|
|
Post by Cubs GM (Heller) on Jan 8, 2019 0:52:31 GMT
Hey all, making this thread to centralize all suggestions for this league for next season. Please reply with anything you might have in mind (and make sure to check the League Rules to confirm it isn't already a thing)!
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Alex) on Jan 8, 2019 0:55:12 GMT
I have talked to a few owners who have backed me up on this. With the new rule that we cannot trade cap (+/- 10), and the ARB rules that we have, I personally think that the 120m cap is to low for a league like this. With players year 5 and 6 reaching contracts around the 7-30 mil range (depending on who you are), players in years 5,6 are making a lot more than they should.
I think the cap for 2020 should be bumped to 130-140m, but thats just my take. Would love feedback.
AD
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 1:45:28 GMT
I have talked to a few owners who have backed me up on this. With the new rule that we cannot trade cap (+/- 10), and the ARB rules that we have, I personally think that the 120m cap is to low for a league like this. With players year 5 and 6 reaching contracts around the 7-30 mil range (depending on who you are), players in years 5,6 are making a lot more than they should. I think the cap for 2020 should be bumped to 130-140m, but thats just my take. Would love feedback. AD I think the +/- $10 is too low. I think 20-25 is more reasonable. Instead of giving teams a ton more cap, I’d like to see a little more cap available to trade |
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Alex) on Jan 8, 2019 15:32:48 GMT
I have talked to a few owners who have backed me up on this. With the new rule that we cannot trade cap (+/- 10), and the ARB rules that we have, I personally think that the 120m cap is to low for a league like this. With players year 5 and 6 reaching contracts around the 7-30 mil range (depending on who you are), players in years 5,6 are making a lot more than they should. I think the cap for 2020 should be bumped to 130-140m, but thats just my take. Would love feedback. AD I think the +/- $10 is too low. I think 20-25 is more reasonable. Instead of giving teams a ton more cap, I’d like to see a little more cap available to trade That could be another solution, I wouldnt mind that as well |
|
|
|
Post by Marlins GM (Andrew) on Jan 8, 2019 16:04:06 GMT
I'm with Connor here - more flexibility > higher caps. Gives rebuilding teams another asset to deal while still controlling the aggregate amount contending teams can be over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigers GM (Ryan) on Jan 8, 2019 18:25:24 GMT
PRoblem with more cap flexibility the problem it creates is the current situation we have. 4 or 5 super teams and a bunch of new owners taking over teams with no players, bad buyouts or future funds that were previously dealt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cardinals GM (Chris) on Jan 8, 2019 18:45:31 GMT
Without more cap flexibility, we're likely going to need higher cap increases over the years though. Because as contract amounts increase in real life, the harder it is going to be to sign multiple quality players Then you get several years down the line and your roster is only like one star and 24 scrubs because that star is making $60-70 mil and the cap is $126 mil or whatever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marlins GM (Andrew) on Jan 8, 2019 19:05:16 GMT
PRoblem with more cap flexibility the problem it creates is the current situation we have. 4 or 5 super teams and a bunch of new owners taking over teams with no players, bad buyouts or future funds that were previously dealt. Just for reference...Boston currently has $86M of additional cap in 2019, while the Cubs have $58 and Reds have $43M. So, I agree with you in a vacuum, but increasing the +/- to $20M still meaningfully curtails the impact relative to 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Alex) on Jan 9, 2019 2:22:44 GMT
Lies, I do not have any cap available next year. You forget I can pick up Altuves extension and Mookie will be at his highest ARB value.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marlins GM (Andrew) on Jan 9, 2019 2:27:34 GMT
Lies, I do not have any cap available next year. You forget I can pick up Altuves extension and Mookie will be at his highest ARB value. Nah man I mean 2019 cap you've traded for. I added up all the 2019 salary adjustments. |
|
|
|
Post by Braves GM (Cole) on Jan 9, 2019 23:20:39 GMT
I do think that our waiver wire process with the ability to claim prospects without major league experience constantly is quite a poor process. Really de-values prospects in trade value and also picks. Lots of people feed off of guys who actually know their stuff as well, claiming players they otherwise would have no clue about.
For the start of the league I can see why we had it that way, to open doors for teams to have prospects. Now we have so many owned we can probably dial it back to only FYPD (Amateur) and Rule V (Prospects with no MLB experience) picks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM (Alex) on Jan 10, 2019 5:39:03 GMT
I do think that our waiver wire process with the ability to claim prospects without major league experience constantly is quite a poor process. Really de-values prospects in trade value and also picks. Lots of people feed off of guys who actually know their stuff as well, claiming players they otherwise would have no clue about. For the start of the league I can see why we had it that way, to open doors for teams to have prospects. Now we have so many owned we can probably dial it back to only FYPD (Amateur) and Rule V (Prospects with no MLB experience) picks. I would propose just adding an extra round or two to the FYPD and include unowned minor league players. Or, we could have a separate draft of unowned minor league players in the winter. |
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM (Alex) on Jan 10, 2019 5:42:53 GMT
I think with the cap issue, our league can definitely adjust to having the lower cap. It'll just take a couple years for the contracts to start becoming contracts our league offered rather than contracts that were offered in the MLB. It would reduce the incentive to pick up the real life extensions, which I think is a rule we could just do away with anyways. I'm fine with increasing the amount of cap we can trade away to around $20m... but not much more than that. It is ridiculous that the Red Sox can have nearly $100m in extra cap for a season. How does that create any sense of competition for the playoffs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigers GM (Ryan) on Jan 10, 2019 15:38:09 GMT
I do think that our waiver wire process with the ability to claim prospects without major league experience constantly is quite a poor process. Really de-values prospects in trade value and also picks. Lots of people feed off of guys who actually know their stuff as well, claiming players they otherwise would have no clue about. For the start of the league I can see why we had it that way, to open doors for teams to have prospects. Now we have so many owned we can probably dial it back to only FYPD (Amateur) and Rule V (Prospects with no MLB experience) picks. I would propose just adding an extra round or two to the FYPD and include unowned minor league players. Or, we could have a separate draft of unowned minor league players in the winter. I'd be in favor of those. I would much prefer the adding or minor leagues be curtailed into a few periods each year, not just a revolving open door. and I think for the admins it would be a welcome change to not have to process 30+ pickups a week. |
|
|
|
Post by Braves GM (Cole) on Jan 10, 2019 15:50:17 GMT
Agree with Alex and Ryan. Adding 2 rounds onto the fypd (60 more prospects) isn’t a bad idea. The winter draft Alex was referring to would be the Rule V type I assume, 2-4 rounds of prospects with no mlb experience.
|
|
