|
Post by Seattle Mariners (zach) on Nov 13, 2015 0:28:32 GMT -6
Looking for ideas of what people would like to change in the league. Any and all ideas are welcome. Try to be as clear as possible and we will vote on ideas in the coming weeks. Feel free to discuss ideas, but keep things civil. Examples of changes to get the mind churning: scoring changes, schedule changes, start limits, positional requirements, ways to improve activity in the league, communication improvements, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Oakland A's (Scott) on Nov 16, 2015 11:25:29 GMT -6
Just dropping in to say that I cant think of any major rule changes.
|
|
|
Post by Miami Marlins (John) on Nov 16, 2015 13:26:00 GMT -6
I'd like to see the coverage limit lowered some and I think you and one other person should redraft SF and CIN from those 2 rosters since SF was built and CIN was wrecked by collusion. It would help fill CIN I think.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves (whiteyherzog) on Nov 16, 2015 14:15:38 GMT -6
I agree totally with Marlins on both accounts. Otherwise I think the league is great including the rules
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Mariners (zach) on Nov 16, 2015 18:00:16 GMT -6
I am starting to think that balancing out SF/CIN might be best since they were the cheating teams and SF is so much better than average and CIN is so much worse than average. I will discuss this with Adam and if we decide to go that route, I will talk to the new SF owner to see if he wants to switch teams.
|
|
|
Post by Washington Nationals on Nov 16, 2015 18:19:26 GMT -6
That does sound like the right thing to do
|
|
|
Post by Kansas City Royals (benzies10) on Nov 18, 2015 18:15:23 GMT -6
My rule change suggestion is to have the salaries of the guys on the 60 day DL NOT count against the cap. If not all of the salary at least 50% not count against the cap to help teams who have studs hurt for all or most of the season.
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees on Nov 19, 2015 12:42:56 GMT -6
I agree with KC I would like to see a break in the cap for guys on the 60 day DL. I am in favor of having none count so you have cash to help replace that. If you had a stud go on the 60 day DL & he was making a lot of money you are screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Kansas City Royals (benzies10) on Nov 19, 2015 15:55:20 GMT -6
I know we have a set schedule but I would like to see it randomized. Play the same opponents just in randomized weeks. I offer to assist in it if need be.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Commish) on Nov 20, 2015 10:27:32 GMT -6
Schedule probably wont change and don't see a reason to randomize it more then it already is. It took me several days to come up with the schedule we have now and to make it work out perfectly. The way it is now you get to play your division teams twice, all of the other teams from your league once and then you play 1 team from each division in the other league.
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins (tbraves13) on Nov 20, 2015 12:26:31 GMT -6
Scoring for RP to change. They are over-valued right now. There should never be a RP in your top 20 or even in your top 50 in my opinion. Right now I believe it hurts the value of SP. If you have a good bullpen you can be a really good team with 2 or 3 SP. We have seen it happen in both the 2 years of the league. I would suggest 2 for a save and 1 for a hold
I also think blown saves need to change. RP that come in the 6th inning and give up 1 run get a blown save and are not eligible to get any of those points back since we do not award points for wins or runners inherited that do not score. I would suggest -2 for a blown save.
Another idea is to lower the CG/SO points. If you pitcher pitches a complete game they already received points for 9 innings pitched plus all the stats accrued for the outing. Awarding 8 for that is crazy as it puts that SP to 25-35 points for the start. That is equal to a lot of teams total hitting for the week. One start should not be value that much. I would suggest getting only 3 points for SO. You already get 18 points for 9 IP (CG).
I also would suggest that coverage changes from 50% of a salary to a set amount per year. I think it will create more activity in the league especially for teams that are out of playoffs. They can trade expiring contracts to get pieces that help them in the future. If you have a 15M contract, covering half of it won't allow you to trade and help your rebuilding team for next year. I know many teams strongly dislike coverage in the league but it is very beneficial to what keeps teams active when they are out of the race. I know first year when I was out of it, it was pointless for me to check in b/c I could not trade players that would have benefited my team in the following year. I had like 2 wins the first yaer with a lot of pieces to move and was unable to which led to my inactivity.
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Twins (tbraves13) on Nov 20, 2015 12:52:10 GMT -6
The biggest thing I think the league needs to do to survive and not replace 7+ teams every year is to do a total restart. The way we set the contracts up was a bad idea. It allowed all the good players to be given 4 or 5 year deals so there is no one in free agency. If you don't believe that, look at last year when guys like Castillo and Tomas went for around 30M!!!
There is just no way for teams that need help rebuilding to compete unless it is through the draft which will take years. There are only a couple good free agents every year.
My team is loaded and will be for the next 3 years b/c how we set up the contracts. They need to be more staggered in my opinion.
I would suggest a restart with using one of these options: Option 1 5 year deal - 1 every 10 rounds 4 year deal - 2 every 10 rounds but can not be used in the 2 rounds after you use a 5 year deal; once you use a 4 year deal can not use for another 5 rounds (so if you use one in round 1, you can't use till round 7 again) 3 year deal- 2 every 10 rounds; same rules as a 4 year deal 2 year deal - 3 every 10 rounds - can use whenever 1 year deals - unlimited
Option 2 Many of you will notice this as a lot of it comes from my league which I think if you ask other people has worked out very well. Use players real life contracts. For players that do not have contracts, it would go as follows. Find the year the player crossed the threshold (130ab, 50 ip) Year 1: 500k Year 2: 1M Year 3: 1.5M
So for instance, Carlos Correa would be on a 3 year deal at that contract. Carlos Martinez crossed it in 2014. So he would be on a 2 year deal. Sonny Gray crossed it in 2013. So he would get a 1 year deal.
This obviously could be adjusted to make it 4 year thing instead of 3 year thing especially since we can keep guys like Carlos Correa for six years.
Which will lead me to another point. I think that needs to be changed also. Being able to hold a player like Carlos Correa for 9 years is crazy. I think we need to drop the arbitration to only 1 year (and then can be extended 3 years). So the max you could hold onto any player is 7 years. This still rewards teams for drafting well as 7 years is a very long time. That or you could make any arbitration player ineligible for a contract extension (that we get 1 a year).
|
|
|
Post by Oakland A's (Scott) on Nov 20, 2015 15:06:35 GMT -6
To MN points. 1. I am not in favor of changing scoring. Scoring was set before the league drafted. Owners built their teams based on those scoring settings. The only scoring change i could see would be the CG/SHO scoring. I know last year i had 2 SP that got CG via rain shortened games. If there is any way to stop that, i would be in favor. 2. I agree coverage should change. I think we should put a cap on it. Our cap right now for teams is 125M, i dont think we should be able to go over, example, 150M in players salaries before coverage. 3. I am not in favor of a restart. Eventually the currently bad/rebuilding teams will have prospects being promoted, those players will be cheap and they will be able to afford the good FAs and be the better teams in the league. It will take time but thats what dynasty leagues are about.
|
|
|
Post by Kansas City Royals (benzies10) on Nov 20, 2015 20:58:47 GMT -6
White Sox - I am not talking about randomizing the opponents I am talking about randomizing the order in which we play them. For example taking the matchups for week 1 and switching with week 7. That kind of randomizing. So we all play the same opponents just at different times during the year.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Commish) on Nov 21, 2015 10:06:33 GMT -6
White Sox - I am not talking about randomizing the opponents I am talking about randomizing the order in which we play them. For example taking the matchups for week 1 and switching with week 7. That kind of randomizing. So we all play the same opponents just at different times during the year. And what is your reasoning for wanting to do this? How does it change anything to make the league better?
|
|