|
Post by WWaS? on Mar 1, 2012 11:36:05 GMT -5
Another thread for league opinion. Do we want to allow teams to keep less than the full 12/10 keepers for both minors and majors? To me, it seems fair to allow less than the full amount since we aren't dispersing any teams (pending finding an owner for the last team). There will be a catch* for the minor league keepers that I will explain below. Just wanted to get opinions on this.
**Minor league keepers catch: If we allow less than the full 10 keepers for minors, teams would not receive these extra picks at the beginning of the draft (due to the amount of talent at the top end of the draft due to FYP picks). Instead, they would receive the picks at the back end of the draft (or possibly in the middle of the draft? i.e. round 6 or so) to fill out their roster. For some teams, the previous owner only had 13 minor league players, so they have significantly less players to pull from, and owners did not have very strong minor league systems. I don't feel we should force teams to keep players they don't want. It would essentially be like them making a free agent acquisition but through the draft instead.
Major leagues would function as normal major league keepers where the picks for not having a keeper would come before teams who kept the full amount of keepers have their picks.
|
|
|
Post by riptide624 on Mar 1, 2012 12:02:33 GMT -5
As for major league keepers, I don't see any problem with someone wanting to keep less than the 12 we talked about before. I assume though the extra picks a guy would get (ie: if he kept 10 instead of 12 and had 2 extra picks) would come at the end of the MLB draft? If so, that's fine with me.
For the minor leagues, I agree the available players is top heavy so not really fair to give them picks right off the bat to fill their roster, but would be open to having supplemental picks in the middle of the draft like maybe starting after the 4th or 5th rounds.
|
|
|
Post by WWaS? on Mar 1, 2012 14:04:52 GMT -5
As for major league keepers, I don't see any problem with someone wanting to keep less than the 12 we talked about before. I assume though the extra picks a guy would get (ie: if he kept 10 instead of 12 and had 2 extra picks) would come at the end of the MLB draft? If so, that's fine with me. For the minor leagues, I agree the available players is top heavy so not really fair to give them picks right off the bat to fill their roster, but would be open to having supplemental picks in the middle of the draft like maybe starting after the 4th or 5th rounds. No. The ESPN draft would have the extra picks at the start. Which really isn't that bad because they're picking from the scraps that other teams didn't have room to keep (which the players probably wont be that solid), but they'd be better (presumably) than the players the team has to choose from as keepers. We could only put the picks at the end if we drafted on proboards.
|
|
|
Post by riptide624 on Mar 1, 2012 15:47:17 GMT -5
Well I thought we were still contracting a few teams? Getting down to 12 or so? Or will we have more teams?
|
|
|
Post by WWaS? on Mar 1, 2012 16:56:16 GMT -5
Looks like we'll be full. Only need one more
|
|
|
Post by riptide624 on Mar 1, 2012 18:01:29 GMT -5
Ok Sweet. Didn't realize we were getting that many teams filed.
Then I retract my statement from before. I don't see any problems with guys keeping under the 12 MLB players and just getting some extra picks to start the draft. You are right. Any of the guys available in the draft won't be guys you can build a team around but should be some nice role players someone can take if they feel they really don't have 12 worth keeping.
|
|
|
Post by neifisavedus on Mar 1, 2012 21:02:35 GMT -5
I think for mlb draft existing owners should not be allowed to keep less than 12 if they get their picks at the beginning of the draft. If they got them at the end of the draft, it would be ok imo. I don't think someone should get the leg up by picking at the beginning of the mlb draft just for keeping less than 12. There are still going to be a lot of worthy players in the draft. However, I do think it would be fair for new owners to be able to do that. But I know that customizing the draft so that existing owners make-up picks come at the end and new owners make-up picks come at the beginning.
I agree with your milb draft proposal.
|
|
|
Post by WWaS? on Mar 2, 2012 10:35:51 GMT -5
I think for mlb draft existing owners should not be allowed to keep less than 12 if they get their picks at the beginning of the draft. If they got them at the end of the draft, it would be ok imo. I don't think someone should get the leg up by picking at the beginning of the mlb draft just for keeping less than 12. There are still going to be a lot of worthy players in the draft. However, I do think it would be fair for new owners to be able to do that. But I know that customizing the draft so that existing owners make-up picks come at the end and new owners make-up picks come at the beginning. I agree with your milb draft proposal. We have this set-up in another keeper league and it's really not as unfair as it may sound. Guys who are keeping all 12 keepers usually have stronger teams, so they want to keep their guys. The guys who don't keep 12 have weaker players, so essentially, it serves as a stabilizer. It also makes it a bit of strategy about deciding if someone is actually worth keeping or not. It's worked in the past for me to allow less keepers, so I don't have a problem with it. We could allow just new owners to do that, as I'm pretty sure the only ones who haven't submitted the full keepers right now are new owners, but if we allow everyone to do it, I would probably consider not keeping the full 12.
|
|
|
Post by thewelt15 on Mar 2, 2012 11:54:41 GMT -5
I agree with Tim. It balances teams out quicker to give draft picks at the beginning of the draft when a team keeps less than 12 players. Wtih 16 teams you are talking about players ranked in the 150-200 range that will be available. They are not game changers but can help boost a team.
|
|
|
Post by riptide624 on Mar 2, 2012 12:39:12 GMT -5
Is this even going to be an issue with many managers? Maybe before we decide which way to go, we should see how many teams don't want to keep the full 12 and just how many they do want to keep (11, 10, 9 ??).
I would also be more inclined to just offer this option to new owners if possible. The existing owners from the prior year should have enough decent players where they have 12 they like. Mostly its the new owners who inherited bad teams that need the extra help. And really, how much help is it with guys that will be available? All the star players are already rostered so would mostly be role players they would get anyway.
|
|
|
Post by libertycitykin on Mar 2, 2012 14:27:22 GMT -5
I don't think ALL of our new owners inherited bad teams. There were good teams last year that nobody managed.
If we're going to allow teams to keep less then 12 keepers it should be an all teams thing and not just a few or new owners only.
I feel the same about the MiLB draft and keepers too.
|
|
|
Post by neifisavedus on Mar 2, 2012 16:55:31 GMT -5
I guess I'm fine either way, but would be more in favor of just leaving that option of keeping less than 12 and 10 to new owners regardless if they have a good team or not. The thing is, they inherited that team, didn't have any control so I see it fair to give them the option. I know I will keep the max keepers allowed.
|
|
|
Post by citation on Mar 3, 2012 12:01:33 GMT -5
If do not keep the max allowed in MLB ot MiLB then picks should be at end of draft--NO QUESTION. Keep what you have or pick at end of draft to make up the difference.
|
|
|
Post by crownman on Mar 4, 2012 23:01:40 GMT -5
I would love to have Jason Kipris 2b on my keeper team. But I can not add him. What should I do? Drop him and let someone else get him? Would like to solve this before we draft. Thanks
|
|