|
|
Post by RockiesGM (Jarrod) on Apr 22, 2017 10:52:23 GMT -5
Total nut Job because I want everyone to play by the same rules? Sure then- if that makes me a nut job, I live in lala land and drink bleach on the weekends for fun. And it's obviously not just me as the teams above stated their case as well. CardsGM can rule and make the decision either way, Rules can't be used on some teams and not the others, if this was a free league then sure. But people put their hard earned money on the line, and agreed to set of rules at the beginning of the league. Ryan asked about 1,000 times for everyone to read through the rules and if there was issues to bring it up.
Again it's TJ Friedl I don't care who gets him at this point, but if anything comes of this, I want their to be a league wide understanding that the rules apply to every single team. I've went out of my way to play by them many times as I'm active on the wire probably more so than anyone else.
|
|
|
|
Post by CardsGM (Mat) on Apr 22, 2017 10:54:14 GMT -5
I agree that this is one of the bigger issues we have to deal with within the constitution. Ideally, we'd be able to bid on Fantrax and eliminate 80% of the haggles we have to go through, but as great as that sounds it's just not a reality right now. So, owners have to step up and take the 2 min to sign their guys and make the transaction request on Fantrax. It's just the way it is.
For now, here are my thoughts on a possible band-aid solution.
My initial thoughts are these: For MLB players (guys currently in MLB when auction ends: owners have 72 hours. This is to ensure the move is expedited as per the old rule and possibly sends a player into the FA pool etc....
For Milb players: owners have 1 full week (7 days) to make all necessary moves.
|
|
|
|
Post by CardsGM (Mat) on Apr 22, 2017 10:55:37 GMT -5
Guys, I just went through the recent closed FA bids and well over 50% had related transactions posted after the 48 hour window. Why wasn't action take on Clayton Richard, Brendon Davis, Logan Morrison, Cedric Mullins, Mark Reynolds, Daniel Descaiso, or Geovany Soto? I think it's too much to ask the commishes to strictly enforce this rule and I don't want to see it enforced only when it benefits one of them as in my case. Let's have some logical conversation, return the dodgers fine, and put in place a set of guidelines, not a hard line rule, that we can consistently enforce. We will have to look at those retroactively. Thanks for pointing them out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2017 10:59:39 GMT -5
Total nut Job because I want everyone to play by the same rules? Sure then- if that makes me a nut job, I live in lala land and drink bleach on the weekends for fun. And it's obviously not just me as the teams above stated their case as well. CardsGM can rule and make the decision either way, Rules can't be used on some teams and not the others, if this was a free league then sure. But people put their hard earned money on the line, and agreed to set of rules at the beginning of the league. Ryan asked about 1,000 times for everyone to read through the rules and if there was issues to bring it up. Again it's TJ Friedl I don't care who gets him at this point, but if anything comes of this, I want their to be a league wide understanding that the rules apply to every single team. I've went out of my way to play by them many times as I'm active on the wire probably more so than anyone else. Stop claiming this is a money league dude, it's a $50 pay to play league, go bet like a big boy if you are here to make money. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2017 11:00:49 GMT -5
Guys, I just went through the recent closed FA bids and well over 50% had related transactions posted after the 48 hour window. Why wasn't action take on Clayton Richard, Brendon Davis, Logan Morrison, Cedric Mullins, Mark Reynolds, Daniel Descaiso, or Geovany Soto? I think it's too much to ask the commishes to strictly enforce this rule and I don't want to see it enforced only when it benefits one of them as in my case. Let's have some logical conversation, return the dodgers fine, and put in place a set of guidelines, not a hard line rule, that we can consistently enforce. We will have to look at those retroactively. Thanks for pointing them out. Those guys are legit as IndiansGM pointed out however there are others, we can discuss more later. |
|
|
|
Post by CardsGM (Mat) on Apr 22, 2017 11:03:31 GMT -5
I want to point something out to the entire league, so please abstain from continuing the rage until I write it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by GiantsGM (Adam) on Apr 22, 2017 11:04:03 GMT -5
To attempt to bring this back to why the thread was created in the first place...
I actually agree with the Yankees that this window should be more flexible, and I actually do like your proposed solution, Dustin (maybe a week and a month are too long, but i like the idea behind it). The one issue I have is how we go about changing the rule. If we change Friedl, imo we need to go back and send EVERY player affected by this rule to the original team that won bid on them but did not post the transaction in the allotted time. If we do that, then I think we can change this rule. However, if we don't do that, I don't think it is appropriate to retroactively change this one player, but ignore the other instances that this occurred, both this season and last season. Once we figure that out, I think a vote and change in the offseason is more than a reasonable request and something the league should look at, because I agree with you, sometimes things come up in real life and fantasy baseball (rightfully so) takes a back seat.
edited: grammar
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2017 11:06:32 GMT -5
I agree that this is one of the bigger issues we have to deal with within the constitution. Ideally, we'd be able to bid on Fantrax and eliminate 80% of the haggles we have to go through, but as great as that sounds it's just not a reality right now. So, owners have to step up and take the 2 min to sign their guys and make the transaction request on Fantrax. It's just the way it is. For now, here are my thoughts on a possible band-aid solution. My initial thoughts are these: For MLB players (guys currently in MLB when auction ends: owners have 72 hours. This is to ensure the move is expedited as per the old rule and possibly sends a player into the FA pool etc.... For Milb players: owners have 1 full week (7 days) to make all necessary moves. Fair enough, I'll accept the fine and move on. As for future discussion, I don't think we need a hard line but we can debate more later. |
|
|
|
Post by CardsGM (Mat) on Apr 22, 2017 11:13:10 GMT -5
1. We have an extremely strong league with really competitive owners. That's awesome, and I would never want it any other way.
2. Sometimes, that competitiveness can get in the way of seeing the human side of things.
3. We all live busy lives, and I can attest to that for one as I juggle a multitude of things and try to keep tabs on the goings on of my leagues (5 including this one) and try to get 2 x businesses off the ground while working as the Operations Officer of a Search and Rescue Squadron that covers the entire North Eastern Seaboard of the Atlantic and the Arctic Region and be a father of 2 and work through medical issues my wife has with severe Crohns Disease etc.... Still, I make the time to post and edit transactions, rosters, etc... because I don't want my investments in this league to be for nought.
4. #2 and #3 on this list have to be taken into account when things go awry and we can't just light the torches and set the stake afire. Doing so alienates league members and makes this a no fun league, as was described. On the other hand, we don't want owners to take advantage of things and abuse any leeway that can be afforded.
5. This is still a very young league with a constitution that is strengthening but has already gone through some serious changes to get there. This is one of those lagging issues that we may want to look at to support all aspects of this, so let's take care of it now so that it doesn't continue to plague us.
SO, let's all post constructive ideas, show support for those that make sense and provide constructive criticism to those that don't and we can move forward with a vote if we find some common ground to do so. Out aims should be to maintain some expeditious transactions - for MLB players in particular - and provide some extra time to allow for owners to lay claim to players they won in auction. Don't forget the last part, they won the auction and should be afforded enough time to keep the player, as much as makes sense.
I look forward to ideas, suggestions, and hope to have a poll up by Sunday evening. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by RockiesGM (Jarrod) on Apr 22, 2017 12:23:08 GMT -5
Total nut Job because I want everyone to play by the same rules? Sure then- if that makes me a nut job, I live in lala land and drink bleach on the weekends for fun. And it's obviously not just me as the teams above stated their case as well. CardsGM can rule and make the decision either way, Rules can't be used on some teams and not the others, if this was a free league then sure. But people put their hard earned money on the line, and agreed to set of rules at the beginning of the league. Ryan asked about 1,000 times for everyone to read through the rules and if there was issues to bring it up. Again it's TJ Friedl I don't care who gets him at this point, but if anything comes of this, I want their to be a league wide understanding that the rules apply to every single team. I've went out of my way to play by them many times as I'm active on the wire probably more so than anyone else. Stop claiming this is a money league dude, it's a $50 pay to play league, go bet like a big boy if you are here to make money. Nah, I'd rather take your $50, thanks though man! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2017 16:15:13 GMT -5
Astros, you commented that you wouldn't want the ML window to go beyond 72 hours. In an effort for meaningful conversation why do you think it is so important to complete the signing and corresponding transactions within 72 hours? In my suggestion we'd continue to encourage GMs to complete the signing within 48 hours but offer a 5 day grace period where the GM can be sent a PM.
Why not allow the league to police itself and limit the work required by the commissioners?
see example below:
GM A bids $50,000
GM B bids $100,000
following scenarios would be:
GM B signs the player within 48 hours and makes corresponding transactions.
or
GM B wins bid and doesn't post transaction for 48 hours. GM A is still interested so he sends a PM to GM B and includes a commish, thus starting a 5 day clock.
GM B can then sign the player within the 5 days or pay a $1M fine. If GM B does not sign the player then GM A is awarded the player.
or
GM B wins bid and doesn't post transaction within 48 hours. GM A is uninterested but another GM who was not in the original bidding decides they want player. GM C sends a PM to GM B and includes a commish, thus starting a 5 day clock.
GM B can then sign the player within the 5 days or pay a $1M fine. If GM B does not sign the player then GM C is awarded the player.
or
GM B does not sign the player within a month (or agreed upon time period). GM A is uninterested and no other GM shows interest in player. Commish will see that there is a locked bid that hasn't moved to the closed bids. GM B is fined $1M and the commissioners review the GM to make sure abuse is not in play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2017 16:56:01 GMT -5
To attempt to bring this back to why the thread was created in the first place... I actually agree with the Yankees that this window should be more flexible, and I actually do like your proposed solution, Dustin (maybe a week and a month are too long, but i like the idea behind it). The one issue I have is how we go about changing the rule. If we change Friedl, imo we need to go back and send EVERY player affected by this rule to the original team that won bid on them but did not post the transaction in the allotted time. If we do that, then I think we can change this rule. However, if we don't do that, I don't think it is appropriate to retroactively change this one player, but ignore the other instances that this occurred, both this season and last season. Once we figure that out, I think a vote and change in the offseason is more than a reasonable request and something the league should look at, because I agree with you, sometimes things come up in real life and fantasy baseball (rightfully so) takes a back seat. edited: grammar I agree with this Adam. I started this thread with 'regardless of what happens' since I think a change is needed regardless of what happened with Friedl. As it is Rox got his guy and I'm taking the fine. I've outlined in more detail how I think we could make some adjustments, please take some time and comment with thoughts/suggestions. |
|
|
|
Post by GiantsGM (Adam) on Apr 22, 2017 18:40:35 GMT -5
Astros, you commented that you wouldn't want the ML window to go beyond 72 hours. In an effort for meaningful conversation why do you think it is so important to complete the signing and corresponding transactions within 72 hours? In my suggestion we'd continue to encourage GMs to complete the signing within 48 hours but offer a 5 day grace period where the GM can be sent a PM. Why not allow the league to police itself and limit the work required by the commissioners? see example below: GM A bids $50,000 GM B bids $100,000 following scenarios would be: GM B signs the player within 48 hours and makes corresponding transactions. or GM B wins bid and doesn't post transaction for 48 hours. GM A is still interested so he sends a PM to GM B and includes a commish, thus starting a 5 day clock. GM B can then sign the player within the 5 days or pay a $1M fine. If GM B does not sign the player then GM A is awarded the player. or GM B wins bid and doesn't post transaction within 48 hours. GM A is uninterested but another GM who was not in the original bidding decides they want player. GM C sends a PM to GM B and includes a commish, thus starting a 5 day clock. GM B can then sign the player within the 5 days or pay a $1M fine. If GM B does not sign the player then GM C is awarded the player. or GM B does not sign the player within a month (or agreed upon time period). GM A is uninterested and no other GM shows interest in player. Commish will see that there is a locked bid that hasn't moved to the closed bids. GM B is fined $1M and the commissioners review the GM to make sure abuse is not in play. I like this scenario about 95%. My one complaint would be in the scenario where GM C gets involved - I don't think GM C should be awarded the player. I think the player should go back into the player pool and if GM C wants the player badly enough, he can start a new auction with a brand new 48 hours. |
|
|
|
Post by TwinsGM (Kaj) on Apr 23, 2017 8:06:34 GMT -5
I dislike the Yankees plan. If you want a player, would you have the time in the 48-hour window to post a new bid? If the answer is yes, then you should have the time to post a transaction within 48 hours. We are not asking you to update your team page just post the transaction. To prolong posting the transaction means the GM did not really want the Player. Plus, now I need to take time out of my day to PM another GM about not following the rules and give them an extra 5 days, so I might get a player they outbid me. What happens if GM A doesn't have the time to PM the GM B and the commish does GM B have forever to complete the transaction?
I can understand extending the window on the minor league free agents, but I like keeping things simple and like one rule for both major league and minor league free agents.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2017 8:31:31 GMT -5
Astros, you commented that you wouldn't want the ML window to go beyond 72 hours. In an effort for meaningful conversation why do you think it is so important to complete the signing and corresponding transactions within 72 hours? In my suggestion we'd continue to encourage GMs to complete the signing within 48 hours but offer a 5 day grace period where the GM can be sent a PM. Why not allow the league to police itself and limit the work required by the commissioners? see example below: GM A bids $50,000 GM B bids $100,000 following scenarios would be: GM B signs the player within 48 hours and makes corresponding transactions. or GM B wins bid and doesn't post transaction for 48 hours. GM A is still interested so he sends a PM to GM B and includes a commish, thus starting a 5 day clock. GM B can then sign the player within the 5 days or pay a $1M fine. If GM B does not sign the player then GM A is awarded the player. or GM B wins bid and doesn't post transaction within 48 hours. GM A is uninterested but another GM who was not in the original bidding decides they want player. GM C sends a PM to GM B and includes a commish, thus starting a 5 day clock. GM B can then sign the player within the 5 days or pay a $1M fine. If GM B does not sign the player then GM C is awarded the player. or GM B does not sign the player within a month (or agreed upon time period). GM A is uninterested and no other GM shows interest in player. Commish will see that there is a locked bid that hasn't moved to the closed bids. GM B is fined $1M and the commissioners review the GM to make sure abuse is not in play. I'm on my phone so sorry in advance for the brevity. First, I'm not super passionately opposed to extending the time allowed to sign players a bit. Having said that, I just don't see much of a reason to change it. As I've said before, 48 hours is plenty of time to post a transaction (takes 30 seconds). Also, like Kaj said, if you have time to bid on a player in the 48 hr window, you've got time to sign the player. I just would prefer keep the time shorter so we can keep things moving. I think a week between winning a player and signing him is unnecessarily long. As for the other parts of your proposal, I do like some of it because it could take pressure off Mat and me. However, I don't really like putting responsibility on other teams to notify an owner to post a signing. I think ultimately, the responsibility to post the signing should be on the actual owner and not other owners. Having said all that, I'm fine with whatever everyone decides. I appreciate the detailed proposal! |
|
