Items to Vote Upon

[TheVolCub08]

Add yours as you think of them. (Yes, I fully anticipate Levin just vomiting ideas all over this thread!)

 

Restrictions on # of SP per roster

# of SP active

Total number of keepers (as we move toward more of a dynasty type of league)

Total number of points that can be kept

Roster expansions

[CubbieBum]

You missed the one talked most about :P .

 

What to do after the June Rookie Draft.

[mhuber92211]

so it is moving to a dynasty league?

[CubbieBum]

As far as the keeper points go I think we should hold off on that vote for awhile so we can get an idea of how many points each player will score and how our teams look. My personal preference as it stands now is it keep it as it is. People traded points for next season assuming the points would stay the same. If we then bump the point total up a lot those trades lose value for the person who got points because of a rule change months later.

 

I would vote to keep things the same for this coming offseason because people have drafted and made trades based on this system. Then starting with the following season we go to a more dynasty type league (would have to vote on specifics).

 

The first poll we should do is how to handle guys who will be drafted in June and added randomly by CBS (hold them till league draft, hold a separate Amateur draft, stay with current system).

 

I would then do a simple vote on whether to go into a dynasty type league. Just do that vote in a two parts. First a simple yes or no on going to dynasty format. Then if going to dynasty is the majority we determine whether to go to that immediately or hold off for a season.

[TheVolCub08]

so it is moving to a dynasty league?

 

Nothing has been decided yet. We'll vote. Even if we go that route, it would be a gradual process... like after NEXT season. We'd likely grow to 15 keepers first, and then to 18 or 20 the following offseason. So, even if it moves that way, it's going to be gradual enough to give people a solid chance at building what they'd want for a dynasty team.

 

No worries. We're still going to have at least two full seasons of this format.

[moochpuppy]

so it is moving to a dynasty league?

 

Nothing has been decided yet. We'll vote. Even if we go that route, it would be a gradual process... like after NEXT season. We'd likely grow to 15 keepers first, and then to 18 or 20 the following offseason. So, even if it moves that way, it's going to be gradual enough to give people a solid chance at building what they'd want for a dynasty team.

 

No worries. We're still going to have at least two full seasons of this format.

 

I think the SCP should increase slightly, maybe to 2000-2100. I would also like to see an increase in keepers this offseason from 12 to 15 and a minor league expansion from 10 to 15.

[moochpuppy]

I have a tweak to the exempt player rule that may interest people for voting on.

[TheVolCub08]

I have a tweak to the exempt player rule that may interest people for voting on.

 

Let's hear it. I also agree with a bump in keeper points, but if we're bumping up to 15 keepers, I think we need to go to 2500 points at the very least.

[moochpuppy]

I have a tweak to the exempt player rule that may interest people for voting on.

 

Let's hear it. I also agree with a bump in keeper points, but if we're bumping up to 15 keepers, I think we need to go to 2500 points at the very least.

 

The way the system is now once a player reaches 130 AB/50 IP that players exempt clock begins to tick and he is exempt for the next three seasons. Sometimes with these young players they don't always stick in the majors, get injured or become bench players or what not. What if the rule changed that instead of the next three years automatically being exempt, that we change it so the player is exempt until he reaches that same plateau (130/50) for three more seasons. For example.....Josh Johnson's exempt clock began to tick during the 2006 season. He was exempt then for 2007, 2008 & 2009, however, he only pitched 15 innings in 2007 and whatever team had him lost out on that exempt year. The new rule would allow for 2007 not to have counted against him and he would still have 2010 to be exempt.

 

As far as the increase in keeper points maybe we should keep it within the current average per player? We currently sit at 1800 SCP with 12 keepers (150 per). Increasing the keepers to 15 would put the cap at 2250 SCP.

[CubbieBum]

I have a tweak to the exempt player rule that may interest people for voting on.

 

Let's hear it. I also agree with a bump in keeper points, but if we're bumping up to 15 keepers, I think we need to go to 2500 points at the very least.

 

The way the system is now once a player reaches 130 AB/50 IP that players exempt clock begins to tick and he is exempt for the next three seasons. Sometimes with these young players they don't always stick in the majors, get injured or become bench players or what not. What if the rule changed that instead of the next three years automatically being exempt, that we change it so the player is exempt until he reaches that same plateau (130/50) for three more seasons. For example.....Josh Johnson's exempt clock began to tick during the 2006 season. He was exempt then for 2007, 2008 & 2009, however, he only pitched 15 innings in 2007 and whatever team had him lost out on that exempt year. The new rule would allow for 2007 not to have counted against him and he would still have 2010 to be exempt.

 

As far as the increase in keeper points maybe we should keep it within the current average per player? We currently sit at 1800 SCP with 12 keepers (150 per). Increasing the keepers to 15 would put the cap at 2250 SCP.

 

I like the exemption thing a lot and would definitely vote for it.

 

The keeper points is a bit too low from Mooch and I think 2500 is just right but would rather go lower than higher. Mooch going with the same ratio as with 12 players isn't right because no one will have more exempt players worth keeping. That means the extra players kept are going to cost more on average than the previous 12 because as I mentioned they will most likely be non-exempt players.

 

I don't want to go too high and allow everyone to keep three more really good non-exempt players because that will severely weaken the draft and make it hard for bad teams to improve (especially if new draftees from the June draft aren't held for the league draft). I think giving 700 more points allows a team to keep 1 more top player, 1 decent player and one somewhat promising but under-performing player. For instance a guy like Jake Fox wasn't kept but in this scenario probably would be as the exempt player.

 

That would still leave quite a few quality players in the league draft.

[TheVolCub08]

Clint... while I like the idea about exemptions, it would bring up a tricky situation for some relievers, I would think. What are your thoughts on that? Also, are you suggesting that a player only burns an exemption when they reach the 50/130 threshold in 3 separate seasons?

[moochpuppy]

Clint... while I like the idea about exemptions, it would bring up a tricky situation for some relievers, I would think. What are your thoughts on that?

 

What we could do with relievers is we could use a certain amount of appearences instead of innings pitched once they first hit that 50 IP threshold.

 

 

Also, are you suggesting that a player only burns an exemption when they reach the 50/130 threshold in 3 separate seasons?

 

Correct.