|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:05:25 GMT -5
This only actively hurts inactive teams.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:06:02 GMT -5
if you have to spend an extra 1.5 mil a year to keep your depth while inactive teams lose their players over this, it's working as intended.
|
|
dougiejays
General Manager
Toronto Blue Jays
Posts: 4,350
|
Post by dougiejays on Feb 1, 2021 10:18:49 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. Yeah, though it only actually works that way if they get at least one PA/IP
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 10:26:56 GMT -5
if you have to spend an extra 1.5 mil a year to keep your depth while inactive teams lose their players over this, it's working as intended. Or trade for said players instead of cheaping out and whining and getting them for free? Seems realistic these days. GIVE ME FREE STUFF AT OTHER'S EXPENSE!! I DESERVE IT!
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:29:12 GMT -5
if you have to spend an extra 1.5 mil a year to keep your depth while inactive teams lose their players over this, it's working as intended. Or trade for said players instead of cheaping out and whining and getting them for free? Seems realistic these days. GIVE ME FREE STUFF AT OTHER'S EXPENSE!! I DESERVE IT! Yikes. What a boomer take. This is to keep things active. The hope is that there are 2-3 guys released a year.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:29:57 GMT -5
You sound like my 55 year old mother after she gets done watching fox news
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 10:30:08 GMT -5
Or trade for said players instead of cheaping out and whining and getting them for free? Seems realistic these days. GIVE ME FREE STUFF AT OTHER'S EXPENSE!! I DESERVE IT! Yikes. What a boomer take. This is to keep things active. The hope is that there are 2-3 guys released a year. Ha. You know what else is active? Trading for players....crazy!
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:31:04 GMT -5
Yikes. What a boomer take. This is to keep things active. The hope is that there are 2-3 guys released a year. Ha. You know what else is active? Trading for players....crazy! It's almost like this is designed to enforce playing best players and not about freebies! The freebie is a punishment for inactivity!
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 10:32:08 GMT -5
Ha. You know what else is active? Trading for players....crazy! It's almost like this is designed to enforce playing best players and not about freebies! The freebie is a punishment for inactivity! So you go ahead and take the time each sim to check every team's entire roster and call them out for not playing their best player. Fair?
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:32:22 GMT -5
it's totally unrealistic to have a bunch of 31 yo in your AAA anyways. If you don't make it to the Show, you retire by 30. I've had more than one friend go through it.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 10:33:04 GMT -5
It's almost like this is designed to enforce playing best players and not about freebies! The freebie is a punishment for inactivity! So you go ahead and take the time each sim to check every team's entire roster and call them out for not playing their best player. Fair? it's about checking once a year, and that's why it makes it simple. Why are you trying to make it more complicated? Seems like you just don't like change.
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 10:53:24 GMT -5
So you go ahead and take the time each sim to check every team's entire roster and call them out for not playing their best player. Fair? it's about checking once a year, and that's why it makes it simple. Why are you trying to make it more complicated? Seems like you just don't like change. I don't like pointless change. which this easily is. Does it annoy me that some people hoard in their minors? Sure. Do I think it makes sense to implement a new rule, make more work for Chris (even though he'll say it's nothing), to get said players? Nope. Dumb. Idiotic. Pointless. Overkill. Offer trades. Don't like the response, either try again or oh well. Your next reply: It's only an extra 2 million dollars to bring them up to pay them....5 of the past 6 years I've not had an extra 2 million, so I'd lose said players because I'm an active owner trying to compete with a limited payroll? Guess I'll just demand a rule change for free money after that so I can pay for them?
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 10:56:36 GMT -5
it's totally unrealistic to have a bunch of 31 yo in your AAA anyways. If you don't make it to the Show, you retire by 30. I've had more than one friend go through it. So are we going for realistic or not? How realistic is it to only win 26 or 27 games in a season for the Boston Red Sox?
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 11:01:49 GMT -5
it's totally unrealistic to have a bunch of 31 yo in your AAA anyways. If you don't make it to the Show, you retire by 30. I've had more than one friend go through it. So are we going for realistic or not? How realistic is it to only win 26 or 27 games in a season for the Boston Red Sox? How is it realistic for the red sox to not have a top 3 revenue?
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Feb 1, 2021 11:21:10 GMT -5
So are we going for realistic or not? How realistic is it to only win 26 or 27 games in a season for the Boston Red Sox? How is it realistic for the red sox to not have a top 3 revenue? You used the word realistic, not me!
|
|
|
Post by tadontask on Feb 1, 2021 11:44:07 GMT -5
it's totally unrealistic to have a bunch of 31 yo in your AAA anyways. If you don't make it to the Show, you retire by 30. I've had more than one friend go through it. Is it? I just looked at one team, Boston for your sake, and looked at their 2019 AAA team. They had six hitters ages 29 to 31 get significant playing time, and a few pitchers as well. You can look for yourself. The average age was 27.6. Though that may count the injury rehabs, and would be most helpful in this case if it were weighted by playing time. There were no 30 year old players in all of AAA in 2020, I'll give you a point for that one.
|
|
bigmark
General Manager
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,175
|
Post by bigmark on Feb 1, 2021 14:01:23 GMT -5
I mean if everytime I tried to compete I traded off anything of worth in my minors system to the point of having only a handful of scrubs left in there only to tear it all down and tank again each time. I'd not have an issue with this rule either I guess
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Feb 1, 2021 14:58:09 GMT -5
The simplest way of thinking about this is that there is a new CBA --- players on an MLC must be offered a big league contract before their age-28 season. You can't keep guys without paying them forever. If you want to keep them, call them up and send them back down to start the clock and pay them 300k. All others will granted free agency.
This is the work-around to the Rule 5 draft, and will increase activity in FA.
If they remain unsigned after FA, they cannot be very good, so I don't expect this to "benefit" tanking or inactive teams at all, it will do the opposite. It will force them to play a better roster.
Spencer is right, there is still the issue of inactivty and that is a separate issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2021 16:03:08 GMT -5
The simplest way of thinking about this is that there is a new CBA --- players on an MLC must be offered a big league contract before their age-28 season. You can't keep guys without paying them forever. If you want to keep them, call them up and send them back down to start the clock and pay them 300k. All others will granted free agency. This is the work-around to the Rule 5 draft, and will increase activity in FA. If they remain unsigned after FA, they cannot be very good, so I don't expect this to "benefit" tanking or inactive teams at all, it will do the opposite. It will force them to play a better roster.Spencer is right, there is still the issue of inactivty and that is a separate issue. I still disagree with this. Every year there are players who are good enough to be on my current roster who won't listen to offers from me during free agency that I can sign to better my squad afterwards. Look at the players that are bid on this year. Many of these players I could have or would have bid on in free agency, but because my team is a losing team they had no interest in playing for me.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Feb 1, 2021 17:15:04 GMT -5
The simplest way of thinking about this is that there is a new CBA --- players on an MLC must be offered a big league contract before their age-28 season. You can't keep guys without paying them forever. If you want to keep them, call them up and send them back down to start the clock and pay them 300k. All others will granted free agency. This is the work-around to the Rule 5 draft, and will increase activity in FA. If they remain unsigned after FA, they cannot be very good, so I don't expect this to "benefit" tanking or inactive teams at all, it will do the opposite. It will force them to play a better roster.Spencer is right, there is still the issue of inactivty and that is a separate issue. I still disagree with this. Every year there are players who are good enough to be on my current roster who won't listen to offers from me during free agency that I can sign to better my squad afterwards. Look at the players that are bid on this year. Many of these players I could have or would have bid on in free agency, but because my team is a losing team they had no interest in playing for me. This isn't preventing you from signing in season FA in any way?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2021 18:11:41 GMT -5
I still disagree with this. Every year there are players who are good enough to be on my current roster who won't listen to offers from me during free agency that I can sign to better my squad afterwards. Look at the players that are bid on this year. Many of these players I could have or would have bid on in free agency, but because my team is a losing team they had no interest in playing for me. This isn't preventing you from signing in season FA in any way? Am I wrong? I thought Chris was going to assign unsigned FA's to inactive teams BEFORE we get to make bids
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Feb 1, 2021 18:14:34 GMT -5
You are correct. But I see your point now.
I think we'll do an initial round of signings after ST. Then I will assign players to incomplete teams just before Opening Day.
|
|