Open Comment Thread for Potential Rule Change - Put more established players into the off-season free agent pool with transaction order based on salary cut

Suggested to me this year:

I just wanted to offer one possible idea that may increase a "rebuilding" team's incentive to retain big money studs rather then trade them to a short-term super team.

As the system sits now, the team with the worst record gets first crack at the top 3 picks in the redistribution draft. That alone Is a huge incentive for teams to tank, Along with the top weekly picks they receive along the way. This may help parity since it allows them a mechanism for gaining assets, but it also may diminish the in-season competition. In short, what if the redistribution picks were ordered as a result of total dollars of players released to free agency at the time of the 28 man roster crunch?

It seems this could possibly incentivize struggling teams to think twice about trading a 10 million player for future salary relief. It may still be practical to do such a thing, but it think it would help some. Last year was a huge haul with Tanaka and others I remember. Also, I think it would make the redistribution draft a huge event if suddenly guys like Miggy or Kershaw were floating around. Doubtful the top redist picks would net a bigger haul then trading one of those studs, but it does seem increasingly difficult to move high priced talent in the off-season.

Your thoughts? (I'm personally in favor of no change as this would be something difficult to track and I do feel there's importance for teams that finished at the bottom one season to get first crack at the draft list)

Also note this change is as much about preventing dumping of players for salary reasons and for tanking late-season to get a better draft position (leaving some teams even more non-competitive during the last few weeks of the season).

Open Comment Thread for Potential Rule Change - Multiweek Redistribution Draft

Once upon a time I did each redistribution draft by hand.  So when draft lists were submitted and results weren't posted until 2-3-4 weeks later, I needed all that time.

Then I automated the award process - but posting was still a lot of manual copy-and-paste.  So it still took a couple weeks and I did a "slow reveal" of 2-3 leagues per day.

Now it's all relatively automatic.  I'm able to collect and post in about the same time as it takes for weekly transactions.

Question -
No major format change proposed here (reverse order of finish for draft order - teams get 3 players all at one time per round - 5 total rounds), but would you like the opportunity to post one round per week and then redo the remainder of your list before we do the next round?

So:

• Everyone submits their full list as we do now
• Week 1 - we award players in the first round and post, then reopen the list.
• Teams could choose to redo Rounds 2-5.  Or just keep the list the way it was and live with it.  Or if they missed the deadline for the initial list they could jump back in for the remainder.
• Repeat posting individual weeks and reopening the list

This gives each team more control over their roster
Lets them adjust their position and salary needs based on what they already got or which players already taken by other teams
Lets them set the list and go on vacation for a month if they wish

I think it benefits all teams - but does it swing too far in taking some of the advantages of the poorly-finishing teams and their early position in each round?

In 2014

• We finalized Carryover choices on January 26 (this was delayed largely due to the number or orphans I had to work through
• Draft lists were due February 9
• Draft results were posted February 16
• 6 weeks of pre-season free agency and trades began February 23

This was maybe the latest in a long time that I posted draft results - usually we've started free agency about the first week of February.  I don't miss all of that time - it's usually a slow period - but probably another week or two of transactions would be better.

As long as we don't repeat the late carryover choices and keep it in December we'd go back to submitting the first draft list in early January  (Tentative 2015 schedule had been trade deadlines 12/6/14 and 12/27/14, carryovers by January 11, draft list due Feb 1) and could then have 5 weeks of posting results.  I did enjoy the extra time this year for all of January to look at prospects, but could deal with the earlier dates.

This would take some changes in the website to allow for list changes between weeks and I can't be sure right now that I will have the time for that this year, but it's a thought for at least the future if not immediately next season.

Comments?

Redistribution Draft - Early Mistakes

I've processed 3 drafts so far, and I've had teams in two of them. And I'm already kicking myself.

You can have 2 different strategies in the draft:
1) Get guys who can immediately fill holes in your lineup
2) Get new guys to the player list who are long-term prospects before anyone else grabs them.

Well - and 3) you can try a combo platter of both.
If you're REALLY lucky, if you go for approach #2, they actually fulfill your needs if you went for approach #1 - and for much cheaper (100 is cheaper than 4300).

My problem is that I was going combo platter, but thought that the new guys on the player list would be most in demand. So I've loaded up the top of my list with the hot new foreign guys and some guys that Baseball America lists as the team's #1 prospect, and a few leftover 1st rounders from 2008. So far, it looks like I should have gone for established guys earlier.

Example - In the Beer League I really needed a shortstop and thought J.J. Hardy would fill that hole pretty well and wasn't too thrilled with the other names. But I put him in the 2nd round - and by the time that happened, he was gone (and I still would have been able to get 2 or 3 of the guys I did list in round 1).

The problem with the new players is that
- For every Dice K, there's a Kei Igawa.
- For every Geovany Soto, there's a J.R. Towles
(now, those 2 could actually end up doing something, but they didn't end up being the quick cheap fixes that people drafting them thought they might be).

Maybe my other leauges will turn out better, but so far in my sneak peaks at all the leagues I think I'm in the same situation in most cases.

UPDATE - POST DRAFT - OK, they weren't all so bad. I was smart enough in a couple leagues to put my priority in the first round (a nice snag of Mariano Rivera, for example, in Reality Bites). But mostly I've got teams that need significant bumps to get into playoff contention and a lot of cash (but no one to spend it on). I'm generally not a trader - so don't be offended if I keep turning down your offers, but if you're looking for cash in some leagues, see if you have something that can help me.