Contraction Issues

"The(Theoretic I'm open to different interpretation) problem I have with dumping into FA is that playoff teams could just grab the top two guys and wouldn't their teams become monster teams? It would be hard for the lower teams to catch up unless they just dumped a huge portion of their salary into multiple players which would hurt in the long run? Not sure, kinda just rambling and throwing stuff out there lol."

Your actually on point here.
That why i floated a 1 round draft. The cream goes to the weak( full disclosure- i am near the top of that draft), which are teams with multiple needs.

Changing the values in contracts is just another anchor. SO now a guy costs 2.5 times more then an equal player? IF a team owning that guy wants to make a trade his contract cost becomes a HUGE issue. You just massively devalued the player because you made his contract cost silly compared to players at his level.. You have to keep the contracts the same- so the players are valued equally. Cost and term are very important in a cap league, because it is a bidding league concerning UFA's and UFA milb players. From the proposed $15 million to $6 million, thats $9 million a year for 5 years extra to bid on players.. That is a lot of money for a long time..

Freezing players just kicks the can of Shyte further down the road. As prospects- of which their are many, and about to many more- come on board with cheaper contracts- dollars available to bid will only become more readily available.. The number of available free agent dollars will only get worse- in 5 full seasons- their will be a massive swing towards overpaying when guys in their primes on $6 million dollar deals shake free.

OF course this deals with only MLB players- what about guys in the minors.. 160 prospects- and some should be in GREAT demand..

In the end, if we draft: the guys at the bottom are gonna come up short compared to the guys at the top of the draft.

No way round it. It is the fart in the elevator. Breathe deep, it will pass..

IF we don't draft, uber strong teams with fewer needs can just target 1 player in an open bid system. $35 million for Sale at $6 million for 5 years- yes please..

NO good solutions- just less perfect ones.

The one round draft means the weaker teams get to plug one of many holes with an elite player. The stronger teams get to add a very good player, who directly fills a need or creates a surplus from which to trade and fill that need. I view this through the prism of need. I think it is the best way to view it..

I get verbose- hence the "fart in the elevator sentence" to regain your focus..Beer me..


Hahaha fart in the elevator - that's fantastic. To respond, 'filling a hole' greatly undersells how much of an advantage the teams picking first in a 1 round draft would have... a guy who nabs Goldy for just $6m/year over 5 years has done more than just 'fill a hole' - they've locked in one of the best fantasy players for 5 years at an insanely good price... that's incredibly unfair. We should not punish teams who had success in the previous year, especially not to that degree (we already give the worse teams high picks in rookie draft). While the FA method is not perfect, it at least allows players to be paid what the market dictates. If someone wants to pay Goldy $30m/year, go for it - it will definitely screw them down the road though. Also, if one or 2 teams shell out $40 million/year for a couple big name FA, that leaves a ton of good/great eligible FAs still available for the lesser teams to 'fill the holes' they have. 

I do agree that releasing that many minor leaguers into FA along with the MLB players could be a bad idea... that's way too many players. Maybe we think about doing a snake draft for the prospects, but releasing all MLB players into FA?? 

Anyways, just my 2 cents...

That's certainly still my overall preference and I think there's one new response to the rotoworld ad. The issue there is that the teams would need to be managed by others until then, and how do you regulate that through free agency opening ect..? You can't, because you're not going to outbid yourself. Also, it leaves fewer options for an incoming owner to put his or her stamp on the team. I'm fine with trying to get them filled through October/November, but mid-December, this should be a completed process whichever way it goes. My thought with 16 teams was simply to ensure we had as strong a league as possible and most of my 20 team leagues seem to have 4-5 revolving door teams, something I'd like to avoid here if we can help it!





Totally with you there Mat.. I'd rather have 16 good owners than, 20 with 4 revolving doors.. However, I don't want to jeopardize the future of what we have now.. it's just really a crappy position to be in.. Nothing we are going to do is going to make everyone in the league happy unless we can find a way to stick at 20. And with how bad the nationals and orioles are it's gonna be really hard. I honestly thought offering a free year (2017) would bait quite a few people into the league.. It's still early and we very well might be able to find people down the line.. I doubt it'll be by November though.. I think January is when people transition from fantasy football mode back to baseball.. I understand wanting to have everything done by then though.. 


I hope we can hear from the other teams soon to see what they are thinking.. I'll ask Jake (phillies) to get on and see what he's thinking.