|
Post by Hoyas1 on Jan 2, 2009 11:40:56 GMT -5
From old board:
Looks like the options are: 1.) Keep the farm teams and hold the 2nd part of the farm draft when the new owners are on board.
2.) Scrap the farm teams
3.) Keep the farm player but discontinue the farm draft
4.) Drop everyone and start from scratch. -Spectro13
I like farm teams so I would go with option #1 -cccp00a
If we're conducting a vote, put me down for option #1 -eulogy7
|
|
|
Post by Hoyas1 on Jan 2, 2009 11:42:21 GMT -5
From old board:
Are we planning on doing anything to combat what happened at last season's trade deadline?
I don't want the "Buy all the high priced players and dump them at the trade deadline if it doesn't work" strategy to become more prevalent this season.
Some possible solutions include: -Having some sort of franchise tag(s), where a team can keep a player(s) for free for one year or more -Limiting the total difference in the amount of salaries in trades -Move the trade deadline WAY earlier in the season -Increase the keeper cap so that the big-name players actually have a chance of being kept, thus reducing the massive sell-offs.
Also, Since the keeper values rise every year, shouldn't our salary caps rise also? Maybe we get $300 instead of $260 for the total cap and $120 instead of $100 for the keeper cap, with incremental raises to follow every year.
This would mimic the way the MLB salary cap or "luxury tax" rises every year to allow for inflation.
-eulogy7
|
|
|
Post by chinmusic on Jan 2, 2009 14:55:15 GMT -5
Can you post a link to the old board, I deleted it from my browser.
|
|
|
Post by Hoyas1 on Jan 2, 2009 15:08:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by chinmusic on Jan 2, 2009 15:52:55 GMT -5
Are the final rosters from 08 posted anywhere?
|
|
|
Post by Hoyas1 on Jan 2, 2009 16:28:22 GMT -5
They are attached to the e-mail that Andy sent out earlier. They were in excel form. I copied my teams to this site - but, it was not easy to transfer each team.
So, the best thing would be for each owner to copy their team.
If anyone does not have those files just let me know and I will send it over.
Thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2009 16:37:14 GMT -5
I vote for option #1
|
|
|
Post by chinmusic on Jan 2, 2009 16:46:29 GMT -5
I do not have those rosters.
|
|
|
Post by toomuch1 on Jan 3, 2009 19:56:16 GMT -5
All the posted ideas look great. I just don't know how it's possible to set a $100.00 limit on our keepers. If player values keep going up I think $150.00 limit for keepers is more realistic
|
|
|
Post by 25alive on Jan 4, 2009 14:46:06 GMT -5
I really don't think $100 is a bad number. Though I do understand that there was some disagreement last year regarding the strategy I took late in the season in relation to trades. I believe that may be the source of Andy looking to change some things in hope for more long term stability.
This league being an auction and keeper league creates makes it more difficult but $100 for keepers seems fair to me. However another option could be to potentially have a set number of keepers for each team somewhere between 3-5 and then each team enter the draft with $180 and redraft from there. This is just a different thought if people are looking for another option.
Tim - 25 ALIVE
|
|
|
Post by toomuch1 on Jan 4, 2009 18:23:26 GMT -5
Good points and well thought out Tim. My $150.00 was a bit out of left field. I still feel $100.00 is a bit low. If it's a $100.00 I can live with $100.00. You're idea of a set amount of keepers seems to work also. In the past the set number of keepers has been 8-15 in leagues I've managed. It just depends on the league format. I'll still go with what the league feels is best for the league. Warren
|
|
|
Post by 25alive on Jan 6, 2009 19:55:43 GMT -5
In reference to Andy's email today regarding any league changes, let me voice my loud opinion. I can live with or without contracts. I do not want redraft completely as I tried very hard to set my team up for success coming into this year and that would totally discount last year. I am strongly in favor of finishing the farm draft and would be extremely discouraged if a change occurred that took my minor league players away from me. Particularly David Price, yes my opinions are all for selfish reasons.
Anyway that's my two cents, now I'm ready to draft!!!!
|
|
|
Post by lostwaz on Jan 6, 2009 22:29:29 GMT -5
I prefer keeping the league simpler, but will vote for option 1 as it is was what done (I won't say agreed upon because I don't really remember a vote last year - of course that could be my own poor memory) last year.
as for keeper values, I say keep it low - the $100 is okay with me - once again that is what was agreed upon - I actually desire complete redrafting every year. It eliminates all the dumping rpoblems, but as some teams played towards this year and we should be consistent.
trade deadline - make it earlier
I also vote for no increase in salary caps - otherwise people will own players for many years. I'd be for a limit on the number of years any player (once they reach the major leagues as farm players while in the minors should probably be treated differently) can be owned. I am in a dynasty league and am happy I own Braun, etc......., but really prefer a league where player turnover is more frequent and does not allow one team to dominate for years.
|
|
|
Post by Hoyas1 on Jan 7, 2009 11:38:58 GMT -5
I believe what may help with the situation like last year is to do away with a $$ cap for keepers. That rule in and of itself encourages an owner to stack up on cheap young talent. Nothing that was done last year went against the guidelines that this league promoted.
If we want to look at capping the number of players kept or even the number of players kept at each value may help in this area. For example:
We could keep 2 players selected off of the waiver wire the previous year 3 players valued at $1 - $10 2 Players valued at $11 - $20 1 Player valued at $21 - $30 1 Player valued at $31 +
This would also ensure a fair amount of talent was back in the auction each year.
Just something to think about.
|
|
|
Post by ntsluggers on Jan 8, 2009 10:17:49 GMT -5
It may just be me, but I don't really see any problems or issues with the $100 keeper cap. Why increase the cap on an annual basis? We don't increase the $260 cap, so there is no reason for a keeper cap increase.
What I like about the $100 cap is that it requires team to determine what is important to them - (a) keep a lot of young, cheap players or (b) keep an expensive guy which decreases the number of overall keepers.
|
|