|
Post by Cardinals GM(Jared) on Nov 22, 2011 13:21:52 GMT -6
Dealing with phillies is difficult. I offered a pretty nice sum for Cano.
Hint...if you get tons of people asking about a guys rights, you are gonna have to PAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY the brother.
I thought I'd start a thread with serious bids on the guy for next year.
Projecting my roster past this year. I should have somewhere around $200.0 at the beginning of next year. Before I resign kemp and/or sign Cano. My First priority will be Kemp at 50-60 a year, leaving me 150 for 2013.
I will take advantage of that cap for 2012. So I have 150 this year for all my remaining FAs. I'd rather sign cano this year for somewhere around $65 bc I have the pieces to be able to do that.
|
|
|
Post by adamdunnsbigstick on Nov 22, 2011 13:52:44 GMT -6
LOL a "pretty nice sum". whatever.
also I dont know how you like to do math but you have 150 in cap.
|
|
|
Post by darealastros on Nov 22, 2011 14:40:45 GMT -6
I've been saying for 3 years that the prospect contracts were going to be the doom of the league.
65M on Cano and Yankees proclaiming he will drop 75 on Adrian Gonzo. Congrats boys we are now approaching the point where those with prospect contracts will dominate the rest. And before any of you say it, this isn't sour grapes. I got handed the mess of a team I have now. I have been telling you this problem was going to happen. Enjoy!
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Nov 22, 2011 15:06:06 GMT -6
Hey Cards you know the term don't throw stones while in glass houses? Nick Franklin is 21 years old and a projected 2012 September call up at a prime position, who will be a starter in 2013 exactly when I will lose my starting SS. you selected in the first ..... wait for it ...
Hector Rondon
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2011 15:07:35 GMT -6
I've been saying for 3 years that the prospect contracts were going to be the doom of the league. 65M on Cano and Yankees proclaiming he will drop 75 on Adrian Gonzo. Congrats boys we are now approaching the point where those with prospect contracts will dominate the rest. And before any of you say it, this isn't sour grapes. I got handed the mess of a team I have now. I have been telling you this problem was going to happen. Enjoy! YUP I agree too but Oh well....
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Nov 22, 2011 15:43:22 GMT -6
let me say I couldn't agree more and when I threw out my rule change idea it was ignored and can solve at least a little bit of this. What I suggested to refresh your memories or for those that didn't see it is that we can re-sign players long term who are coming up before their contract is up. This eliminates alot of the spendable salary cap. What I proposed is te hometown discount where if a player is coming on a contract (like say Braves with Tulo in 2012). He gets a chance the year before to re-sign him for the average price of the top 5 short stops. Sure here are a few exceptions like Tulo that will get a small price break but the fact is it's a loyalty kinda thing and the same happens in real baseball. It's not like any of these guys will go for nothing and most will be paid for fair value
Like Cards points out with him having about $200 M next season , this year I have $130 M + and need one player. So I could seriously sign AGone for $100 M this year on a one year deal. Why wouldn't I?
I'm not saying that this will fix all the problems but it certainly can help them, it also gets people to think long term rather than year to year, as well as keeping "franchise players" on their teams. I think it leads to a loyalty thing and adds interest as well. If this doesn't happen why not just sign huge guys year after year to one year deals? Let me know what you guys think.
I have also heard of the "franchise tag" on guys which is also interesting but that should have to also allocate money. The point is what Kevin says is right, anyone who has young guys will dominate and just get 2-3 huge contract guys. And I know someone like Cards will say this benefits me but look at my team I am built for 3+ years extremely young and will have that disposable income year after year. We are heading in a situation where I can go after Cano in a bidding war and watch him go for $90 M+ etc , it's something we can fix though so let's implement this
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM(Mike) on Nov 22, 2011 15:51:57 GMT -6
2 easy things that could be done to curb this either lower the cap or put a cap on the max dollar amount a contract can be.
Not a fan of francising guys cause i think it limits turnover and that can lead to boredom and staleness.
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees GM(Tommy) on Nov 22, 2011 16:03:14 GMT -6
Stars - the problem with that is it just can't be done this far into the league. Most guys have their teams set up already preparing with the rules in place as far as cap and contracts.
As far as the "staleness" I am not arguing with that but the fact is in a dynasty league there is supposed to be limited turnover. The whole point of a dynasty league as opposed to a one year or even keeper league is exactly what you would propose to prevent. In most dynasty leagues there is lifetime contracts actually so there is almost no turnover. This is the most turnover I have ever seen in a dynasty league. If that's what the league wants to become more of a one year league then fine but the purpose of a dynasty league with a minor league system is the guys you draft and invest in should be on your team for half a decade at the very least and most should be for their careers if all works well.
|
|
|
Post by darealastros on Nov 22, 2011 16:05:47 GMT -6
This is what should be done for all auctions - Blind bidding.
Trecker should let 10 guys be nominated and open a 48 hour window for people to PM him their "bids" (ex. Kaz Matsui is opened by Trecker and I send him a pm with my contract "3 years - 10m") who ever has the highest blind bid wins him. If it is a guy with RFA rights Trecker posts the winning bid and the RFA holder has his option to accept/decline his rights.
Another solution would be for the person with the RFA rights to receive the bids and then he posts the highest bid and accepts/declines the rights. The RFA holder wouldn't be able to cheat the system becasue the people who bid would know if they were getting cheated.
BOOM fixed.
|
|
|
Post by darealastros on Nov 22, 2011 16:11:05 GMT -6
Part 2 of fixing prospect contracts:
you get your prospects for free the first year (before rookie contract starts) after that year the prospect gets 4 years of "arbitration" that would work the same way as free agency. You get blind bids from people on prospects and take the average of the bids. (ex. for Desmond Jennings say trecker gets 4 bids of 10, 12, 8, and 15) average those bids together and then take the middle of that number and the rookie contract numbers (1, 1.75, 2.5, 4) and theres your salary for next year.
In this example you average 10, 12, 8, and 15 to get 11.25 then take his "Rookie Salary" of 1.00, the average of those numbers is 6.125. That would be Jennings Salary.
BOOM just fixed arbitration and I would be fine with being the "arbiter" of the league and keeping accurate documentation of all the bids placed and the salaries should you all decide.
|
|
|
Post by darealastros on Nov 22, 2011 16:14:06 GMT -6
As an addendum to keep people from being idiots and blind bidding 100 mil on prospects to drive up their salary you would throw out the highest bids.
I think doing arbitration would also help keep the league active during this dead period.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves GM(T.J.) on Nov 22, 2011 18:11:11 GMT -6
You all are proposing some pretty drastic changes to a league that has worked really well going on its 5th year. A blind bidding process is something I am not in favor of. Yankees rule idea sounds complicated and will be hard to determine a value if 2 of the top 5 players at their position are on a rookie contract.
Yes a $100 1 year bid is bad for the league. So to combat this I think the best course of action is to revamp the auction process (as suggested by another gm). In lieu of it be a winner by highest annual contract value we make it a cumulative contract. For instance: Yankees bids $100 for 1 year on AGon. Rays can follow that up with a 2 year $55 bid or $110 cumulative. Since this a dynasty league I also think we should discuss whether to remove the year limit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2011 18:26:05 GMT -6
I'll be ok with what Yankees proposed but Kevin's idea is too much! And I won't even Consider because it will be TOO Much for a Change!! Tommy's Idea is more of a Quick Fix and IMHO better for the League !! Cause CAP SPACE Should have NEVER been Upped from 180 to 280!!! But that NOW U cannot go back to 180 either cause of all the Bad Contracts! AND NO! i don't want that there be ANOTHER Rule to DROP BAD Contracts cause the Problems will REPEAT Again didn't it??? So to fix that I think Yankees Idea will work out Good for the Future!! Kevin's idea is Good but Too much for me! Cause I'll probably LEAVE when that rule is in Effect!! When I FIRST entered in this league back in 2007 it wasn't supposed to be so many Dramatic Changes every freaking Year I just wanna play some DYNASTY!!! My proposition is TAKE Yankees Idea make it Happen NOW!!!!! And then Leave EVERYTHING Else like it is!!! This isn't MLB that we have to Sign a Deal every 5 years!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2011 18:27:39 GMT -6
You all are proposing some pretty drastic changes to a league that has worked really well going on its 5th year. A blind bidding process is something I am not in favor of. Yankees rule idea sounds complicated and will be hard to determine a value if 2 of the top 5 players at their position are on a rookie contract. Yes a $100 1 year bid is bad for the league. So to combat this I think the best course of action is to revamp the auction process (as suggested by another gm). In lieu of it be a winner by highest annual contract value we make it a cumulative contract. For instance: Yankees bids $100 for 1 year on AGon. Rays can follow that up with a 2 year $55 bid or $110 cumulative. Since this a dynasty league I also think we should discuss whether to remove the year limit. I also don't like this!
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Rockies GM(John) on Nov 22, 2011 18:50:52 GMT -6
Ive been thinking the same as Braves for awhile. It first started when I wondered why someone who bid 1 year for 30M would take precedence over a 3 year 25M bid. Doing it by cumulative value would entice owners to offer more years and also lower the yearly salaries. Everything has a downside of course, for instance owners could bid 4 years on everyone in an attempt to win this year (lowering the yearly cap hit allowing them to sign more stars) and mortgage the future. But similar things are already going on and I dont think anything would be perfect.
As per Yankees approach you could just scrap the salary cap and auction altogether and make it a true dynasty league. If you draft a guy he is yours until you trade him or cut him. This would make it tough for the worse teams to compete any time soon though.
|
|