POLL - Trading Period after RFA? Please vote.

[Scott (Boston Padres)]

Let's figure out if we want to do this before we start posting Unrestricted Free Agents.

[Deleted]

does this include releasing and outrighting players as well?

[Drew (Chicago Blue Jays)]

I think this makes plenty of sense. A week would be nice, but 3 days would work as well. No reason to be making all our bids this far out, with pitchers and catchers just now reporting. The UFA process will go much faster than last season, with more roster spots already filled.

Would be nice to have some time to make a few moves now that the market is a little clearer and we've had some crazy salaries settled.

[Scott (Boston Padres)]

No. Releasing and outrighting players is over. We've let that go way longer than we anticipated. If you're releasing or outrighting players, now it's going to have to wait until after our Unrestricted Free Agency and every team gets to at least 37 players entering the season.

[Deleted]

seems like the same logic would apply to trades as well.

[Scott (Boston Padres)]

I have several teams asking about trading. That's the option we're discussing here. I have not received one person asking if it's too late to drop or outright players. We allowed that up until right before RFA began.

[Deleted]

What I meant is we allowed trading up until the deadline as well. If the purpose of the proposal is to allow more flexibility in making a team between the free agent periods, I don't see why we would distinguish between different types of moves that would create that flexibility

[Scott (Boston Padres)]

I see trading as totally different. Teams swapping players to potentially free up cap space. Releasing players comes along with a penalty that I feel we should shy away from allowing at this stage in the game. Those are just my feelings.

Teams will have to work diligently to make deals within either this 3-day or weeklong period. There's no effort needed to just release a player.

And if you were going to release a player, wouldn't you have done that already? We shouldn't allow that now only to give more flexibility in free agency. I thought that's why you wanted that deadline back in January.

[Deleted]

Teams outrighting players allows teams to free up roster space (and maybe cap space) and other teams to add a player. (I'm not sure how the penalty is relevant, but if you don't want extra salaries to compute into fantrax as commish I understand, but then again trades are also more work for you)

By the same logic, if someone wanted a trade, wouldn't they also have done that already?

I just don't see a difference. We had deadlines for both trades and outrighting. The same reasons why people want to make trades would justify teams making other moves.

I'm in favor of being consistent and either allowing both or not allowing both, with a preference to not keep changing rules on the fly. After all, I did plan my moves in restricted free agency around not being able to make any moves, as I'm assuming others did as well. To change the circumstances at the last minute to benefit certain teams doesn't seem fair. Again, I'm for opening up all moves to potentially benefit everyone, or keeping with what we all planned for.

[Deleted]

I agree with Andrew. Is there something I'm missing why do we even need a freeze on any types of moves?

[Scott (Boston Padres)]

If we have trading and/or options to release/outright now, I do not want free agent contract offers happening at the same time. On the other side of the coin, I don't think there should be trading or releasing of players while we're in free agent contract signing period.

Maybe I'm in the minority and the league can chime in.

[Drew (Chicago Blue Jays)]

I am fine for opening up for releasing/outrighting as well, but I thought the 2 rules were in place for different reasons.

The release/outright deadline was in place so that the available player pool was set for free agency and so that teams couldn't simply drop someone in order to win a bid or to decrease salary.

I assume that the no trading during FA rule was so that there was never any question of what someone's budget was during free agency. For example, if I make a trade in the middle of a bidding war, my budget and my trade partner's shift in the middle of the bidding or with some bids already posted. This makes it incredibly difficult to keep up with things.

In the case of trading, salary is only shifting between teams, not just being dumped. You have to find someone willing to take on said salary.

Again I am fine with either, but I don't see any reason why a hard trade deadline should be made. Trading and free agency generally go hand in hand and the only reason not to do it for our league is for logistical ease.

[Deleted]

maybe we allow outrighting but not releasing? That way no salary ever disappears, but just gets shifted?

[Drew (Chicago Blue Jays)]

Yea, that would make sense. Roster spots are different than salary in my estimation. I agree with Scott that we want to create as little precedent as possible for releasing big contracts to free up space for more big contracts.

[Deleted]

I can understand if you want to prevent releasing of players now but don't see why trading should be prevented.

[Chuck (Philadelphia Astros)]

Feb 19, 2014 0:28:50 GMT -5 @cardinals11rams said:

Teams outrighting players allows teams to free up roster space (and maybe cap space) and other teams to add a player. (I'm not sure how the penalty is relevant, but if you don't want extra salaries to compute into fantrax as commish I understand, but then again trades are also more work for you)

By the same logic, if someone wanted a trade, wouldn't they also have done that already?

I just don't see a difference. We had deadlines for both trades and outrighting. The same reasons why people want to make trades would justify teams making other moves.

I'm in favor of being consistent and either allowing both or not allowing both, with a preference to not keep changing rules on the fly. After all, I did plan my moves in restricted free agency around not being able to make any moves, as I'm assuming others did as well. To change the circumstances at the last minute to benefit certain teams doesn't seem fair. Again, I'm for opening up all moves to potentially benefit everyone, or keeping with what we all planned for.

I agree with Andrew. I makes sense to be consistant, and not keep changing the rules on the fly. There should be a time to tweak the rules. This is not the time for that.

[Deleted]

i said yes to opening trading for three days..

[Drew (Chicago Blue Jays)]

I guess I just don't see this as a changing of the rules. This is our first time through the process of RFA and UFA, so I think it makes sense to evaluate as we go.

Most of all, there is really no reason to be in a rush to start free agency now. If we do, we will be finished before spring training games even start or at least during the first week. That is just going to lead to a ton of guys being released during the first week of the season when spring training things shake out. Makes sense to me to take a break now to allow for some roster maneuvering and to allow some spring games to be played.

[Deleted]

I was in a league with a draft similar to this one, and due to trading being open one team took advantage of this by massively outbidding for players, then trading them away for salary. It created a bit of a headache, and needless to say the guy was a giant douche. I figure we should know how much we can spend at this point and stay in budget.

[Scott (Boston Padres)]

Well I still need at least 4 more guys to chime in since I don't expect Doug to as we're looking to find a new owner for Cincinnati Twins (anyone know anyone?). Let's get those guys to give some feedback and we'll go from there.

Only a handful of RFA's still on the board, several waiting for previous owner to match.

[Deleted]

Feb 19, 2014 15:53:37 GMT -5 @slimpiknz said:

I was in a league with a draft similar to this one, and due to trading being open one team took advantage of this by massively outbidding for players, then trading them away for salary. It created a bit of a headache, and needless to say the guy was a giant douche. I figure we should know how much we can spend at this point and stay in budget.

I can see how someone could do that but were only allowed to exceed our own cap by at most 10M so it couldn't happen in this league. Also if I were in this league I would have refused to trade with him and forced him to release those players

[Deleted]

Don't think it would happen here, but it was a loophole that he exposed. Later that season he just straight up cheated by adding players to his roster and the league folded. Anyways, I'm good to go with the majority.

[Deleted]

My two cents;

I feel we should definitely open up trading. It goes hand in hand with the strategy of who you sign. One of the perks of an RFA is that you are guaranteed the right to retain your RFA player whether you particularly want or need him, but the RFA carries value in the fact that you can move him to fill another void in your roster versus just letting him go. It just gives you another chance to mold the team that you want.

I agree with the deadline for dropping players. There was plenty of time manipulate your cap through (trading or releasing)to put yourself in the position that you wanted your team prior to the RFA bidding.

I know it could be argued that both are the same, but the difference to me is that now 2 RFA 'unknowns' now have a concrete value. The value was established through a bidding process that the RFA owner did not have control of, but only the right to match. Releasing a player is totally controlled by the owner.

Lastly, I guess it is a guarantee against 'shady' moves by having a 'hard' deadline for releasing and the 3 headed commissioner is the guarantee against salary cap abuse through 'shady' trades. Just have to veto the ones that catastrophic for the league.

[Deleted]

Lets Trade! The more the better.

I think it's good for all teams to readjust, plan and trade before Free agency starts. I see a difference between the hard deadline to release players and trading during Free Agency. I also think outrighting a player would be that big of a deal either. The money doesn't go away, it just changes hands or stays the same. Same with trading.

I vote we take a week, finalize the new owner, open trading and then get on with the bidding.

[Deleted]

As someone limited by the cap, it makes sense to keep consistent with the rules. If it's not working, we can change for next season. If it's decided to open it up, it should be both trades and out righting players. Not fair to open 1 and not the other on the fly.

Just my opinion.

Suggest keeping as is and if the majority are in favor making the change for next year.

Jim