|
|
Post by ohthecommotion on Feb 18, 2010 13:55:46 GMT -5
So, John and I have been discussing the issue of keepers that you didn't originally draft. The rule isn't clearly laid out, but my understanding was that you need to keep a player in the slot they were originally drafted at. So, for example, if I traded away Mark Teixeira to whomever, that owner would have to keep him in lieu of a first round pick (AND, more importantly, in lieu of any other first round keepers). Conversely, if I were to somehow trade for Hanley Ramirez, I'd only be able to keep him OR Teixeira.
This rule is all well and good, but my proposal is this: I propose that, in order to attempt to keep more players, an owner should be able to push a keeper's pick any number of rounds UP the draft (but not down, obviously. We'd all love to keep Lincecum in the 17th round). So, for example, if I were to trade for Ian Kinsler, then under my rule I would have the option of keeping both Kinsler and Lincecum, even though they were both drafted in the second round. To so do, one of them must take the place of my first round pick, and I wouldn't be able to keep any other first round draftees, such as Mark Teixeira.
I think it's a rather elegant solution, and that without it, the order that players were drafted in would play a much bigger part in trade talks than it rightfully should. What do you guys think? Like it, dislike it? Have your own ideas?
Edit: Oh, I almost forgot! In my proposal, any changes to a player's keeper slot are PERMANENT. If I decide to move Lincecum into my first round keeper slot, he's there until the three years are up. This prevents you from drafting a new stud young player in, say, the 12th round, bumping him up for a year, and then dropping him back down afterwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by playerx3d on Feb 18, 2010 14:02:46 GMT -5
Looks good to me. In this example, if you traded for Kinsler, you could keep both players but you would not have a pick in Round 1 or 2 of next year correct?
|
|
|
|
Post by ohthecommotion on Feb 18, 2010 14:05:58 GMT -5
Looks good to me. In this example, if you traded for Kinsler, you could keep both players but you would not have a pick in Round 1 or 2 of next year correct? Correct. I'd bump one of them into the "first round." It would be as if I drafted them in the first, for the purposes of keepers. |
|
|
|
Post by mofugger on Feb 18, 2010 14:07:02 GMT -5
Yeah, I was wondering how you guys were going to handle this. I guess there's no perfect way to handle this.
How about this idea....
Since we are going to have deep rosters, we can keep 0-10 players on our team. We name our keepers by a due date that is provided by the commish(s). With every player you keep, you lose a round in the following year's draft. This will force everyone to decide the importance of the players that they are keeping. IMHO, this is a more fair system.
|
|
|
|
Post by playerx3d on Feb 18, 2010 14:09:56 GMT -5
Looks good to me. I would vote to support that option. And I sent ya a PM brother. Let's start talking trade options. I'm going to see if I can make it this entire draft without keeping a player on my roster for more than 24 hours. Hahahaha.
|
|
|
|
Post by ohthecommotion on Feb 18, 2010 14:15:34 GMT -5
Yeah, I was wondering how you guys were going to handle this. I guess there's no perfect way to handle this. How about this idea.... Since we are going to have deep rosters, we can keep 0-10 players on our team. We name our keepers by a due date that is provided by the commish(s). With every player you keep, you lose a round in the following year's draft. This will force everyone to decide the importance of the players that they are keeping. IMHO, this is a more fair system. I don't follow you...We decided on five keepers to keep the list small and so it isn't always the same teams every year. But from what you describe, it sounds like if I draft Johnny Cueto in the 15th round, and decide to keep only him, I need to give up my first round pick. Or, worse, a pick of my choosing (which would always be the 25th). The keeper rules in regard to how many players are kept, and what picks you lose for them, are set it stone from what I can tell. All I am proposing is allowing owners to move certain players up to higher rounds, to facilitate trading and keeping who you really want. |
|
|
|
Post by teek on Feb 18, 2010 14:35:05 GMT -5
So, John and I have been discussing the issue of keepers that you didn't originally draft. The rule isn't clearly laid out, but my understanding was that you need to keep a player in the slot they were originally drafted at. So, for example, if I traded away Mark Teixeira to whomever, that owner would have to keep him in lieu of a first round pick (AND, more importantly, in lieu of any other first round keepers). Conversely, if I were to somehow trade for Hanley Ramirez, I'd only be able to keep him OR Teixeira. This rule is all well and good, but my proposal is this: I propose that, in order to attempt to keep more players, an owner should be able to push a keeper's pick any number of rounds UP the draft (but not down, obviously. We'd all love to keep Lincecum in the 17th round). So, for example, if I were to trade for Ian Kinsler, then under my rule I would have the option of keeping both Kinsler and Lincecum, even though they were both drafted in the second round. To so do, one of them must take the place of my first round pick, and I wouldn't be able to keep any other first round draftees, such as Mark Teixeira. I think it's a rather elegant solution, and that without it, the order that players were drafted in would play a much bigger part in trade talks than it rightfully should. What do you guys think? Like it, dislike it? Have your own ideas? Edit: Oh, I almost forgot! In my proposal, any changes to a player's keeper slot are PERMANENT. If I decide to move Lincecum into my first round keeper slot, he's there until the three years are up. This prevents you from drafting a new stud young player in, say, the 12th round, bumping him up for a year, and then dropping him back down afterwards. I'm in, makes much more sense than what we have existing. (now here is a good question) what happens if/when you trade for picks in next seasons draft? say I traded a player and a lower pick for a 2nd round pick from another team. Could I then keep two 2nd round players? |
|
|
|
Post by ohthecommotion on Feb 18, 2010 14:39:56 GMT -5
I'm in, makes much more sense than what we have existing. (now here is a good question) what happens if/when you trade for picks in next seasons draft? say I traded a player and a lower pick for a 2nd round pick from another team. Could I then keep two 2nd round players? A good question indeed. You can only keep players for picks that you own. If you have no second round picks, you cannot keep a second round player (obviously, because there would be no penalty). You CAN move a player up in rounds to avoid this. So, if I had no 2nd round pick, and wanted to keep Lincecum, I'd move him up to the 1st. Also, if you have multiple picks in one round, you can keep multiple players from that round. If I have two first round picks, I could move Lincecum up to the first, and keep both him and Teixeira in lieu of those two picks. Again, everything I state here is my proposal for the rules, none of these are set in stone yet. But I like how these are shaping up so far! |
|
|
|
Post by mofugger on Feb 18, 2010 14:56:02 GMT -5
Yeah, I was wondering how you guys were going to handle this. I guess there's no perfect way to handle this. How about this idea.... Since we are going to have deep rosters, we can keep 0-10 players on our team. We name our keepers by a due date that is provided by the commish(s). With every player you keep, you lose a round in the following year's draft. This will force everyone to decide the importance of the players that they are keeping. IMHO, this is a more fair system. I don't follow you...We decided on five keepers to keep the list small and so it isn't always the same teams every year. But from what you describe, it sounds like if I draft Johnny Cueto in the 15th round, and decide to keep only him, I need to give up my first round pick. Or, worse, a pick of my choosing (which would always be the 25th). The keeper rules in regard to how many players are kept, and what picks you lose for them, are set it stone from what I can tell. All I am proposing is allowing owners to move certain players up to higher rounds, to facilitate trading and keeping who you really want. No, I stated we can keep "0-10" players. Hence, if you keep 5 players, you lose your rights to draft in the first 5 rounds, you keep 3 players you would not draft in the first 3 rounds, you keep 10 players you don't draft in the first 10 rounds. I don't see how this is not fair. If you decide to keep Cueto, just remember he's going to cost you a round in the draft the follwing year. Anyway, I'm game for whatever the majority votes for. I just think this sytem makes more sense. |
|
|
|
Post by ohthecommotion on Feb 18, 2010 15:00:03 GMT -5
I don't follow you...We decided on five keepers to keep the list small and so it isn't always the same teams every year. But from what you describe, it sounds like if I draft Johnny Cueto in the 15th round, and decide to keep only him, I need to give up my first round pick. Or, worse, a pick of my choosing (which would always be the 25th). The keeper rules in regard to how many players are kept, and what picks you lose for them, are set it stone from what I can tell. All I am proposing is allowing owners to move certain players up to higher rounds, to facilitate trading and keeping who you really want. No, I stated we can keep "0-10" players. Hence, if you keep 5 players, you lose your rights to draft in the first 5 rounds, you keep 3 players you would not draft in the first 3 rounds, you keep 10 players you don't draft in the first 10 rounds. I don't see how this is not fair. If you decide to keep Cueto, just remember he's going to cost you a round in the draft the follwing year. Anyway, I'm game for whatever the majority votes for. I just think this sytem makes more sense. My point is that you're equating every player in the MLB to the same ten rounds. If I decide I'd rather have my picks than my best players, why should I be penalized for keeping a late-rounder? The point of keeping players in the spots they are picked is that it creates a value system, as opposed to saying "Whoever you want to keep had better be worth your first [however many] picks." |
|
|
|
Post by mofugger on Feb 18, 2010 15:14:52 GMT -5
No, I stated we can keep "0-10" players. Hence, if you keep 5 players, you lose your rights to draft in the first 5 rounds, you keep 3 players you would not draft in the first 3 rounds, you keep 10 players you don't draft in the first 10 rounds. I don't see how this is not fair. If you decide to keep Cueto, just remember he's going to cost you a round in the draft the follwing year. Anyway, I'm game for whatever the majority votes for. I just think this sytem makes more sense. My point is that you're equating every player in the MLB to the same ten rounds. If I decide I'd rather have my picks than my best players, why should I be penalized for keeping a late-rounder? The point of keeping players in the spots they are picked is that it creates a value system, as opposed to saying "Whoever you want to keep had better be worth your first [however many] picks." No sweat. It was making a suggestion that makes sense to me. I'm willing to do whatever. |
|
|
|
Post by mofugger on Feb 18, 2010 17:57:50 GMT -5
Didn't mean to kill your thunder guy....carry on!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2010 18:17:13 GMT -5
I agree that the round you drafted a player in is the round you get to keep him in should stay.
Makes people think about keeping players in the round drafted (say Jacoby Ellsbury) or taking chances on that young guy keeping up his output (like Justin Upton in the 14th rd last year).
|
|
|
|
Post by NoPepperGames on Feb 18, 2010 19:05:24 GMT -5
So if you manage to grab 2010's hot rookie off waivers and he tears it up...and you decide to keep him...does he take your final 2011 pick to keep?
|
|
|
|
Post by ohthecommotion on Feb 18, 2010 19:58:42 GMT -5
So if you manage to grab 2010's hot rookie off waivers and he tears it up...and you decide to keep him...does he take your final 2011 pick to keep? I would imagine that would be the fairest way to handle it. Waiver wire pickups that you decide to keep would take your last however many picks. So if you keep two undrafted players, they would take your 24th and 25th picks. |
|
