|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Sept 13, 2012 18:35:00 GMT -8
I am still confused on salaries with 30 team rosters. Would we leave them the same OR reduce all salaries by $5 to a maximum $30. If left the same, does a $7 keeper count as the 28th round (like now) or 23rd round. Whatever it is, we should try to work it out so 1st round players are worth $30 eventually (& hopefully it doesn't take a few seasons to work out). My other confusion on the keeper draft. When you say, we can protect our top 12 keepers do you mean (1)we can keep the 12 highest dollar keepers or (2)do we get to choose which 12 players are our best keepers. I can see a situation where a $35 player may be one owners favorite keeper while another has a $7 free agent as their favorite keeper. Given thi salary structure of the league, would a better method than protecting 12 players be to allow each owner to protect X players based on a salary limitation (say $180 or so)? Owners would be able to keep whichever 12 players they want to protect. For salaries, if we count the minors draft as the last couple of rounds of the main draft, the salary structure will be the same. I think that we would keep the MLB draft at 35 rounds one last year, to account for trades and keepers that have low value, and then all teams would have to trade drop or DL players to get to 30 active by opening day. Then and player drafted rounds 31-35 would have a value of $6, basically round 30 value. Then the transition to rounds 31-35 being only for minor leaguers would be smooth the next year.
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Dec 18, 2012 15:44:39 GMT -8
I saw that you setup the draft with 35 slots. At the actual draft will we need to draft all 35 (i.e. majors and minors) or will the draft be the first 30 major leaguers and then the slower draft afterward to complete the last 5 minor spots. I prefer the idea of a 2 phased draft splitting minors and mojors in keeping with the previous years.
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Jan 2, 2013 20:49:16 GMT -8
I made plenty of trades too... but even with hoarding as many cheap players as I did, I currently only have 17 players who I plan to keep. So based on the rules I outlined I would lose at most two of the guys I plan on keeping - one of which would be the second-to-last guy I kept. So while there would be a little damage to each current team I am confident it would be pretty minimal. If we were to not have a expansion draft though, the two new teams would stand almost zero chance of being competitive initially. That is my main concern - giving the newbies the chance to compete right away. I understand the need to give the new teams a chance to compete. I also understand the value of keepers, trades, and the hard work put into each others rosters. Therefore, I hesitate to say this, but I am wondering if allowing each team to protect less than 12 players would be more effective at making the expansion teams more competitive from the start. Even if the expansion teams get to keep all the 13th and 14th best keepers from each team, they are stll going to be at a disadvantage. I certainly would hate to lose my 11th best, but when you state that my next 2 are protected I am only risking a minor difference/change. You could even argue for protecting fewer (say the first 8). For the record, as a Carolina Panthers fan, the 1995 NFL expansion with the Panthers was done much more successfully than the Seahawks/Tampa Bay expansion. The Panthers were competitive almost from the start making the NFL mopre competitive sooner. The others (Tampa Bay in particular) seemed to take 10-20 years to grow past expansion status. You can start throwing the tomatos now.
|
|