Idea

[Sha-Le Unique]

Oct 2, 2013 0:31:05 GMT -5 steve said:

piazza had the soul of a dodger

lol'd The Dodgers treated him like shit the entire time he was there

[K.]

Can we get Clemente on the Pirates first then?

[K.]

A romantic idea but it'd surprise me if all teams would have the same sort of quality to pick from, or have that talent equally spread out over the years; it changes up the draft dynamic considerably as it removes quite a few players from the top of draft classes which the teams that have been crap do need ... This could have further reaching than expected consequences.

For example if a big market, talented Yankees team wins about 100 games on average in the 90s, why would they also be able to pick freely between 2 HoF calibre players in Jeter and Rodriguez? Shouldn't those players go to the teams with the worst records?

All in all, there's a lot to take into account.

[Boston Red Sox]

1960s Yaz
1970s Rice
1980s Clemens
1990s Garciaparra
2000s Pedroia

sounds fucking good to me!

[soonerfantu]

I'm with Spencer on it not costing anything. Since everybody gets the benefit of this once a decade, I don't see any reason to make it a convoluted rule with points and all that. Agreed they should have to have a first round pick. I'd also say that if they have traded for a first round pick, it's their first pick in the first round that has to be used on said player. Teams picking ahead of him just have to be notified not to choose that player.

I'm also okay with teams not having to give the final okay on selecting a player until right before the start of any draft. I don't think this is something that has to be picked a year, or years in advance. Maybe each team posts a preliminary list (maybe give a small amount of points to posting the list, and/or sticking to it when the time comes).

[soonerfantu]

Oh, and can we please decide soon? I think Mr. Koufax is in the next draft class.

[CSCommish]

The more I am thinking about this, the more I am liking this. However, while I am willing to have no cost to it (players being assigned once a decade), I still have trouble wrapping my head about eligibility.

I looked at the Yankees, and I think it'd be a no-brainer, I'd personally prefer:

1950s - ?
1960s - Munson (1967)
1970s - Mattingly (1979)
1980s - Williams (1985)
1990s - Jeter (1992)
2000s - Cano (2001)
2010s - ?

I looked at them purely as the, these are "true" Yankees, whatever that means and I realized these guys all had a significant amount of playing time for the Yankees, if not were career Yankees.

I'm wondering if there should be a minimum 5000 PA or 1500 IP in order to qualify as being eligible to be franchised?

I personally think it should cost points; if you want to get a free first overall pick, it'll cost you 75-100 points. If said player played their entire career for your team, you get a 25 point discount?

I understand the rationale for every team getting a benefit, but certain teams (Yankees, Dodgers) benefited from having a lot of HOF players play for them. Not every team will benefit the same way others will. But I am willing to discuss this further.

Again, love the idea, I think we should do it, we just need to determine eligibility and cost, if any.

[soonerfantu]

Keep in mind that not all of the players drafted would necessarily be the #1 overall players in a draft class. Looking at the Dodgers, I think the 80's and 90's, guys like Orel Hershiser(sp) and Karros might be the guys I'm looking at. I doubt either of those guys would be the #1 pick in their class. Possibly not top 5. So I don't think every pick is essentially taking away the #1 guy in each class.

Chris mentioned the Dodgers above, but I'm serious about not being overly impressed with a bunch of my players from the 80's through current. Everybody remembers Orel Hershiser as a stud, but if we create him based on career numbers, would he really look that impressive on paper? Would Karros? I don't know. I just don't see many complete studs when you taken entire career numbers into account.

Maybe the cost should have to do with the players' potential worth, or ratings? A slightly higher cost to get a player like AROD that would indeed be a #1 overall pick, and would be rated like one. Maybe less of a cost (even though I really prefer not cost, or only slight cost) for a player that would be #5-10 in his class, and isn't rated like AROD. Just thinking out loud here.

[soonerfantu]

Maybe each team should put together a preliminary list, so we can judge just how close (or far apart) in talent each teams' list would be?

[Boston Red Sox]

I think that if we make it free then we need to slightly over rate the players who aren't in the HOF tier to give them a boost. Players will fall apart anyways.

[Deleted]

My concern is the benefit to "good" teams over "bad" ones. For the Cubs I would take Billy Williams in 59, who would probably be a top 10 guy, but I doubt #1, Santo in the 60's (1960) who would probably be a top 3 pick. I'd forgo Fergie Jenkins in the 60's. In the 70's there's nobody that I would probably spend points on, but if there's no cost, then I guess I would do it, but is my Bruce Sutter or Dave Kingman equal to the A's Ricky Henderson, etc. ? In the 80's I would take Ryno, again probably a top 3 pick, and forgo Grace and Maddux, who I probably couldn't get anyhow, in the 90's, MAYBE Sosa? My heart says Kerry Wood, but if I take Wood, that would probably be the worst franchise player taken in the decade from all the teams. I think there needs to be a cost so that teams have the option of NOT taking a player and having some reward for not doing so.
'

[steve]

Oct 2, 2013 11:55:14 GMT -5 @cubsgm said:

My concern is the benefit to "good" teams over "bad" ones. For the Cubs I would take Billy Williams in 59, who would probably be a top 10 guy, but I doubt #1, Santo in the 60's (1960) who would probably be a top 3 pick. I'd forgo Fergie Jenkins in the 60's. In the 70's there's nobody that I would probably spend points on, but if there's no cost, then I guess I would do it, but is my Bruce Sutter or Dave Kingman equal to the A's Ricky Henderson, etc. ? In the 80's I would take Ryno, again probably a top 3 pick, and forgo Grace and Maddux, who I probably couldn't get anyhow, in the 90's, MAYBE Sosa? My heart says Kerry Wood, but if I take Wood, that would probably be the worst franchise player taken in the decade from all the teams. I think there needs to be a cost so that teams have the option of NOT taking a player and having some reward for not doing so.

Agreed.

Although Maddux would be mine!

is..<input maxlength="8" size="8">

is..<input maxlength="8" size="8">

[bigmark]

I doubt this would work...some teams may want to claim same guy and do we each get a guy what if its all in the same draft? we skip the first 20 picks while each team gets the guy they want?

[Sha-Le Unique]

Oct 2, 2013 13:28:01 GMT -5 bigmark said:

I doubt this would work...some teams may want to claim same guy and do we each get a guy what if its all in the same draft? we skip the first 20 picks while each team gets the guy they want?

If 2 teams claim the same guy, the deciding factor will be a mixture of service time and overall impact between each team. Greg Maddux for example may have been drafted by and won his 1st Cy Young Award with the Cubs, but he is best known as a Brave by far, so the Braves would have priority. Same reason why the Mets will have priority over the Dodgers in 1988 with Mike Piazza. It makes perfect sense.

[steve]

Oct 2, 2013 13:47:29 GMT -5 Sha-Le Unique said:

Oct 2, 2013 13:28:01 GMT -5 bigmark said:

I doubt this would work...some teams may want to claim same guy and do we each get a guy what if its all in the same draft? we skip the first 20 picks while each team gets the guy they want?

If 2 teams claim the same guy, the deciding factor will be a mixture of service time and overall impact between each team. Greg Maddux for example may have been drafted by and won his 1st Cy Young Award with the Cubs, but he is best known as a Brave by far, so the Braves would have priority. Same reason why the Mets will have priority over the Dodgers in 1988 with Mike Piazza. It makes perfect sense.

ARod?

is..<input maxlength="8" size="8">

[Boston Red Sox]

A Rod is a Yankee.

[Spencer]

Needs to be more simple. Games played imo.

If you think about it lots of good players will be left over. Bad teams will still get very good players.

This is a fun thing. Should definately work out.

[Spencer]

I'm gonna guess that worst case 5 players would be protected from a single draft. Which means the worst team would get potentially the 6th best player. But lots of good players will still be available. Ill probably grab McCovey over Marichal. So Marichal will be available to be drafted

[Sha-Le Unique]

Oct 2, 2013 14:04:22 GMT -5 steve said:

Oct 2, 2013 13:47:29 GMT -5 Sha-Le Unique said:

If 2 teams claim the same guy, the deciding factor will be a mixture of service time and overall impact between each team. Greg Maddux for example may have been drafted by and won his 1st Cy Young Award with the Cubs, but he is best known as a Brave by far, so the Braves would have priority. Same reason why the Mets will have priority over the Dodgers in 1988 with Mike Piazza. It makes perfect sense.

ARod?

is..<input maxlength="8" size="8">

He's a Yankee. He only spent 5 full seasons with the Mariners.

[K.]

I see very little fun in knowing now already that I will have close to no shot at ever having most of the top baseball players ever. I would love the feeling of being able to draft Koufax, Jeter, Maddux, Gwynn ... whomever. This seems way too scripted to me esp as the league and its history will diverge ever more from real life. Why would a team deserve first dibs on a player 50 years in the future regardless of what has happened in the meantime?

[Darryl]

Not a fan of this. I can win a world series and potentially pick up the top talent in the draft. No thanks.

[CSCommish]

ARod is a Yankee, but I will probably select Jeter anyway. I'm not going to utilize the franchise feature just to grab the best Yankees ever, I will grab my favorite Yankees: Mattingly, Bernie, Jeter, Cano. I'd love to have Reggie, but he'd be an Athletic.

I will start a new post and would like all 16 teams to post their preliminary franchise players. I will edit the lists to clean them up and include WAR values and their WAR rank in relation to all other players drafted that season.

I think there should be a cost feature. I'm thinking 75 to 100 points with an additional point value based on the player's career WAR and discounts if said player played their entire career for your team.

Don't forget, these players will get PD hits, so you'd have to spend points to get your guy and then some to reverse PD hits; other players will get increases and reward points, so that player you want in the 1970s may have been valued at #10 overall, he may end up being ranked #20.

We'd have to have a mechanism to prevent a situation where, say the Yankees suck in the 1970s and, I could foresee being able to draft Mattingly as of right. I don't want to be able to say "nevermind, I'll tag Guidry instead!" and draft Mattingly in one year and be gifted Guidry in another.

[Spencer]

If there is spending required I'm out

[Spencer]

Ah well. Couldve been fun

[Boston Red Sox]

I think the point total is way too high. 50 max. Points aren't super easy to get in this league like BBSBL.