a player of star caliber being nabbed. You always have access to free agency, and of course you know the trade route.
Have a little heart and let waivers be will ya?? lol.
My take on things, but always open to feedback.
Mat
NO, I must obliterate!
JK
I get where you are coming from though. Thanks for the explanation Mat.
JK