Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 8:52:35 GMT -5
Gents,
There has been little activity and little trading in recent weeks - I assume because some of the divisional races are pretty sown up meaning that there are few buyers, whilst the others have nothing to play for. Does anybody have any views on what could/might be done to help drive interest throughout the year - even if you are out of contention?
Perhaps we could shuffle how the draft picks are distributed so that they no longer go in reverse order of the standings?
What other ideas do we have?
Stephen
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 9:44:48 GMT -5
True that, trade market has been dry but it is pretty impressive that 14 of 15 GMs have been on in past 24-48 hours
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 11:50:04 GMT -5
"Perhaps we could shuffle how the draft picks are distributed so that they no longer go in reverse order of the standings?" - I think anything that stops people from wanting to tank is ok by me...
|
|
phronesis
TTC Member
Posts: 752
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by phronesis on Aug 1, 2014 13:15:11 GMT -5
How would we distribute the picks if we changed it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 15:58:52 GMT -5
Or another idea is you have to meet thr minimum number of AB and IP to even qualify for the draft.
|
|
miggitymatt
League GM
Posts: 971
Favorite Baseball Team: Tampa Bay Rays
|
Post by miggitymatt on Aug 1, 2014 20:46:08 GMT -5
Interesting idea, JP.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2014 4:35:12 GMT -5
How would we distribute the picks if we changed it? Two ideas off the top of my head: Pick 1 to the highest team outside the playoffs, down the the lowest finishing team, followed by the wildcard then the division winners in reverse order. This rewards those who were close but didn't make it, and might mean that people in the middle push harder for draft picks Or Pick 1 to the highest team outside the playoffs, pick 2 to the team finishing last, pick 3 to the second highest team outside the playoffs, pick 4 to the second last team in the standings. This method would punish those mediocre teams in the middle who fell out of contention and just drifted through the rest of the year (hands up from me). That said, are draft pick positions enough to play for? Other 'throw them out there' thoughts: I don't know of lengthening the minimum contract to 2 yrs would have any impact. The way it is at the moment non-elite veterans are sort of auctioned annually - I don't know if making teams commit to them for longer would change any philosophies in the league Staggered expansion of salary cap varying by finishing position (would be difficult to agree on, but if we could come to a consensus that would be a real reward worth playing for) Sent from my phone
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Aug 2, 2014 18:59:25 GMT -5
Honestly I think we should be able to have 15 owners in this league who are able to be competitive and field the best team they possibly can. Rebuilding is fine, but you need to play the guys you have in the best way possible. Everyone in this league should be able to field the best lineup possible on a daily basis. I'm not sure if I'm so much for changing the draft and salary, as I am doing something along the lines of what JP said with not qualifying for the draft if you don't meet the minimums. Maybe some sort of salary hit as well. No one should have a team so bad that they can't hit the minimums. If you're team is that empty of useable players, you won't have much incentive to log in and set your lineup at least weekly, and that should be a priority of this league.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2014 4:26:11 GMT -5
What minimums would you suggest we impose? Off the top of my head I think they only minimum we have is 900IP?
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Aug 4, 2014 13:16:30 GMT -5
It's actually set at 700 IP. It doesn't look like ESPN has a setting for AB's minimum so not sure how we would work around that?
|
|
saltman
Administrator
Posts: 1,161
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by saltman on Aug 4, 2014 15:18:04 GMT -5
We could monitor it ourselves. For example my team is currently on 5276 ABs. Would have to be done on trust though I guess! 700IP is way too low I think, I am already on 1,460 with 2 months to go. Maybe increase the minimum to 1,200 or even higher
I might be in the minority here but I wouldn't be against possibly tinkering with the actual format of the league. 15 team roto means that inevitably by this point in the season all but 2/3 teams are likely to be out of it every year. Personally I think the 'divisional' alignment on this website is a bit pointless, unless we were to actually split the league into proper divisions on the scoring website. For example I have just checked and I am actually 'leading' the eastern division, but that's the first time I've even given it a single thought all season. But if it was laid out in divisional format on ESPN then I'd have known about it all season and would have paid it close attention!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2014 16:56:32 GMT -5
I agree that AB minimums (cough, surely plate appearances would be more correct if we're using OBP?) could be monitored manually if necessary.
It is my opinion that the divisional alignment (and wildcard) actually gives teams more to play for. I would have given up on the season a lot earlier if I'd only had top spot to challenge for, and I might speculate that the wildcard is keeping the Rangers and Angels a bit more interested in pushing all the way. I do not think it is possible to show the divisions on ESPN, but I will check in the offseason. I don't think it's too difficult for people to keep track of which other teams they need to compete with in their own division.
|
|
miggitymatt
League GM
Posts: 971
Favorite Baseball Team: Tampa Bay Rays
|
Post by miggitymatt on Aug 4, 2014 21:50:13 GMT -5
So, does anyone know the actual IP min? I've seen 700, 900, and the constitution says 1000.
3.10 Hitting and Pitching Minimums To qualify for the ERA and WHIP standings, each team must compile a minimum of 1000 innings pitched. There is no hitting minimum to qualify for the batting average standings.
I agree with, Stephen, PA would be more accurate with the switch to OBP. Maybe 500 per lineup spot? Maybe that's too high for the C position? 500 per would be 7000. Markakis is currently leading MLB with 505 and Trout rounds out the top 10 with 485.
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Aug 5, 2014 0:27:24 GMT -5
It's locked in at 700 for this season. We can change it in the offseason.
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Aug 5, 2014 0:31:41 GMT -5
I'm not sure if that was an oversight to not set it at 1000, I'm assuming we are going to go by the ESPN site, but Stephen would have to verify that. As Saltman said it shouldn't be an issue for anybody to hit 1000 anyway.
|
|