Keepers were expected, but we were all expecting different things. And we all want different things. What should have happened is we should have had a better plan last year, and we never got around to agreeing to it. I still don't think it's going to work out but I'm willing to try it. If we can get a group together and decide on some unified rule, then I'm all for that. But I don't see that happening. And I don't want to have it be where we don't get along and don't have baseball.
First problem I see is the inactive teams and seeing who wants to play. It's hard to make a group decision when you don't know the group. While they weren't around, they're still going to be stuck with some shit teams and should have some say in how we're doing things. Alienating new owners makes it higher that they will not stick through the season. So far this is what we have from just looking at the forum, but biggie is in charge.
Returning Players:
-Me
-Biggie
-Stall
-Imanalt
-Del Rio
-Texas Cloverleaf
UncleSam is leaning toward no. Pook doesn't deserve to be back IMHO. He has barely touched his team the last 2 years. CBT and Greenlean are the only two who want to replace them. Though giving a keeper spot to someone only on the forums for about 6 months with 7 posts worries me a bit. But that's not my call. If Sam decides what he wants to do, then we need to divide up the teams and then move on.
Second Problem is what the hell we're doing with keepers. We all had different things in our head when it came to last season, and all I really am hearing is that people trying to recall what was the default. Whatever that was or wherever that was promised, god only knows. I just know if we are trying to argue what was promised, we are going to argue forever. We need to pick what we want to do for this year. What is fair and what keeps some competitive balance.
With
the number of keepers, I think everyone of us said 6 would be a fair number. I know Sam and maybe one other person said that they drafted for 4 keepers, but like was said before, we had a discussion middle of last season and 6 seemed a universally appropriate number.
For
how to handicap the keepers, I think we first need to see what we can actually do.
BiGGiE : Do you know if there is a way to change everyone's values of their auction bids? I can't mess with the settings, so I don't know how possible it is for you to change things like that. And if we can't do that easily, then that's not even an argument.
Subpoint of this, is if we should have the keepers should handicap the team based on projected value, have them reflect past value, or have no handicap. If we go based on what we drafted them for, this kind of poses some problems. On my team, I would have Kyle Seager for $1 and Altuve for $7, Johnney Cueto for $3, Greg Holland for $9. A lot of your teams are the same way. We paid out the ass for superstars last year to have them as keepers, that the guys who developed into stars during the year are so undervalued. You think it's fair that because I traded for Cueto halfway through the season, I should keep him for $3 while the guy who has Kershaw has to take a $47 hit? Is the guy who picked up Harvey on waivers because he went under TJ and didn't get drafted should get him for nothing? Is that competitive balance?
And if we go the other way, is it fair to the guy who took a risk on a guy like Tanaka or Jose Abreu on being total busts and has to take a 200% increase because they proved out to be good? Is it fair to the guys who drafted prospects and young guys who turned out, like mine did with Altuve, and dont get rewarded for this?
And if we just let the people keep their keepers with no draft hit, then why don't give Stall and his front ended team 1st again this year?
I dont see any of these options making a fair and balanced league IMHO. Like Sam said, I dont see teams that aren't drafted to the opposite side have any shot. If we are doing what we paid for, then all my keepers combined will cost less just Trout. If we do projected, Stall gets a discount on overpaying for the best players last year, and can use that to overpay on more top tier guys and fill in with $1 guys like he does every year. While I have to take my cheap talent I got last year and pay out my ass to have prospects and guys who developed stay with me.
Whatever we pick, one or more of us is getting screwed and one of our teams are becoming so powerful for years and years to come that it's not even gonna be worth playing. Not to mention guys who dont have a shot because they have to replace the teams.
If someone comes up with a plan with this to have my team or Stall NOT be a super team, please speak up. Cause I don't see it. While I dont mind being given the underdog task of beating the Yankee-esque Stall Squad with my rag tag bunch of 2004 Red Sox looking idiots, I know a lot of you guys might feel not up to having your ass kicked every week and not having a real chance to win.
Third is we need to decide on a draft date. And based on all the other years I've done it, this takes forever to decide with all the timezones and the work schedules and everything involved. We need to hammer out the details and then find a time and place.
MY VOTES FOR WHAT WE DO
First, we DEFINITELY need to get the new owners teams and up to speed. They're affected by the rules and should have a say in what we do.
I dont see how the keeper system works out. Consensus is we have keepers, so I'll try it. Keep me in for
6 keepers. And I think because giving us the keepers at the rate we paid for them last year gives me a totally broken team, I also vote for
projected salary or
no salary hit. I don't care what, they're equal to me.
I also vote for having a
second league with our non-keeper rules, because I really see this as totally flopping down the road. Maybe I'm wrong, but having a second league that can be balanced and a second option doesn't sound like a bad idea. But of course you guys seem to have a ton of optimism and maybe I just need to roll with it.