|
|
Post by CSCommish on Jan 31, 2021 11:06:37 GMT -5
After further consideration, the following rule change will take effect starting next season:
- After the file is flipped, I will release all players who are 28 years of age or older that are still on a minor league contract.
- After FA / Ammy is complete, I will assign certain unsigned players to 100+ loss teams that were not active in FA --- this is intended to prevent uber-tanking. I see you PIT.
- After ST is complete, in-season FA will open up.
That's it.
You drafted a player at age 16-22. After 6-12 seasons at age 28, his "minor league contract" will now expire. During the season, you need to ask yourself whether or not a 27- or 28-year old player still in the minors is worth keeping. If so, then you need to call him up and start paying him. Likewise, if you sign a veteran to an MLC for depth. His MLC contract is effectively a one-year MLC contract. Again, if you envision using him going forward, simply call him up and start paying him. You can always send him back down to AAA. If you decide not to pay him, he will be granted free agency so he can look for some playing time elsewhere.
In 1995, there will be a glut of releases, but each season thereafter, it will mainly be 2-3 players for each team. Again, if you want to keep them, pay them. The call-up is the protection.
This will help improve the FA pool, creating more activity for teams to improve depth as needed --- and unsigned players will be assigned to the tanking teams first.
To clarify, I won't send players down or run auto-manager. That was my overreaction. I will do that to teams who don't export for Opening Day, as I have done since the 1953 season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Jan 31, 2021 11:22:23 GMT -5
big fan this is simple and it addresses every concern
|
|
stooolfan
General Manager 
St Louis Cardinals
Posts: 7,247 
|
Post by stooolfan on Jan 31, 2021 11:26:50 GMT -5
Rude! I’m a small market team, forcing me to spend my money!
|
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Jan 31, 2021 11:33:26 GMT -5
lol I am taking this as sarcasm. You literally have to spend money to create a 25-man roster. And you can only profit 25M a season anyway. You'll be at max next flip. Now you need to think about your stadium, unless you're jumping ship to TB
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Jan 31, 2021 11:35:56 GMT -5
Damn I really dont like this. Really punishes the teams that create older minor league depth. I feel like I always have about a handful of infielders and outfielders that can be brought up to my roster in case of injuries and such. Meh.
|
|
Texas
General Manager
Texas Rangers
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Texas on Jan 31, 2021 11:45:25 GMT -5
All stems from Bos of trading years of draft picks and not building some type of Minors system.Claim other teams who draft and and keep a full Minors system as hoarding players.Classic move by Bos to most owners who draft every year and now have to lose players because he feels as if is wronged by owners using the draft.
|
|
stooolfan
General Manager
St Louis Cardinals
Posts: 7,247
|
Post by stooolfan on Jan 31, 2021 11:54:02 GMT -5
lol I am taking this as sarcasm. You literally have to spend money to create a 25-man roster. And you can only profit 25M a season anyway. You'll be at max next flip. Now you need to think about your stadium, unless you're jumping ship to TB I was being sarcastic, I’ll prob keep Pitt, see it through my rebuild. Tampa can go to someone |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Jan 31, 2021 11:57:35 GMT -5
Damn I really dont like this. Really punishes the teams that create older minor league depth. I feel like I always have about a handful of infielders and outfielders that can be brought up to my roster in case of injuries and such. Meh. There's nothing wrong with that, you just need to call them up and send them back down. Pay them 300k a year and you'll have the same guys through age-34 season. Or sign a couple extra guys in FA to a MLC for the season. Rinse and repeat. I'm looking at your minors, I assume you'll be calling up a couple of them anyway to fill out your active roster. But will you really be missing guys like Ed Vosberg, Chris Beasley, and Todd Benzinger? |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Jan 31, 2021 12:05:14 GMT -5
All stems from Bos of trading years of draft picks and not building some type of Minors system.Claim other teams who draft and and keep a full Minors system as hoarding players.Classic move by Bos to most owners who draft every year and now have to lose players because he feels as if is wronged by owners using the draft. This was never about BOS having a deep minor league system (or not) --- it was more about prospects stuck in the minors and/or lack of playing time. This applies to all teams, active or not. As to your team, I am confused why Stottlemyre, Jackson and others haven't been called up yet. I had to call up McDowell last season, and I expect Giambi to be called up this season. FYI, BOS will be subject to this too, he'll lose guys like SP Holman, SP Eric Nolte, SP Jose J. Bautista unless he called them up. |
|
Texas
General Manager
Texas Rangers
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Texas on Jan 31, 2021 12:10:34 GMT -5
Yeah McDowell was awesome
But new ruling works fine
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Jan 31, 2021 13:16:34 GMT -5
Damn I really dont like this. Really punishes the teams that create older minor league depth. I feel like I always have about a handful of infielders and outfielders that can be brought up to my roster in case of injuries and such. Meh. There's nothing wrong with that, you just need to call them up and send them back down. Pay them 300k a year and you'll have the same guys through age-34 season. Or sign a couple extra guys in FA to a MLC for the season. Rinse and repeat. I'm looking at your minors, I assume you'll be calling up a couple of them anyway to fill out your active roster. But will you really be missing guys like Ed Vosberg, Chris Beasley, and Todd Benzinger? Its just gonna take more creativity and effort. My team is currently built differently than I normally do it. Ive focused way more on putting all my assets into fewer players. Its working out better so Ill probably just keep it up. |
|
dougiejays
General Manager
Toronto Blue Jays
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by dougiejays on Jan 31, 2021 14:28:09 GMT -5
Damn I really dont like this. Really punishes the teams that create older minor league depth. I feel like I always have about a handful of infielders and outfielders that can be brought up to my roster in case of injuries and such. Meh. There's nothing wrong with that, you just need to call them up and send them back down. Pay them 300k a year and you'll have the same guys through age-34 season. Or sign a couple extra guys in FA to a MLC for the season. Rinse and repeat. Fair enough, but don’t those guys auto-convert back to mlc after a while? |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Jan 31, 2021 16:34:49 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with that, you just need to call them up and send them back down. Pay them 300k a year and you'll have the same guys through age-34 season. Or sign a couple extra guys in FA to a MLC for the season. Rinse and repeat. Fair enough, but don’t those guys auto-convert back to mlc after a while? Yes, but they will continue to clock. You simply need to put them on your 40 in September each year to not lose them. |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Jan 31, 2021 16:57:40 GMT -5
Fair enough, but don’t those guys auto-convert back to mlc after a while? Yes, but they will continue to clock. You simply need to put them on your 40 in September each year to not lose them. Basically. |
|
bigmark
General Manager
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,175
|
Post by bigmark on Jan 31, 2021 22:59:48 GMT -5
Still against this. Punish active GM's for GM's who don't bring people up on time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 7:51:11 GMT -5
Still against this. Punish active GM's for GM's who don't bring people up on time. How does this punish you besides forcing you to spend 300k a year to keep a guy? It's not only about GMs that don't bring people up on time. You have the roster space to do it in September, so you can't complain about roster space. If you can't spend 300k to keep a guy, how can you call yourself an active gm? |
|
bigmark
General Manager
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,175
|
Post by bigmark on Feb 1, 2021 7:57:21 GMT -5
Still against this. Punish active GM's for GM's who don't bring people up on time. How does this punish you besides forcing you to spend 300k a year to keep a guy? It's not only about GMs that don't bring people up on time. You have the roster space to do it in September, so you can't complain about roster space. If you can't spend 300k to keep a guy, how can you call yourself an active gm? 5 titles say I'm pretty active. |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 8:12:21 GMT -5
How does this punish you besides forcing you to spend 300k a year to keep a guy? It's not only about GMs that don't bring people up on time. You have the roster space to do it in September, so you can't complain about roster space. If you can't spend 300k to keep a guy, how can you call yourself an active gm? 5 titles say I'm pretty active. ok, so then this should be zero issue to you. I have 1 lowly pennant and it's fine to me? |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 8:13:48 GMT -5
there's no conceivable legitimate reason to have an issue with not being able to keep a guy at minimum past 34 years old.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 8:16:06 GMT -5
I've seen zero actual reasons why it's punishment either. Some of you just keep vaguely saying it with no reasoning. It's a new rule for competitive balance. Clearly this had been a long time coming here.
|
|
dougiejays
General Manager
Toronto Blue Jays
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by dougiejays on Feb 1, 2021 8:41:58 GMT -5
there's no conceivable legitimate reason to have an issue with not being able to keep a guy at minimum past 34 years old. Yeah I don’t like it but I get it. As much as I like to hoard fringe minor leaguers, you can’t actually do that in MLB. |
|
Matt
Other 
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 9:11:55 GMT -5
I've seen zero actual reasons why it's punishment either. Some of you just keep vaguely saying it with no reasoning. It's a new rule for competitive balance. Clearly this had been a long time coming here. Want completive balance? Get rid of tanking. Veto horrible trades (impossible, I know) Make it so you can't trade cash or points. Fringe major leaguers aren't going to do a thing for competitive balance. |
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Feb 1, 2021 9:41:24 GMT -5
Still against this. Punish active GM's for GM's who don't bring people up on time. How does this punish you besides forcing you to spend 300k a year to keep a guy? It's not only about GMs that don't bring people up on time. You have the roster space to do it in September, so you can't complain about roster space. If you can't spend 300k to keep a guy, how can you call yourself an active gm? It starts the clock on players that we could keep for depth. Its not about the 300k, its about losing control of them faster. Its a pretty big difference. |
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Feb 1, 2021 9:42:53 GMT -5
To me this doesnt fix any of the major problems of this league for me. This legit really only punishes the active teams that are trying to maintain a long term competitive advantage.
You want to fix the league replace the 5-8 extremely inactive GMs and come down hard on guys that can be active but dont participate when tanking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:03:43 GMT -5
How does this punish you besides forcing you to spend 300k a year to keep a guy? It's not only about GMs that don't bring people up on time. You have the roster space to do it in September, so you can't complain about roster space. If you can't spend 300k to keep a guy, how can you call yourself an active gm? It starts the clock on players that we could keep for depth. Its not about the 300k, its about losing control of them faster. Its a pretty big difference. you keep them until 34 no matter what with this. You have every opportunity to extend faster. You're bitching about a 1 in 100 players situation, in which 1 in 5 of those are anything more than fringe players. For that one in 500 player, you can sign him at 34 years old to his first real contract. How is that horrible? |
|
