Keeper World Discussion Thread Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by bjschumacher on 1/30/2015 8:03:00 PM (view original):
What are your thoughts about letting teams sign FAs DURING the R5 roster freeze? That was a topic of discussion while it was actually happening many times.
I wouldn't allow it.   Diminishes the importance of the R5 draft.

I've got 20 players and the 30th pick.   I take a peek at the R5 players, don't see much I like and sign 5 FA to fill out my roster. 
1/31/2015 7:47 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
shobob, if the concept was devised to bring up the worst team, leaving it as is will do that.    If the idea is to get the bottom 10 closer to the top 10, you're not going to do it with the current set-up.   Anything that creates an incentive to lose is bad.   Having a distinct advantage on the WW priority only gives an owner MORE reason to lose 9 of his last 10.    Because you KNOW the WW will be populated.   Teams already tank for draft position.   In your world, WW priority is more important than the draft because you know you're going to see all players(regardless of scouting), you're going to have first pick on 12 of them and you know teams are going to waive worthwhile players.
1/31/2015 7:58 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
And, as an added benefit, #1 WW priority is going to get pick of all the R5 offer backs for the next 15 days.   And you know there will be plenty.


That said, maybe it's just a first year issue.   Maybe owners will learn how to play knowing they'll only be able to protect 20 and there won't be mass DFA/waived players next season.    But it will still be an advantage even if there's only a handful.   Because #1, alone, will have first pick over and over again from first day of roster moves until game 28.
1/31/2015 8:06 AM
shobob
Posts: 3316 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 340
Prospect
Bjschumacher's 3 pre rule 5 successful waiver claim limit idea is easy to enforce. Banning free agent signings for the 24 hour period until after the R5 draft takes place is an idea worth considering too. I'm going to put these to a vote.

1/31/2015 8:34 AM (edited)
shobob
Posts: 3316 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 340
Prospect
Posted by shobob on 1/31/2015 8:34:00 AM (view original):
Bjschumacher's 3 pre rule 5 successful waiver claim limit idea is easy to enforce. Banning free agent signings for the 24 hour period until after the R5 draft takes place is an idea worth considering too. I'm going to put these to a vote.

Ease of enforcement and ease of compliance is my goal. Both of these would qualify.
1/31/2015 8:40 AM
shobob
Posts: 3316 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 340
Prospect
I like the one idea of protecting less than 20 from the rule 5 draft. It never occurred to me that adding MiL scrubs to the ML roster would allow this.
1/31/2015 8:46 AM
bjschumacher
Posts: 4573 (0)
Hall of Famer
49 2 80 449 172
All Star
Just ckarification: so the mechanics of this would be to demote a player off of your ML roster, add a scrub in order to stay at 20 on the ML roaster, then flat out release the scrub. I think that's the only way the system will let you go below 20 on the ML roster, right?
1/31/2015 9:26 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by shobob on 1/31/2015 8:34:00 AM (view original):
Bjschumacher's 3 pre rule 5 successful waiver claim limit idea is easy to enforce. Banning free agent signings for the 24 hour period until after the R5 draft takes place is an idea worth considering too. I'm going to put these to a vote.

The reason I don't like it is because only #1 KNOWS if his claim will be successful.   #2 could make 12 claims in 6 days and get 0.  Because #1 picked all of them.

I kind of feel like I'm beating a dead horse because you're not understanding what I'm saying.  I don't know if it's because I'm wording it poorly or if you're just not interested in understanding.   I'll try again.

My understanding is that the concept is designed to move all teams closer to the middle.   To bring the bottom 10 up to the middle 12 and to bring the upper 10 down towards the middle 12.    In order to do that, the bottom 10 need to be on equal footing.   This can be accomplished by protecting 640 4th year or older players.   Then, from the remaining players from that group, 10 can be drafted 1st to 32nd by the teams.    When you FORCE teams to "unprotect" players by waiving/DFAing before that draft, the #1 priority on the WW gets a head start.    And the #1 guy is guaranteed to get his claims.   None of the other 31 are. 

By eliminating WW claims before the R5, this advantage is removed.   He'll still be number 1 for about 15 days and he'll still get the #1 pick in the draft.   He just won't get pick of the litter from the WW BEFORE the games actually start.



1/31/2015 10:46 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by bjschumacher on 1/31/2015 9:26:00 AM (view original):
Just ckarification: so the mechanics of this would be to demote a player off of your ML roster, add a scrub in order to stay at 20 on the ML roaster, then flat out release the scrub. I think that's the only way the system will let you go below 20 on the ML roster, right?

You'd protect 15(or whatever) like under the same guidelines used in S1. 

Then you'd protect 5 more(or whatever) slugs and promote them to the BL roster.   I'd recommend some sort of slug guideline, probably max #'s for specific categories.    Then, when you set your roster, you can demote the slugs or release them or carry them if you're a tanker.   

1/31/2015 10:49 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
BTW, I can guarantee that anyone who doesn't like the FA signing limit during the R5 freeze and for another 24 hours after it, signed more than one player.   They had access that others did not.   One could argue that the entire FA period passed and those guys could have been signed but they would have been part of the 20.   Anyone signing FA at 4 AM on the day of the R5 freeze is starting with more than 20. 

And I don't want to hear "impact player".     With 640 players protected, you're distributing 641 and beyond.   I'm not sure there are 350 "impact players" in any world.

My rosters are comprised of 1/3 vets that I think I need, 1/3 younger guys who'll get significant playing time and contribute and 1/3 specialty players/roster filler.   IOW, if I have more than 16-17 "impact players on any team, I'd be shocked.     And, in this world, I can protect 20. 
1/31/2015 10:58 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 162 32 129
Prospect
As the guy who benefited from being number 1 on the WW, I'll have to admit that the advantage was much greater than I expected it to be.  I picked up a couple of guys (two, possibly three) who will likely be regulars in my lineup.  Bering #1 also gave me top pick in R5, and will continue to give me top pick during R5 offer backs throughout and at the end of spring training.  

How much of a help will that be to my team?  Only time will tell.  This franchise was mismanaged for a number of years, hasn't had a .500+ record in 15 seasons, and hasn't made the playoffs in 20+ seasons.  Had I not been hampered with around $20m or more of bad contracts spread out across 4-6 players who had no right to ever see a ML contract, I could have done more damage by playing in the FA market before R5.  Because my payroll was tight (I picked up around $16m or so in ML contracts from R5 alone), I stayed completely out of FA before R5.
1/31/2015 11:03 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 162 32 129
Prospect
The other thing I'll point out is to validate what Mike said in his 10:46am post.  Knowing that all my claims were going to be successful changed my approach.  That's going to be true of every single world every season, but when the theme is, by it's very nature, exposing more non-garbage players to the waiver wire, I cannot overstate the value of KNOWING that I'm getting player X as opposed to HOPING player X falls to me.
1/31/2015 11:07 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I don't think being #1 on the WW and getting priority during the entire process will turn the worst team into a playoff contender.    Theoretically, he's getting the 21st or lower player from another roster.    He's still a bad team just not as bad.   However, #2 to #8 might have been 0-5 games worse last season.   And they aren't getting the same benefit from the WW picks.    That's the point I've been trying to make.   Sure the worst team is getting all the advantages but the other, perhaps insignificantly worse, teams at the bottom are not.  
1/31/2015 11:38 AM
shobob
Posts: 3316 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 340
Prospect
I think we might have to play out the season, and observe people's behavior near the end, in order to convince people to enact any changes. It seems like popular opinion is that there are enough rules as it is.
1/31/2015 12:05 PM
shobob
Posts: 3316 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 340
Prospect
Am I wrong that if you ban waiver claims outright before the rule 5 draft, it almost kills the concept entirely? Say you have 30 on your 40, so you waive 10. They clear waivers, and then you demote them to AAA. You have now brought yourself down to 20 without risking the loss of players 21-30 of your 40 man roster. Is there something I am missing here?
1/31/2015 12:14 PM
◂ Prev 1...21|22|23|24|25|26 Next ▸
Keeper World Discussion Thread Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.