|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves (whiteyherzog) on Feb 22, 2014 12:02:03 GMT -6
Personally don't like minimums of any kind.
You tbraves13 are basically going from saying you don't want to be forced to sign a player at a 5 year deal to making people sign players to 2 or 1 year deals by incorporating a minimum. Sorry but I don't see the consistency in that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2014 12:30:56 GMT -6
That was my thought when I read the post as well. Maybe just set a max of 4 & 5 year deals and let you do whatever with the rest.
|
|
|
|
Post by St. Louis Cardinals on Feb 22, 2014 17:32:20 GMT -6
To be honest, I think it is going to end up being a nonissue anyways. Are people really going to commit 19M to Miggy Cabrera for 5 years? Probably not. The only players who are gonna get locked up long term are the young studs, and that's the way it should be in a dynasty league.
I really do not think we need any limits, but I understand the logic behind it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins (tbraves13) on Feb 23, 2014 12:28:54 GMT -6
Personally don't like minimums of any kind. You tbraves13 are basically going from saying you don't want to be forced to sign a player at a 5 year deal to making people sign players to 2 or 1 year deals by incorporating a minimum. Sorry but I don't see the consistency in that? That is because you want some players to be free agents after year 1. I don't know if you are in our football league...but everyone was given long term deals so there was horrible horrible free agents in the first year and pretty bad in year 2. The minimum is there so there are some players that are free agents after year one. And ummm...you are going to have to sign people to 1/2 year deals no matter what...you won't have a choice b/c of their salary you will be limited. Maxing out the long term deals assures that people don't give 7 1 year deal and 18 5 year deals....like I said I don't know if you are in our football league or not...but we are trying to avoid the issue that happened in that league. Minimum for 1 years...max for 4/5 is the best option in my opinion . I don't really want to be told how many 1,2,3,4 and 5 year deals my team is gonna have. Let me decide that. Just my opinion as I am sure everyone has their own idea. Was just taking your idea and tweaking it. |
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves (whiteyherzog) on Feb 23, 2014 12:49:55 GMT -6
Nobody is telling you to do anything under what I had except limiting long term deals. Under what I had you wouldn't have 18 5 year deals so I'm not sure what you are arguing against. I just don't want to be told that I have to have a certain amount of 1 or 2 year deals. Limiting certain contracts is what my idea does, your idea makes certain contracts mandatory which I'm against.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Commish) on Feb 24, 2014 18:36:10 GMT -6
This will solve tbraves13 concerns 5 year contracts limited to 3 players 4 year contracts limited to 4 players 3 year contracts limited to 5 players 2 year contracts limited to 6 players 1 year contracts no limits. That way you can have 25 one year contracts if you want, you are just limited on the multiyear deals Alright after a lot of thought, this is the system I'm going with. It still allows teams to sign 25 1 year deals if they want to but also prevents teams from keeping all 25 of their players for 4 or 5 years which was the goal of this rule. The limits above are only for contracts in the Inaugural Player’s Draft. The limits do not apply to future in-season and offseason free agency. Also the $500k rule does not apply to Inaugural Draft Contracts. The $500k rule will come in effect during free agency. If your not aware. The $500k rule says if you win a player for the MLB minimum of $500k you are only allowed to sign said player for up to 2 years. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Commish) on Feb 25, 2014 20:14:07 GMT -6
Still getting a lot of grief on this. If someone can come up with a better system or if everyone agrees that no system is needed then I would be ok with changing it as long as people don't bitch about it screwing up their draft strategy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2014 2:29:05 GMT -6
Still getting a lot of grief on this. If someone can come up with a better system or if everyone agrees that no system is needed then I would be ok with changing it as long as people don't bitch about it screwing up their draft strategy. Maybe open up a new thread to vote on that specific aspect? I would like to see some proposals for different solutions. Otherwise Whitey's last proposal on 2/21 works ok with me. But let's do it soon before the draft gets further along. Not generally kosher to tweak rules once the draft starts. The beauty of a dynasty league is that if a certain rule doesn't work you can always tweak it next year. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Commish) on Feb 26, 2014 8:25:27 GMT -6
well this rule will only apply for the draft so we won't have to tweak it but yes I know what your saying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2014 9:00:58 GMT -6
well this rule will only apply for the draft so we won't have to tweak it but yes I know what your saying. ^^That's what I meant.  It was 4am and I had very little sleep. Perhaps I should table my 4am ideas for when I get more sleep. HA! |
|
