|
Post by Chicago Cub Sox (Scott) on Aug 27, 2016 13:05:44 GMT -5
Good points Drew. Maybe it should only apply to Rusney Rule and International Free Agents signed in season. I don't think we can do anything about not allowing an owner to sign a player in preseason Free Agency for 1 year, $28M.
And in season, you could sign any Free Agent out there for a large 1 year contract and then Franchise Tag him for less, right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2016 14:31:45 GMT -5
I just don't think it's fair to peg my move as manipulating the rules. Why should I continue to try to make win now moves, when I have no chance to "win now"? My offseason strategy was clear....acquire a bevy of prospects and sign mostly short term one year deals in off season free agency to try to win this year. When those moves didn't all work out, injuries struck, shields/wainwright/price underperformed, I began to look to the future. I don't understand why some people seem to have such an issue with that. Why hold onto guys only signed thru 16 when I'm out of the winnings? I traded guys for future pieces and released some as well so I could sign gourriel. By signing him this year with the plan to RFA him, how am I getting a discount or manipulating the rules? There is nothing that addresses this type of move and all I'm doing getting a slight edge by not having to bid against myself.
In addition, this move is not my sole idea. I know the same thing happened in DD1 with gourriel and I wouldn't be surprised if there were several comparable offers having the same idea in mind....to RFA him or Franchise him. This is sort of beginning to feel like a witch hunt. Just look back to off season free agency in dd1, dd2 and dd3. How many out of hand 1 or 2 year deals were signed? You don't think people had the same idea of signing high price deals now to get a discount or advantage in the future? Why should this be against the rules anyways? Teams should be able to gamble on their own and raise their own salaries short term. I also happen to think it helps competitive balance.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cub Sox (Scott) on Aug 27, 2016 15:02:57 GMT -5
For the record, and I'm going off of 4 years experience in these Diamond Duos leagues, nothing Tripp says is off base. It was within his allowable cap and is still a risk for 2017 and beyond. That's all RFAs ever are anyway.
|
|
|
Post by St. Louis Orioles (Drew) on Aug 27, 2016 15:27:44 GMT -5
Tripp, this is by no means an attack on you. Your signing was a fully legal and fully within the rules. I just think the rules are wrong. I don't, by any means, blame you for doing it. If I had the resources, I might have considered the same thing. In fact, I made a similar one-year signing of Max Scherzer at the start of DD2 when his free agent destination was up in the air. I signed him to a large one year deal and then franchised him after that one year expired. Slightly different situation, but the result was similar.
I just don't think this is a reasonable way to go about the Rusney Rule. We are going to make everyone hold off on signing a guy, and then whoever happens to have the most single year cap room available gets the guy and the right to franchise him/ RFA him the following year? Seems like a flaw in the system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2016 16:34:37 GMT -5
"This 2 month Gourriel rental is total BS and a complete skirt of the spirit of the Franchise tag rule."
I think we know where you were going with this Drew. I'm open for discussion on any and every rule just like I'm open to discuss and and every player. When people fire off comments like this because "sour grapes", I'm not going to just standby and not comment.
If we want to have a big boy discussion, let's do it. I think the rule is fair as is. I didn't happen to have the "most cap space at the time". I made several calculated trades and drops (while taking on future financial hits due to salary cuts/obligations) to make the room for gourriel. Just look at the moves yourself. ANY owner could have done this as well. You could have done the same very easily Drew since you're out of 2016
If we have enough people that vote on changing the rule, by all means let's do it. I'd suggest something more simple. Rusney rule players simply aren't eligible until either the following MILB draft or the following off season FA period.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cub Sox (Scott) on Aug 27, 2016 16:57:30 GMT -5
I love this league and how much the owners care about it too.
Why haven't there been any comments in the other two leagues about this? I even got a PM from the DD1 owner letting me know Gurriel was available. What is that? The trading deadline has passed!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2016 20:09:16 GMT -5
OK guys, I want to start thinking more about 2017 and getting this Constitution tweaked and revised as needed. Thanks for all the previous comments in this thread. Here are some items that we need to address: 1) Minor league claims in season - to be posted on the board as opposed to sent in via blind email. 2) Compensation for Restricted Free Agents (RFA) that sign with another team. 3) I think we should have a minimum of AAS $1M for 3 years or more of free agent contracts in season. 4) Outrighting process - is it from time of outright post on the board, or should we use standings as of 48 hours later, or even 2 days later end of games? This needs to be clarified. 5) Trade deadline. Some feel the August 7th deadline is too early in the season and it doesn't allow teams to improve over the last 2 months of the season in ways other than FA signings. Should we modify this rule and allow for some sort of trading after August 7? Maybe something similar to MLB and players have to pass through waivers after that date? Definitely up for discussion. 6) League fee change? Keep $50, make it $30 or something else? Not sure this needs to be in Rules discussion but something we want to address. What else am I missing? Awesome banter about Yulieski, not sure we need a rule regarding these type players. There is maybe 1 or 2 players every couple of years and everyone had a chance to bid. Just happens that Tripp maneuvered his way into a lot of cap space. As for the rest, this league was a start-up so it provided some opportunity to claim players, etc. I feel there will be a lot less opportunity in year 2 and beyond. We are all really digging for diamonds in the rough at this point. 1) Posting MiLB claims on the board would take a lot of heat off of Scott. I think this is the way to go. 2) I posted a thread about this earlier on. I think it would be a great if we can get this done. As long as we hold the draft after restricted free agency then this would be easy to do. After the restricted FA period is over if someone declines to match the offer then a sandwich round could be established in reverse order of the standings. 3) No comments here. Would not be opposed to the 1M minimum AAS for in-season FA. 4) Outrighting process - I would vote for having the claim awarded to the owner according to the standings after the last game has been played on the day the player was outrighted. 5) Trade deadline - This is the one area that I would like to see be changed the most. Trading is the most significant way to improve your team and for 1/3 of the season in the DD format, trading is extinguished due to the trade deadline. This is the one area where we should not model after MLB. There really isn't much incentive to sign-on to proboards after the trade deadline has passed. Most moves (calling-up a minor, 1 monthly bid on a MiLB, or an in-season FA bid) do not involve interacting with other owners. Maybe there is a creative solution or simply just pushing the deadline back to September 1st would help. I might be in the minority here, but I would like to see an active league rather than a set it and forget league with two months remaining in the season. 6) Would prefer the league fee to be lowered to $30, but not a sticking point for playing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2016 20:25:02 GMT -5
I actually think J has brought up a good point at the deadline. My pro board time will dip a bit after the deadline, as I'm sure it will others as well. I'll try to think of something creative....wouldn't be opposed to 9-1-16. I think the league review process will have to take a closer look at late deals. I trust Scott, Henry and Brent to catch anything fishy.
|
|
|
Post by Texas Giants (Alex) on Aug 27, 2016 21:39:30 GMT -5
For what it's worth I tried to sign Gourriel for 20M+ as well. However.... I do agree with Drew, I think it's a bad rule in the long run. It means teams that are out of it have a big incentive to totally clean out their cap space which, while it is not specifically tanking, has some of the same effects on league balance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2016 11:55:04 GMT -5
I agree with the trade deadline. I'm sure we were all rushing around trying to get deals done or inquire about someone. Either we got a deal done or it took to much time coming up with a"FAIR" trade for both teams and it died at the deadline. There is still so much of the season left and the Chumpionship is still in somewhat a tight race. Extending the deadline would create a more active league. I've been in some FFB league were you could trade up till the final couple of teams are set up. Giving teams a good chance to claim top spot and bottom teams better chances at securing decent future pieces. As far as the other items we are talking about I'm still new to these type of leagues but I do like the input from everyone and the desire to make this league unique and awesome.
Everyone is making a huge stink about the Rusney Rule so I would like everyone to have the option of having Rusney on your team and suck up allot of money and do absolutely squat. Lol lol
|
|