Fixing the League Rules Going Forward

[Pirates GM (Alex)]

Hey guys!

Not sure if everyone has seen it yet.  But the Reds and Padres have decided to quit their roles as LM's in this league.  They're starting a new league and inviting all current owners to join that one.  Reasons for that are that they don't think the rules here are fixable, and they think only 2-3 teams will win for the foreseeable future.

I think that's nonsense, and so do a lot of other owners from the discussions last night.  With no LM's currently, we're going to move forward with this league and fix some problems to make things smoother, more manageable for future LM's, and set up better for future league success.  Here's the items that were discussed last night that we feel are things that need to be improved for the league going forward.  All are still open for discussion.  If anyone is able to help with spreadsheet updates, fine tuning rule tweaks, we're all hands on deck right now.  


1. Fix all service time for ALL players on the spreadsheet rosters.  There's quite a few players that have incorrect service time.  We understand that players have been traded at a certain value, and that this could affect free agency this off-season.  We have to fix the league though going forward.  Correct service time is non-negotiable in my mind.  Proposal: The plan is to fix everything this season and offer compensation to teams that lost a year of service for players.  Players ranked (1-50 or some other number) will be given a compensation pick at the end of the first round.  We could also tinker with having players that lost a year of service time and go straight to free agency this off-season become RFA's, just to give teams fair value for what they traded for.  All in all, we need to fix all players service time and have a consistent way of handling this going forward.

2. Get rid of MLB offered extensions.  Create a new extension system based on rank of player on Fantrax.  Simply, the extensions offered in MLB don't work with our league, because we have a $120m salary cap.  For example, I want to trade for Xander Boegarts from Kansas City right now, but there's no way I'm going to pay $20+m for him on his MLB extension, that's over 1/6 of my cap for one player.  Mike Trout... who is going to want to pay $40m for him besides a team like the Mets with what they did with Harper?  It really reduces top players value.  Not what we want.  Proposal: All current MLB offered extensions that were offered will stay in place.  However, for future extensions, teams could be given one extension per off-season to use.  This would based on a scale.  For example, a top 1-25 hitter could be offered an extension around $20m a year.  Hitters 26-50 could be at $17m.  And so on.  Same with pitchers.  The numbers can be changed, they're just an example, but this would be the improved system.  

3. Change our current Free Agency bidding system.  Currently, an offer of 5 years @ $8.1m beats an offer of 1 year @ $40m.  That's ridiculous and would never happen in baseball.  We need to lessen the value of longer term deals and reduce the amount of years offered.  Proposal: Reduce the maximum contract length from 8 years to 5 years in Free Agency.  Change the bidding system to a points based system where each year offered is worth 0.5 points and one million dollars is worth 1 point.  Example, 5 years @ $8.1m would equal 10.6 points (8.1m = 8.1 points, 5 years = 2.5 points).  It could be beat by a 1 year, $10.7m deal, much more fair than $40m a year.  

4. Prospect Waivers.  There's too much freedom in the current waiver system.  I can really add any prospect I want for free, and it really lowers the value of late round draft picks and also makes almost every prospect that's done anything owned.  Tough unless you're deep into prospect scouting.  Proposal: Get rid of weekly waivers for prospects.  Implement an off-season Rule V Draft for unowned prospects.  It can last anywhere from 3-7 rounds, up for discussion.  Teams can draft unowned prospects at one set time, and it gives teams more time to prepare and do research.  Also gives teams more assets to trade.  

5. Spreadsheet updates.  A big complaint is how long it takes for things to get updated on the spreadsheets, which can't happen in a league with daily call ups and demotions.  Part of the problem is it's only done by a few people. We need to get a bigger team involved in spreadsheet updates.  Proposal: Spread out spreadsheet updating powers to more people.  Have two people do trades.  Two people do call ups and demotions.  One do waivers.  One do service time updates.  One do draft updates.  

If there's other things to discuss, post it here.  Let's get things rolling.  

[Royals GM (Max)]

On #1 - my league’s master has 99% correct service time for players (I do it myself so I’m sure there’s one mistake here or there, but I’m meticulous). While I may not have the time to do it myself, if anyone was to do a simple Command+F (Ctrl+F) search on my league’s spreadsheet, you’ll find the scale player with the correct year. This is based on a slight change from our current rules tho. Where our current rules stipulate year (1) as 130 AB, mine is 150 AB. And there is no appearance rule. If we change the rules to be like my league (not advocating this, just suggesting for ease) someone can just search the spreadsheet and find what’s needed rather than scouring BBRef.

On #2 - what if we do this extension system but only allow extensions to be given to players with IRL extensions? So it keeps the realism to an extent but also doesn’t make extensions unusable with the cap

[Pirates GM (Alex)]

#1 - so... do you list the players amount of at bats on the spreadsheet? I'm confused on how this is different from how we do things, other than the fact that you're meticulous in updating it? What's the change?

#2 - Is being at the mercy of whether an MLB offers an extension realistic and fair though? Like, if I own a Tampa Bay Rays player, say Blake Snell. The real Tampa Bay Rays likely won't give him an extension if he's two expensive... so I can't offer him an extension either cause the Rays can't afford it?

[Astros GM (Travis)]

1. The change is that if we want to fix all of the service times, we can go off his sheet and adjust ours since his is 100% correct. Pirates GM (Alex)

2. I would like a system where we can control our own extensions. More fair in general and keeps the actual MLB out of controlling our rosters.

3. A new bidding system, like the one you suggested sounds good. Last years FA was indeed flawed.

4. I would suggest a five round Rule V draft. Not 7 rounds which seems too long, or 3 rounds which seems a bit short, especially if you do not trade for extra picks, adding 3 prospects per year is not enough.

5. I can update service time and run arbitration during the offseason. Other than that, I do not know how much doccing I can do.

Just my quick thoughts.

[Pirates GM (Alex)]

#1. Makes sense.

#2. Definitely agree!

#3. Yep.

#4. Yes, the length of the round can be perhaps 5 rounds? 5 prospects isn't a lot, but you would be able to trade for these picks.

#6. Another proposal. It's really difficult to track the Master to make sure teams don't have 3's on up to FA's in the minors that have been called up to MLB teams. It'd take almost daily monitoring, something we probably don't have time for. I would suggest we just say only 1's, 2's, and prospects in the minors to keep it simple.

#7. Another proposal. Could we increase the amount of IL spots from 3 to 5? It's really difficult if you have a player out for the year to still make roster moves without cutting guys. It's how real baseball does it?

[Royals GM (Max)]

Jun 11, 2019 20:39:06 GMT Pirates GM (Alex) said:

#1 - so... do you list the players amount of at bats on the spreadsheet? I'm confused on how this is different from how we do things, other than the fact that you're meticulous in updating it? What's the change?

#2 - Is being at the mercy of whether an MLB offers an extension realistic and fair though? Like, if I own a Tampa Bay Rays player, say Blake Snell. The real Tampa Bay Rays likely won't give him an extension if he's two expensive... so I can't offer him an extension either cause the Rays can't afford it?

I don’t list it out but all the players are correct. So you can know if it’s right or not. Searching the player and updating the Sim master to what my master says is easier than going on BBRef for every player and counting what year they are

[Marlins GM (Andrew)]

My votes/comments;
#1. Yes. This will suck for a number of teams, but is necessary in aggregate. MLBC's has been accurate, I agree.
#2. Yup. Too much lottery built into today's extensions rules. I like 1 / offseason for any player on your team, with annual salary either fixed or based on performance. Grandfather in current ones
#3. Co-sign.
#4. Hell yes. I've been driving the prospect draft bus for awhile now. That would be great, although the first one may not be awesome given all the talent that's been dispersed via waivers.
#5. I've been (except for the last week+) doing waiver claims. If the waiver system goes away that won't be necessary, but i'd be happy to run prospect drafts or something. Also, more than 2 people doing call ups / demotions would be wise. There are a ton of those.
#6. Is there a reason we limit who can be in the minors at all? Would it make sense to just have anyone be demotable and then there's nothing to have to manage against. I'd be for either that or having guys year 1-3 eligible for demotion (i.e. pre-ARB). Agree the current system requires too much daily monitoring to be feasible.
#7. Does MLB have a limit on # of IL spots at all? I'm up for increasing the limit from 3-5, but want to at least bring up whether it's worthwhile to explore removing the limit altogether.

[Deleted]

I like it, I like it. Definitely need more IL slots as I'm pretty sure every owner has been lamenting only 3. 5 seems good, I wouldn't say no to 6.

When the league started we all knew the rules would have to be tweaked as we went forward, learned what does and does not work, and then they would change. Everybody is going to dislike having their players service-timed out of the minors, but everybody will like the extra IL slots, and the stability the other rules bring.

Do what needs to be done. I don't even care if you take an arbitrary date like the all star break and just fix things once and for all. Perhaps grandfather in whomever gets upped from a year 2 to a year 3 for the rest of the season so that isn't an issue. But it's like ripping off a band aid -- it'll hurt for a second, then you just get used to it, forget about it, and move on.

[Pirates GM (Alex)]

Seems like #1-#3 are pretty consensus, more thoughts though?

#4 - Yeah. I think we need to find a balance for the amount of rounds the draft will have. What about 5 rounds for the first year? We can always adjust for future years. The first draft could take place this off-season, and we could cancel prospect claims at the end of June? Or next week.

#6 - Well, if we let anyone go down, then we're essentially doing away with the MLB-like 25-man rosters and teams can just amass as much depth as possible. From experience in my other league, this unbalances the league more, because teams can acquire as many major leaguers as they want and just stream players up and down on off days. I really like having options, only certain players in the minors, creates a more realistic roster construction process. I think having players 1-3 able to be sent down could work. We could just have the rule be, only prospects or players in years 1-3 can be in the minors. No FA's or Major leaguers over year 3 could be sent down.

#7 - I don't see a limit after reading about it.

[Rays GM (Duck)]

Just a thought, Keep it simple (like if a player is up in the MLB then he has to be up in here, if he is down then he can be sent down).
Put your salary cap at $150 and raise it $5 every 2 years for inflation.
Do away with service time.
All prospects cost $.1 ($100,000).
Whatever the players salary or contract is in the MLB then his salary and the number of years you own him is in here.
Make the Injured List 7 anything more than that you have to live with.
Do away with the trading of Cap.
If a player is a free agent in the MLB or Minors then he is in here also.
The releasing of any MLB player is a 25% hit of contract for that year only.

[Pirates GM (Alex)]

That kind of takes the fun of a dynasty league.... we'd really lose a lot of options as GMs? That would take away all of our free agency, all call ups or demotions.

I think we're all in agreement that the service time needs to be fixed? After I finish making sure the options on players are right, I'll start with the service time updates. I'll keep track of who is being changed and to what in a separate tab on the Master so that we can assign compensation for lost years later.

[Marlins GM (Andrew)]

Maybe a quick vote on the GC?

I agree to track fixes to assess compensation later.

[Dodgers GM (Pat)]

#7
Why only 3 IL spots? Can't there be more? My one league has 5, another has more

If an MLBer goes down for the year I can only IL him, so there goes one of my 3 spots. Not very flexible, e.g. Corey Knebel
I had to cut a guy I gave an FA contract to the other day because of this

[Pirates GM (Alex)]

#7. I agree Pat. I think we should expand to 5 or 7 IL spots for next year.

[Dodgers GM (Pat)]

why can't it be this year </3