|
|
Post by Lunatic Fringe on Dec 20, 2008 15:03:44 GMT -5
Okay, so we clearly have some things to discuss before we draft. If you have something you want brought up, post it in this thread. I'll then create a new thread and a poll for each individual topic to be discussed and voted on. I'll put a sample thread up for everyone to see. We'll officially begin the Winter Meetings Jan. 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lunatic Fringe on Dec 20, 2008 15:17:40 GMT -5
A couple of things I think have been talked about:
1. New salary cap for '09. I'm thinking $125,000,000 for 30 man rosters
2. New minimum salary: $390,000. That was the league min 2008 for MLB and the figure to be used for players without salary information for 2008
3. # of keepers, both MLB and MiLB for '09
4. Minor league eligibility, which might require the most discussion
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2008 16:42:42 GMT -5
I think one thing we definitely need is a regularly updated spreadsheet of MiLB rosters for each team. There have been dozens of occasions in which someone will have claimed a player days or weeks after someone else has owned him. If we had an easily accessible spreadsheet as a reference for which team owns which prospect, this problem would be avoided entirely. That MiLB transaction thread only does its job halfway before turning into a mess.
Another issue is clarification among MiLB prospects. There was some commotion late in the season about people being picked up at too young an age or halfway through the season before the actual draft, etc. I'm not saying we need to change the eligibility rules or anything. I think we just need clarification and some clearer explanations of it to avoid any further confusion.
That's all I can recall at the moment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2008 16:45:39 GMT -5
"...Halfway through the season before the actual draft" refers to MiLB players who signed with their respective teams later in the season but remained independent of the 2008 MiLB draft class (including Beckham, Posey, etc.). Sorry for any confusion in that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nuke LaLoosh Express on Dec 20, 2008 18:08:12 GMT -5
Wasn't there something in this league about performance bonuses? I can't find it now but I thought the league champion got extra money and the top place finishers did also, whoever had the MVP in each league, the CY Young ect. Maybe I made it up in my head but we should have something like that if we don't already.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nellie's Holler on Dec 20, 2008 20:35:24 GMT -5
Don't forget ROY! I don't remember anything about that though. Not a bad idea, but it may reward the people who did good in the league, and thereby punish those who did not. Thus digging a bigger hole for those people. Since I would be the recipient of 2 of those, I wouldn't be against that, but I can see why some people would.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nellie's Holler on Dec 20, 2008 20:42:04 GMT -5
"...Halfway through the season before the actual draft" refers to MiLB players who signed with their respective teams later in the season but remained independent of the 2008 MiLB draft class (including Beckham, Posey, etc.). Sorry for any confusion in that. Some assholes picked up players that were drafted during the International siging period (Inoa, Portillo, etc). One of which was that Nellie's bitch, which is why I might change my name. Maybe that could make it a loophole? |
|
|
|
Post by Nuke LaLoosh Express on Dec 20, 2008 22:28:57 GMT -5
Yeah that Inoa kid went to some asshole name Nuke... What a douche!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lunatic Fringe on Dec 21, 2008 0:03:08 GMT -5
Wasn't there something in this league about performance bonuses? I can't find it now but I thought the league champion got extra money and the top place finishers did also, whoever had the MVP in each league, the CY Young ect. Maybe I made it up in my head but we should have something like that if we don't already. That was the league we ditched when I decided to do this one. |
|
|
|
Post by Lunatic Fringe on Dec 21, 2008 0:05:48 GMT -5
I think one thing we definitely need is a regularly updated spreadsheet of MiLB rosters for each team. There have been dozens of occasions in which someone will have claimed a player days or weeks after someone else has owned him. If we had an easily accessible spreadsheet as a reference for which team owns which prospect, this problem would be avoided entirely. That MiLB transaction thread only does its job halfway before turning into a mess. Another issue is clarification among MiLB prospects. There was some commotion late in the season about people being picked up at too young an age or halfway through the season before the actual draft, etc. I'm not saying we need to change the eligibility rules or anything. I think we just need clarification and some clearer explanations of it to avoid any further confusion. That's all I can recall at the moment. 1. I'll make the spreadsheet happen after this year's draft. I'll either find a place to post it here, or e-mail it out once a week. 2. We will have a definite clarification on this before we draft this year. This might have been our single biggest issue this past season, along with a douchebag fucking LM that bailed in July..... |
|
|
|
Post by varsity18 on Dec 21, 2008 0:08:15 GMT -5
hate that guy...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2008 12:53:45 GMT -5
Biggest thing for me is MLB keepers. I think we need to up it be AT LEAST 1 every season now that our MiLB squads start trickling to the big leagues. Personally I'd like to see 3+ increase over this season.
As for the MiLB players that get drafted mid-season, or are signed as interntional free agents, I think the rule should be simple: if they weren't MiLB eligible during our MiLB draft, they can't be added to any rosters until next season's MiLB draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lunatic Fringe on Dec 21, 2008 13:42:28 GMT -5
Something else I think we need to discuss is eligibility for the MiLB roster and when a player has to stay on the MLB roster. She we leave the way it is, with rookie status determining roster status. Should we go strictly to an option method, or maybe incorporate service time?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2008 15:32:23 GMT -5
I think it would be wise for us to start counting rookie stats as WE decide to promote then within this league. If our players amass 50 IP or 130 AB as we activate them on OUR rosters -- whether we decide to start them on an everyday basis or not -- then we lose all options and have to keep them on or drop them. I don't see much of a point in all the adds and drops while they're still MiLB eligible. The odds of a team adding someone of real valuable from the waiver wire, especially one worth using up an option on an MiLB player, are very slim.
We may have over-thought that entire process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lunatic Fringe on Jan 1, 2009 12:32:07 GMT -5
So, the Winter Meetings start today. A few decisions have already been made. There's one new poll up now, and one other that still needs to be decided. Also, we need to figure out the MiLB eligibilty thing. I like Ruck's idea: players will no longer be MiLB eligible when we have used them for 50 IP or 130 AB on our own roster. It's easy to track and would eliminate us having to hold onto guys with 131 AB who get sent down to the minors.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Ayala - Matt on Jan 1, 2009 13:33:45 GMT -5
I like Ruck's idea: players will no longer be MiLB eligible when we have used them for 50 IP or 130 AB on our own roster. It's easy to track and would eliminate us having to hold onto guys with 131 AB who get sent down to the minors. Couldn't we exploit this idea by just leaving a player on the bench? The "active stats" log only keeps track of what they did while in your starting lineup. I think this change would make it really hard to keep track of when a player crosses the IP/AB threshold. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2009 13:53:47 GMT -5
I didn't mean activate as in start a player. I meant more along the lines of owning him in general.... as I feared the same thing you're bringing up. 130/50 accumulated over the course of owning a player (starter or bench player) should be the determinant. Whether you start that player on any particular day is your own preference. But my idea was as long as you own Player X, and you own him in any capacity for 130 AB/50 IP, any ownership up to that threshold constitutes the MiLB status.
As I'm typing this, I realize it seems more complicated than I originally envisioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Ayala - Matt on Jan 1, 2009 14:00:15 GMT -5
Also, how would anybody be able to keep track of how many AB/IP a player has accumulated while on their particular roster, without keeping a separate list (thus making it more complicated)?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2009 14:18:31 GMT -5
When a player is on a MiLB roster and is accumulating stats at the major league level and when he goes over the MiLB requirement are they fair game to any other owner that wants to put a claim in and add to their MLB roster? How long do you need to wait to make a claim?
Its easy to keep track of players and MLB requirements and a few will go over but its our own fault especially if they are on are MiLB roster. We should be able to keep track of our own MiLB team. Other teams we will watch the diamonds and when they go over we will pounce.
I say tough shit if you can't keep track, its your fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Ayala - Matt on Jan 1, 2009 16:02:23 GMT -5
When a player is on a MiLB roster and is accumulating stats at the major league level and when he goes over the MiLB requirement are they fair game to any other owner that wants to put a claim in and add to their MLB roster? How long do you need to wait to make a claim? We should be able to keep track of our own MiLB team. According to the rules: "Once a player loses rookie status, he can no longer be kept on your Minor League roster. You will have 7 days to place him on your Major League Roster. After one week, the player will be placed on waivers." After which point he is indeed fair game and can be claimed by the normal waiver procedure. And yes, the more we keep track of our own teams, the less work for Mack. |
|
|
|
Post by Nuke LaLoosh Express on Jan 1, 2009 16:24:32 GMT -5
I'd say keep it as is. The idea might work but what's the real value in it?
|
|
