Some thoughts for the RC - and rest of the league

[h4cheng]

For the signing bonus issue, would everyone be on board with keeping the signing bonus but allowing for teams to sign players to major league contracts (must adhere to max/min restrictions), and thus the bonus money would get spread out?

E.g., Zunino could be signed to a 3 year, 2.5M per year deal.

There are several disadvantages of signing major league contract (none are potentially to a team, but there are certainly enough incentives for teams to shoot for non-major league contracts):

1. Player would not be eligible for EDR, taking up a spot on the 40 men roster
2. Player would not be eligible for rookie extension provision (similar to any other major league contracted player)
3. There would be a penalty for dropping the player (similar to any other major league contract player)

[Dan Wood]

As my opinions have previously been stated,  I still feel that no one has presented a reason FOR having the signing bonuses. Shooter I understand your position in saying that you knew going in that you were going to have to make sure you had room to sign whoever. But might I also point out that you had 4-5 MLBers all season long. There was no way you were going to win with that (you won 1 game - woulda got you fired in real life), and unless everything breaks right, you might not win with what you have. Now don't get me wrong, you have done a commendable job with your team, I have always said as much, and you are a benefit to this league. But there might be a point in time where you are going to need that extra 6 mil to field a team, yet at the same time it could still be bad, or have a bad year, then you are stuck because you have to pay a pick out of money that you don't have. As I have said previously, MLB teams never face this obstacle. Most teams have a stressed cap as it is, then they have to cut what are useful pieces in order to signs some rookies. It is counter productive to constructing a winning ballclub, especially if you are a fiscal giant.

As you pointed out Jake had an amazing year, kudos to him, but he HAD to cut guys to sign a player who might help him in 4-5 years. Pavano could have helped him next season. Not a lot, but you get my drift.

As far as #5 goes, I spoke with Colby because I was confused about why my cap was dropping every year, and he said because the Reds in real life made the play-offs and I had not. His Pirates had a poor 2010 and a good 2011 and his cap climbed both years. Why? Because the real life Pirates suck, that is until this season. So no, the cap influences aren't totally based on what happens in this league. If I finished 16th of 30 teams, and in my mind my cap shouldn't have gone up or down. I also apologize for talking about my team, but it is what I know best, not really familiar with how everyone else feels about their cap situation.

2,3,4 that's fine if no one is on board. I threw them out there because I had heard a few rumblings when I was commish, and those were some things that were brought up.

[nerwffej]

For draft pick signings can't there be a formula that has a % say like Yankees Hughes payroll pays 100% of the bonus but if lowest payroll team has to pay a extremely lower % of the bonus and %s change for all teams in the middle?

[rcankosy]

My beef with the signing bonus is not money management. It is with the fact that it puts small market teams at a disadvantage because of how high the bonus is. Zunino's bonus was 10% of 's total cap space. Zunino's salary commitment for this year would make him the highest paid player on . It's very easy for large market teams to clear cap space to sign players. It's much more difficult, for small market teams, especially well run ones, to clear cap space. For example, can really clear up 2.5M in cap space to sign a draft pick? The draft is suppose to restore the competitive balance, if the small market teams have trouble signing the best players, then the purpose of the draft is void.

I agree 100% with Howe.  I completely understand the original concept of one overall player cost budget including the rookie draft, but it makes little sense that rookie bonuses can be as high as 7m, while rookies acquired through free agency like Profar can be had for as little as 500K.  Imo, it is simply unfair to ask small market teams like the Padres to hold back 12% of their caps for a player who might not impact their teams for 3-4 years. 

As far as the other suggestions, I would NOT be in favor of trading draft picks, eliminating divisional play, adopting the new CBA rules until we get a better grasp of what it entails, or adjusting the formula we have for calculating team salary cap amounts.

[h4cheng]

One additional comment: I would be ok with salary bonuses, if teams are allowed to spread the bonus through multiple years. This is not uncommon in real life as teams offers draftees major league contracts.

[h4cheng]

My beef with the signing bonus is not money management. It is with the fact that it puts small market teams at a disadvantage because of how high the bonus is. Zunino's bonus was 10% of 's total cap space. Zunino's salary commitment for this year would make him the highest paid player on . It's very easy for large market teams to clear cap space to sign players. It's much more difficult, for small market teams, especially well run ones, to clear cap space. For example, can really clear up 2.5M in cap space to sign a draft pick? The draft is suppose to restore the competitive balance, if the small market teams have trouble signing the best players, then the purpose of the draft is void.

[shooter47]

Shooter, you state that as the Orioles you know you'll have a high pick every year. Isn't it a goal to NOT have a high draft pick every year?

Yes that is the goal but the draft is also based on the previous years results.  I already know that I have the Number one overall pick next year so I can plan ahead and know that I will need a certain amount of salary cap saved for that pick.

Take your washington nationals for example.  You have had an exceptional season this year and will finish top 4 in the league this year.  This means you will have a lower first round pick and don't need to save nearly as much salary cap next year to sign a player at that spot. 

[Jake]

Shooter, you state that as the Orioles you know you'll have a high pick every year. Isn't it a goal to NOT have a high draft pick every year?

[shooter47]

1. Doing away with signing bonuses during the draft. IMO, this is just dumb. We assemble a team, then we start dropping guys to sign a prospect. No team in MLB, maybe the Mets, would be that bereft of funds that they would have to do this. "Sorry Wright but you make too much, and we really want to sign our third rounder". As I have said before, MLB teams have different budgets for active roster and scouting. Bad teams should get the good players. I hate the fact that we have to cut players just to be a part of the draft. And it has nothing to do with money management.

In my opinion the draft bonuses have everything to do with money management.  As a re-buildling team in the league I look at my salary cap as the total amount of money I have for the year.  Some teams decide to compete and spend right up to the salary cap in a given year.  I know that as the Orioles I will have a high pick every year and must save part of my cap to cover any draft bonuses that I will have.  In my opinion the teams that are forced to cut players are the GM's who don't think about building a team and player acquisitions in the long term.  The draft happens every August and teams should be prepared for it. No draft bonuses takes some strategy out of the draft.  Re-building teams that are smart can often make more out of the draft by getting players that drop because there are teams that can't afford them due to spending all of there money trying to win this year.

2. Going back to trading draft picks. Again this may help with the rebuilding process of certain teams. I used to be staunchly against this and it is very un-MLB like, but personally I kind of miss it.

I personally like not trading draft picks.  The premise of this league is to follow real life MLB and this would change the entire meaning of the league.  Any team that is re-buildling should be trading for prospects and not draft picks.  Most players drafted are years away from the Majors. 

3. No more divisional play. Play everyone in your league equal amount of times. Also very un-MLB like, but if you play in a tough division, you know what I am talking about. How good is a team really if it beats up on teams that score 500 a week, while another team loses when scoring 1200? Of course there is the argument, well the Rays do it in real life and they do OK, they also sucked for a solid decade to be good. Again, I have heard the arguments for this, and they make a lot of sense (Mike B - jump in any time). I also think it might add to the overall enjoyment of the league.

Once Again I like divisional play.  This is the same scheduling that MLB has and keeping it would maintain the league's emphasis on mimicking the MLB as close as possible.

4. New CBA implementation...I say as soon as we craft it to our league, it should go into effect immediately, just like the 2nd WC did.

These changes are far greater then adding a 2nd wildcard.  These changes affect team strategies and player acquisition far more then adding a second team to the wildcard did this year.  Any changes should go into effect after one year.

5. Re-configuring how salary caps work. At this stage in the game, our teams no longer represent the MLB teams that they were born from. To compare them against the success or lack there of, of our facsimile brethren is not the way to go about it. Here's why, the Marlins went berserk on the FA market this season, no way anyone in this league can do that, regardless of how good they have performed. IMO it should be based on .500 with a high and low ceiling that you can reach for each market. My Reds for example should have a 75 as a low and a 90 as a high, or something to that effect. My team has been .500 or better 2 of the 3 years I have run them, and my cap continues to drop because the real life Reds do better than me. IMO that is an apples to oranges argument. We have now reached a point where each team is its own entity.

I like the current salary cap structure.  Your cap for the reds isn't droping because the reds are doing better but because the reds continually underperform in FGM.  The salary cap is determined by the average of three past seasons with one year as a buffer.  The salary cap for the reds in 2013 is determined by the reds performance in FGM from 2009-2011.  The formula does contain Stand values which are based on Real life MLB payrolls but that is it.  The reds in FGM finished 22nd in 2009, 16th in 2010 and 22nd in 2011.  This is why the reds salary cap has dropped.  Cincinnati finished 16th in 2012 which will likely cause there salary cap to increase in 2014.  The Salary cap is just delayed from the results of FGM.   Basing the Salary cap off of the average of three previous years and a one year buffer makes the salary cap changes from year to year less drastic.  After looking at this system it seems to be very realistic.

In my opinion the current league mimics the real life MLB league fairly well and that is what it is supposed to do.  The league premise in the rules is as follows.

League Premise
To represent the current atmosphere of MLB for GMs in a manner that works effectively with fantasy baseball while not making it overly complicated to play.

I am of the opinion that the league doesn't need changes but needs no major changes and a period of continuity so that we can accurately assess the rules that we have.  When they are changed continually every year we can't determine what improved the league and what may need changes in the future.  If you want rules like those suggested there are other leagues to join like that or another league can be started.  These changes would drastically alter the league and change the entire meaning of the league which is to be as close to the MLB as possible.

[h4cheng]

I have brought up 1) and 2) already in the draft thread, and I agree with both 3.

I like division play, it builds rivalries. Keep in mind that the top 10 scoring team all made the playoffs this year, so it's not like divisional play is precluding good teams from making the playoffs.

I hate 4). It completely destroys any incentive for long term strategy.

I don't enough knowledge about the salary cap formula to comment on 5)