Posted by deanod on 9/30/2010 10:54:00 PM (view original):
How about this: nobody thinks your idea is worthwhile and it will never happen.

THE END!!!

Why?

Do you speak for everybody now?

Or do you just believe what Mike says because if Mike says it it must be true?

(yes, I'm messing with you. you don't have to answer.)

Free Agent compensation comes from the principle that teams who want to retain a player are unable to do so because the player would rather player for another team/larger contract.

You, on the other hand, don't want the player. You didn't extend him. You didn't bid on him. You refused to even throw $1M at him and store him on your bench where he can get you a pick next year. You did none of those things. You don't want to retain the player. Therefore, you don't get compensation.

"I'm not proposing everybody ranking their own FAs and deciding if they should be A or B or not."

Not everybody?  Just you?

"If you have a few minutes, what do you see so clearly that I'm missing?"

What I see clearly is that the Type A/B system is an objective grading system intended to determine possible compensation to teams in return for their departing free agents.  You want to make it a subjective grading system in order to game the process for your own self-serving benefit.

You seem to not understand that.

Posted by deanod on 9/30/2010 10:54:00 PM (view original):
How about this: nobody thinks your idea is worthwhile and it will never happen.

THE END!!!

I'm nobody then?

Nobody's pointing out one obvious problem, which is that this system would artificially add yet another advantage experienced owners have over less experienced ones.

Put simply: I've been through more than 40 free agency periods in six different worlds, so I have a pretty good idea of which Type A/B free agents will get signed (although I'm occasionally surprised). But imagine a guy who's starting his very first offseason trying to make that determination. Hell, it was overwhelming for me taking over a new team last month, with all the players I knew nothing about, and I've been playing this game for 4 1/2 years.

I don't think the system is broken now. It mimics real life (anyone wanna ask Orlando Hudson or Orlando Cabrera how they feel about Type A designation?), although we don't have to offer arbitration to departing free agents to receive compensation (which is something Admin has assured me "will never happen"). Sometimes you benefit, sometimes you get burned. What you're asking for is a way to hedge your bets.

I still agree with the OP here.   I think it's annoying (and not a good thing)  when good/not great players have to sit out half of the year because of being stuck with a type A designation.  We all know that overall is not a good indicator of actual value, so sometimes a player is a type A who really shouldn't be based on performance.  I've read all of the opposing viewpoints, and nobody has convinced me that this will have a detrimental effect on the game.

WOW!

How is "I'd like to make my Type A a Type B so he has a better chance of getting signed" fundamentally different than "I'd like to make my Type B a Type A so he has a lesser chance of getting signed"?    Essentially both owners would be manipulating the system for their own good. 

You want to make it a subjective grading system...

Giving an owner the option of changing a Type A to a Type B is hardly making it a subjective process.

That's exactly what it is.  Look up the definition of "subjective".  You're making a call, based on your own personal experience and/or opinion, that you would benefit more from a player being downgraded to a Type B instead of remaining a Type A.  How can you deny that that's subjective?

Here's another part of the problem with that.  Two similar, almost identical FA's, leaving two different teams.  One former owner wants to keep their guy as a Type A. with the hope of getting a first round comp pick  The other owner decides to downgrade his guy to Type B.  Who's going to be more attractive to sign on the FA market?  In order to now not get shut out from receiving any compensation at all, the first owner now feels compelled to also downgrade his guy to a Type B just to be in the running.  Repeat this many times over and you now have a FA pool with a lot less Type A's and a lot more Type B's.  Screws up the whole dynamic of the FA period.  Plus, it pretty much throws the integrity of the Type A/B compensation process out the window.

You also mention (I believe) that your decision to downgrade a player from A to B would be strategy.  I would say that having a lot fewer Type A's on the market actually reduces overall strategy from the larger pool of owners as a whole.  If I have nothing to lose by signing a Type B (who otherwise might have been a Type A), then I don't have to make the strategic decision of "do I pursue this Type A, or do I look for a slightly less quality Type B and save my draft pick?"

All this suggestion accomplishes is that it's just another attempt to dumb down the game.  Give me more opportunities to get compensation picks that I might not have otherwise received.  Really, not much different than the periodic requests for better DITR's.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2010 8:07:00 AM (view original):
WOW!

How is "I'd like to make my Type A a Type B so he has a better chance of getting signed" fundamentally different than "I'd like to make my Type B a Type A so he has a lesser chance of getting signed"?    Essentially both owners would be manipulating the system for their own good. 

It's not fundamentally different at all. Two sides of the same coin.

Thank God I'm not the only one who sees that.   I was seriously beginning to wonder if I was missing something.

Sorry I'm late.

Officially deemed a DUMB IDEA!!!!!

Green is the new official colour. How do you like?