Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 23:24:31 GMT -5
Hey Guys,
I would like to propose the following rule change.
Allow an overage of 5 Minors up until opening day (much like we have with Cap space).
This will allow teams to take full advantage of the draft and not be forced to making a trade they may not wish to do or drop players they may not wish to. this will also allow teams to watch spring training and decide on players that make the show right away. as it stands now we have to make those decisions before the draft if we want to use those spaces in the draft.
definitely up for discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 7:31:59 GMT -5
I understand why this change makes sense but my couple of points would be
1. I was already faced with this issue in multiple seasons and I was forced to drop a bunch of prospects I really didn’t want to but needed to make sure I had room in the draft. I over estimated the room needed made some trades and the end result was I have one of the smallest minors systems of any team.
2. If every team did this that would result in 75 players being kept out of the minors draft and being dropped after when the only way to re aquire is by making 1 pick up a month
3. If this is allowed then I would propose that any team that’s under the 60 player cap should be allowed to fill their minors system if they so choose before the season starts with the recently dropped players included in that pool
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 11:36:51 GMT -5
Steve you make some good points.
1. any rule change should be for the betterment of the league. your example is a good one of why this should be accepted IMO. for me the major benefit of the rule is not having to make decisions on borderline MLB players in Mid Jan.
2. this is something I haven't thought about. maybe a work around is we allow 3 pickups in April? or there is a system where dropped players from the draft can be picked up in addition to the one minors player in April. My concern would be who gets priority over these players. reverse standings? other ideas?
I definitely think there could be some discussion points around this rule.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 12:13:31 GMT -5
I agree in the betterment of the league but isn’t more players for everyone to choose from better for the overall league? Your proposed rule change helps teams that have maxed out their minors system only. This hurts me who made the tough choices and followed the rules and also hurts new owners taking over depleated teams by limiting the available players to choose from. It’s the same reason I’m against raising the salary cap or allowing tags to be traded. . We should be forced to make difficult choices just like real teams are forced to make ( keep in mind I oppose these things that my team would certainly benefit from )
As always I’ll go along with what everyone decides just offering a different view point
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2017 12:37:52 GMT -5
I agree, I like to look past what benefits my team now. While this rule certainly does I plan on being in this league for a long time. this rule definitely benefits rebuilding teams. You may get to the point where you are rebuilding again and this may come into play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck (Philadelphia Astros) on Dec 15, 2017 12:57:12 GMT -5
Brodie,
I like the idea a lot. You do gather a lot of information through Spring Training about some borderline prospects. You got my vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 4, 2018 20:50:57 GMT -5
Our Minors roster should be expanded period. Maybe for 2019. We have to stick with the plan now for 60 going into 2018 and one claim per month.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2018 16:10:13 GMT -5
Why? Why shouldn’t teams be forced to make tough choices on who they do and don’t keep? I mean two years ago I dropped a ton of guys I didn’t want to to make sure I would have room to make trades and aquire as many prospects as I wanted. Don’t understand why this is an issue that needs to fixed with a rule change. I mean how is this any different than increasing the cap which I would be very in favor of since for me I’m going for a title 😜
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 5, 2018 21:10:10 GMT -5
Nothing is changing right now anyway. Go for the title Steve. Whatcha got?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 18, 2018 12:23:39 GMT -5
why not have unlimited minor leagues?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 18, 2018 20:27:49 GMT -5
I don't know about unlimited minors. There has to be a maximum. I proposed last year expanding the rosters and it didn't pass.
Now Brodie's poll here from a month ago still only has 11 votes so not even the whole league has chimed in over the course of 30 days.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 18, 2018 20:56:26 GMT -5
Why does there have to be a limit?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Boston Padres) on Jan 20, 2018 0:54:32 GMT -5
Why a limit? I guess because I want to maintain some semblance of order. Every league has a certain number of majors spots and minors spots. If ours was unlimited then there's no strategy and owners wouldn't have to open spots when needed. That's part of how this league runs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 20, 2018 8:10:13 GMT -5
Why a limit? I guess because I want to maintain some semblance of order. Every league has a certain number of majors spots and minors spots. If ours was unlimited then there's no strategy and owners wouldn't have to open spots when needed. That's part of how this league runs. I run a league with unlimited minors and there is still strategy. It also promotes a lot more trades. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2018 10:43:12 GMT -5
Please understand that your vote can also be changed on this "rule change" just like you could on the one I proposed. At this point I am always going to vote NO on any rule change as it seems that some are enforced and put into place while others are not. So I'm with Steve; you made the rules when the league was first thought out and we should play by those rules and those rules alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 20, 2018 11:11:55 GMT -5
Please understand that your vote can also be changed on this "rule change" just like you could on the one I proposed. At this point I am always going to vote NO on any rule change as it seems that some are enforced and put into place while others are not. So I'm with Steve; you made the rules when the league was first thought out and we should play by those rules and those rules alone. That is extremely archaic. Leagues should be fluid and flexible. Rules written in infancy don’t account for adjustments and changes in ownership and are often short sighted and self limiting as years go by and things play out |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2018 11:19:33 GMT -5
Archaic? Possibly, but also I feel I have every right to feel that way as a rule that I proposed that had 10 votes went out the door without even an ounce of thought into actually putting it into effect. And the thought process that I read was that it would have been too much work for Scott; which I agree with. So therefore any new rule I am opposed to as it would put more effort into what Scott is already doing. Unlimited or even expanded minors puts more work/effort into what he already does so I'm always going to vote NO on any rule change. I do agree with it "SHOULD" be fluid. Also if a poll gets 10 votes it "SHOULD" be put into force, but alas it wasn't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2018 11:31:57 GMT -5
Please understand that your vote can also be changed on this "rule change" just like you could on the one I proposed. At this point I am always going to vote NO on any rule change as it seems that some are enforced and put into place while others are not. So I'm with Steve; you made the rules when the league was first thought out and we should play by those rules and those rules alone. That is extremely archaic. Leagues should be fluid and flexible. Rules written in infancy don’t account for adjustments and changes in ownership and are often short sighted and self limiting as years go by and things play out You might think it’s archaic but how is it fair to the teams that made decisions based on the current rules and released players they didn’t want to? It’s no different than raising the salary cap which never gets discussed. Why? Because raising the cap has almost no effect on rebuilding teams and only benefits teams that are going for it and money is tight. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 20, 2018 11:56:10 GMT -5
If rules are terrible then we should just keep them because you released a bunch of minors?!? Poor you. How many of those guys you released are top 10 in their organization?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 20, 2018 12:44:46 GMT -5
The real problem when using a limited number of roster spots during the offseason is that it forces you to decide between what you have and what you might have. If guys want to limit their ability to build a team, that's fine. But forcing people to cut assets for a chance to add other assets without knowing what those assets are, is a terrible way to run a league. Going into the draft, you may have a list of targets and when those targets are taken, you can be done. But what if you cut 5 or 6 guys that you like only to see all your targets taken and settling for less?
60 minors limit is fine but during the offseason, you should be able to add as many as you like and THEN trim to 60. It is much easier to make informed decisions without conjecture.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2018 12:49:05 GMT -5
Just my 2 cents. I will ALWAYS vote no for the very same reason my rule proposal was shot down. If it makes even 2 seconds more work for Scott who is already doing more than enough then I'm opposed to it. And it would seem that ANY rule change would put more work on Scott. I even offered to track and keep up with tag trades, but alas........
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 20, 2018 12:55:27 GMT -5
Just my 2 cents. I will ALWAYS vote no for the very same reason my rule proposal was shot down. If it makes even 2 seconds more work for Scott who is already doing more than enough then I'm opposed to it. And it would seem that ANY rule change would put more work on Scott. I even offered to track and keep up with tag trades, but alas........ How would setting a deadline date before the season to cut minors to 60 be more work than the current system? The current system forces him to monitor everyone's fantrax before the draft and during the draft over the course of the month. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2018 14:00:12 GMT -5
If rules are terrible then we should just keep them because you released a bunch of minors?!? Poor you. How many of those guys you released are top 10 in their organization? How is being allowed to keep up to 60 guys a terrible rule? If everyone was maxed out that’s 900 minor leaguers lol Wasn’t sure where all this fire was coming from but I just looked and noticed that your minors is maxed out. Makes sense now. You didn’t make the tough choices and now can’t select anymore guys. Poor you |
|
|
|
Post by Jason (Seattle Braves) on Jan 20, 2018 14:26:52 GMT -5
If rules are terrible then we should just keep them because you released a bunch of minors?!? Poor you. How many of those guys you released are top 10 in their organization? How is being allowed to keep up to 60 guys a terrible rule? If everyone was maxed out that’s 900 minor leaguers lol Wasn’t sure where all this fire was coming from but I just looked and noticed that your minors is maxed out. Makes sense now. You didn’t make the tough choices and now can’t select anymore guys. Poor you Nice try, Steve but that has nothing to do with it. I run a league with 24 teams - unlimited minor leaguers - and that league runs fine. Dont be so reactionary with your retorts |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2018 16:16:49 GMT -5
No I saw Scott bailed you out. He’s nice like that
|
|
