Idea

[Matt]

Oct 1, 2013 22:11:12 GMT -5 CSCommish said:

lol Jer, Bonds was a Giant nearly twice as long as a Pirate

Amazing what steroids do...

[Matt]

Oct 1, 2013 22:09:37 GMT -5 CSCommish said:

Oct 1, 2013 22:05:34 GMT -5 soonerfantu said:

I'd say AROD is a Yank, but that's just me.

I don't have a problem with either team having rights to a player, it's only an issue if both want to draft him. At that point do we vote (might be some bias to keep a guy out of your league), look at games played? That is the tricky part for sure.

How about WAR?

www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/rodrial01.shtml

And that would make Rodriguez a Yankee. Although I'd probably still pick Jeter anyway. Does that mean the Mariners CAN'T tag him? How do we handle those situations?

I'd say if the first choice didn't want him, and there is an obvious second choice they have shot at him.

[soonerfantu]

Oct 1, 2013 22:11:12 GMT -5 CSCommish said:

lol Jer, Bonds was a Giant nearly twice as long as a Pirate

Sure doesn't seem like it.  At least in my mind.  Geez.  Getting old.  lol

[soonerfantu]

Oct 1, 2013 22:32:19 GMT -5 Matt said:

Oct 1, 2013 22:09:37 GMT -5 CSCommish said:

How about WAR?

www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/rodrial01.shtml

And that would make Rodriguez a Yankee. Although I'd probably still pick Jeter anyway. Does that mean the Mariners CAN'T tag him? How do we handle those situations?

I'd say if the first choice didn't want him, and there is an obvious second choice they have shot at him.

Agreed.  I'd say any team that drafted a player, or had him play a full season of games, should be eligible to draft a player.  We only decide between two teams when both want the same player.  WAR isn't a bad idea.

[Spencer]

We probably need to list all the players we want for each decade. Then just remove those players from the draft file and remove our first round pick from that draft.

So the worst team gets the first pick without the option of drafting the players that are hometown players.

Fun idea.

I like it.

[Spencer]

I think it has to go by games.

[CSCommish]

Sounds good. So at least it won't be a first-come, first-serve issue and can be addressed as a whole when that does occur.

How about repercussions? I don't think it should just be a tag, it should be costly. However, that does not stop said team from tanking anyway to get the player he wants during said season---although he may be competing with fellow tankers! I'd hate to see Shale gut his team again to get David Wright!

This tagging only allows a team to comfortable know that he will end up having him. The cost? I'm thinking points, and lots of them. Team must have a first round pick to forfeit (in order to be assigned the player). But what about the teams that "lose out" on picking? What else?

[Spencer]

1950 - Juan Marichal or Willie McCovey. YIKES
1960 -
1970 -
1980 - Barry Bonds
1990 -
2000 - Buster Posey

[Spencer]

Oct 1, 2013 22:49:00 GMT -5 CSCommish said:

Sounds good. So at least it won't be a first-come, first-serve issue and can be addressed as a whole when that does occur.

How about repercussions? I don't think it should just be a tag, it should be costly. However, that does not stop said team from tanking anyway to get the player he wants during said season---although he may be competing with fellow tankers! I'd hate to see Shale gut his team again to get David Wright!

This tagging only allows a team to comfortable know that he will end up having him. The cost? I'm thinking points, and lots of them. Team must have a first round pick to forfeit (in order to be assigned the player). But what about the teams that "lose out" on picking? What else?

I wasnt even thinking that. Im saying every team gets one player a decade. We all get that benefit. So if we all get a benefit why do any of us need to sacrifice anything? Some times the player will be better, sometimes worse. But I think every franchise had a stud in each decade. And with PDs and such you cant really count on anything in OOTP. So each year the draft file is complete. The "hometown" players are selected at the spot of that teams first round pick. The other teams select players around those picks. Worst team still gets the best player still available.

Lots of good players will be available still. For example I can only get Marichal or McCovey. Means one goes elsewhere!

[CSCommish]

Oct 1, 2013 22:56:25 GMT -5 Spencer said:

Oct 1, 2013 22:49:00 GMT -5 CSCommish said:

Sounds good. So at least it won't be a first-come, first-serve issue and can be addressed as a whole when that does occur.

How about repercussions? I don't think it should just be a tag, it should be costly. However, that does not stop said team from tanking anyway to get the player he wants during said season---although he may be competing with fellow tankers! I'd hate to see Shale gut his team again to get David Wright!

This tagging only allows a team to comfortable know that he will end up having him. The cost? I'm thinking points, and lots of them. Team must have a first round pick to forfeit (in order to be assigned the player). But what about the teams that "lose out" on picking? What else?

I wasnt even thinking that. Im saying every team gets one player a decade. We all get that benefit. So if we all get a benefit why do any of us need to sacrifice anything? Some times the player will be better, sometimes worse. But I think every franchise had a stud in each decade. And with PDs and such you cant really count on anything in OOTP. So each year the draft file is complete. The "hometown" players are selected at the spot of that teams first round pick. The other teams select players around those picks. Worst team still gets the best player still available.

Lots of good players will be available still. For example I can only get Marichal or McCovey. Means one goes elsewhere!

Sounds reasonable. I am willing to keep it simple like that.

[steve]

So you get to automatically jump to the #1 pick?

[Spencer]

We all get a player we want. Only thing is that we have to have our first that year. I think if said team does not have their first that year then the player goes into the draft pool.

I mean we should all do our own research and find the players we want. Double check with you when theyll be in the draft pool and then not trade that first accordingly.

Seems simple.

[steve]

Oh wow, there were 2 additional pages of discussion there.

[Spencer]

Oct 1, 2013 23:10:15 GMT -5 steve said:

So you get to automatically jump to the #1 pick?

No. You just automatically get your player at whatever # first you have.

[Spencer]

Oct 1, 2013 23:11:08 GMT -5 steve said:

Oh wow, there were 2 additional pages of discussion there.

Oh boy.

[Spencer]

Love the idea by the way.

[Spencer]

Can we move Juan Marichal to the 80s?

[steve]

So I could I get Maddux in 84 and Chipper in 90? Not mad about that. Costs a lot of points that might be worth more towards PD reversals. But interesting regardless.

[steve]

Oct 1, 2013 23:11:59 GMT -5 Spencer said:

Oct 1, 2013 23:11:08 GMT -5 steve said:

Oh wow, there were 2 additional pages of discussion there.

Oh boy.

Can we kick Spencer out already?

[Spencer]

Oct 1, 2013 23:13:30 GMT -5 steve said:

So I could I get Maddux in 84 and Chipper in 90? Not mad about that. Costs a lot of points that might be worth more towards PD reversals. But interesting regardless.

In my scenario it wouldnt cost anything.

[Spencer]

Oct 1, 2013 23:13:52 GMT -5 steve said:

Oct 1, 2013 23:11:59 GMT -5 Spencer said:

Oh boy.

Can we kick Spencer out already?

If it means I dont have to read your meaningless posts anymore I might be open to the idea.

[steve]

lol @ that

[Spencer]

Life does not stop and start at your convenience, you miserable piece of shit.

[Spencer]

Oct 1, 2013 23:16:20 GMT -5 steve said:

lol @ that

I know right?

[steve]

this got serious pretty quickly