Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 15:49:55 GMT -5
I understand as of right now we have 1 franchise tag and 1 restricted tag, anyway this can be adjusted? I can play it however we decide but I just feel like teams that have multiple players on 1 year contracts will be at a disadvantage. Are you allowed to keep a player if he resigns with his original team next year? I saw this was explained but I wasn't really sure I understood it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 16:20:52 GMT -5
I opined that we could do a restricted free agent type of deal and give the original team the chance to match whatever the best offer on the table was so they could keep them.
It's tough because you don't want to lose all of your guys but on the other hand they should still be able to be bid on
|
|
|
Post by bxm701 on Jan 21, 2013 16:27:33 GMT -5
Totally agree with Steve but get what Adam is saying.
The fact is is that technically a team with a bunch of 1 year deals should maybe not have got drafted very high because that should have been taken into consideration. In fairness though, we've done this extremely fast and I don't think it was considered in a lot of cases.
This really comes down to enjoyability and I do think if we don't put something in place for teams to keep their core for the first couple years at least we might not like the turnover we get.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 18:51:57 GMT -5
Agree with Ben that some of those teams with a bunch of contracts expiring next year maybe should not have gone so high, but understand about teams wanting to keep their core.
I think I said earlier that maybe more than one restricted tag should be issued. I do feel like they need to be bid on to make sure their contract is based on the Diamond Duos market
|
|
|
Post by bxm701 on Jan 21, 2013 22:16:37 GMT -5
Here's a proposal for the commissioner's office:
Each team gets 1 restricted and 1 franchise tag to use in the year which the tag was issued (ie. these tags do not accumulate if not used). PLUS, in the inaugural season, each team is issued 5-10 (debatable number) restricted tags which do not expire and can be used at any point in the future on any expiring contract.
The idea behind this is obviously to allow for teams to keep their core in tact for at least a period of time - especially for those teams who got numerous players on one year deals.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 21, 2013 22:27:12 GMT -5
Hmmm, very interesting proposal Mr. Mahon. The Commissioner's Office will take this proposal into consideration as we deliberate with the respective powers that be. Stay tuned...
|
|
|
Post by bxm701 on Jan 21, 2013 23:47:06 GMT -5
Another part of this could be the offer sheet idea the NHL uses (could be other places as well).
Basically, for restricted players, if another team signs a restricted player to an offer sheet (meaning team must match to resign) and the team chooses not to match than the signing team must give up x number of low level prospects (equivalent to draft picks in the NHL analogy). Just a thought.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 23:57:39 GMT -5
I like the idea of the non expiring tags. Easiest way would be you get player for whatever he signs for in real life as a FA. Also stipulate that the tag can only be used once per player
Some franchises might have close to +60M in free cap space to spend which would start to lessen the benefit of salary matching
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2013 10:29:22 GMT -5
how about instead of our definition of a franchise tag, we use the NFL's. One tag per year and you can sign a player to a one year contract at the average AAS of the top X at his position.
I don't like the idea of the real market (who knows where it will go) distorting the diamond duos market once we finalize our initial keepers.
This league wont be fun if there are no good free agents because you can keep all of your players. There are plenty of players on everyone's team who are under team control for a few years
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2013 11:11:15 GMT -5
Andrew,
Your right about that. If teams feel like they can never improve people will lose interest. However there has to be some middle ground. I mean we already lose the chance to lock up players long term before they hit FA like most responsible MLB teams would do. I just feel it needs to be more than just one franchise player. What about 3?
Another idea might be that we can pick any 3 players right now that we wish to sign to a long term contract of 1-5 years 1st year is 10M and goes up by 2M every year you sign them for. Also contracts are 100% guranteed. So it would be.. Year 1 10M Year 2 12M Year 3 14M Year 4 16M Year 5 18M
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 22, 2013 22:16:25 GMT -5
1. I'm definitely for some sort of compensation (low level prospects) if a team doesn't match an offer on a Restricted FA. Maybe 1 prospect if it's less than a $5M AAS contract, 2 prospects if it's a $5M-$10M AAS contract, and 3 lower level prospects if it's a contract worth more than $10M AAS? Low level I'm talking rookie ball or Low A. Nothing High A or above.
2. I don't know about picking players now (getting too far ahead of ourselves) but something like 1 restricted tag per year could work. I do like the idea of each team having a certain number to use at their discretion, and it's only for starting out now - our initial year. Use on whichever FA's you want to. Some teams have more 1-year guys than others and they might choose to use them up sooner. I think 5 is a good number, but if we did that, then I don't think we'd add additional restricted tags each year until maybe the year after next. Still have a Franchise tag per team.
|
|
|
Post by bxm701 on Jan 22, 2013 22:27:55 GMT -5
Agree with commish.
Now to define low level prospects, would ranked outside the BA top 100 be low enough?
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 22, 2013 22:52:54 GMT -5
I was thinking low level meaning Minor League ball levels, not BA ranking. Your BA ranked 125th guy could actually be a good quality AA/AAA player and I don't consider him low level. We'd need more parameters here - like not drafted in the 1st or 2nd round of a First Year Player Draft, just thinking out loud. I'd almost say it can't be anyone in BA's Top 200. How far down do they rank kids?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2013 23:01:52 GMT -5
since we will be holding an amateur (and foreign) draft each year, why dont we tie the free agents to picks. 13+ million= 2nd round pick, 10-13= 3rd round pick etc. something like that. MLB protects the first ten or fifteen picks of the draft, so maybe we can do that too (our rounds are only 15 picks)
Maybe we can replace the franchise tag with Steve's proposal (not necessarily the specifics). For the first year maybe we get 2 RFA's and 2 of those. Every year after we get one. Maybe we require you to offer a contract extension during the season after this initial set up to increase the risk a little?
ultimately the point of a franchise tag is to keep one of your players at market value or just below. we can always adjust the specific numbers if too many people are using it or not enough people are.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 28, 2013 17:01:16 GMT -5
To add to this discussion from last week... After speaking with Andrew and getting some ideas from others, this is a baseline of how we'll enter next off season. Each team will have the following tags to use: - 1 Franchise tag (you put on a FA and have to keep that player for whatever he signs in real life)
- 1 Restricted Free Agent tag (you can match the highest contract offer, compensation prospects or picks will be tied to this)
- 2 Prospect tags (players coming off initial league minimum salary years and you have the option to keep for 2 more years at $3M and $5M)
We have to confirm what those RFA compensations will be. It's just not priority right now with our Minors supplemental draft and FA bidding coming up soon.
|
|