Top Prospects And The Reason For Our Setup

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon May 10, 2010 4:48 am

I don't think I'm sending out a pickup alert this week when using Derek Holland as an example here, especially after he was wrongly added to the NFBC player pool this weekend. We/STATS already put a red alert on him by having to take him out of the free agent player pool this weekend.

But to me, he's an example of why I originally wrote the NFBC rules the way I did. I have no problem with people discussing an easier way to handle our player pool by letting EVERY player become available. But here's my reasoning for not doing it to this point:

Remember, this is a NO TRADING LEAGUE, so after Draft Day the only way to improve your team is through free agency. That's it. The free agent pool is your lifeblood after Draft Day and some folks know how to draw blood better than others. But it's there for all.

And outside of veterans who have failed already or weren't good enough to be drafted in the first place, the minor leagues are the best source of "game changers" for your teams. Thus I allow folks to draft anyone they want and to reserve top prospects if they want since the reserve roster is so thin. It's a gamble for those owners who draft players starting in the minors, but the rewards can be worthwhile. Some take the chance and some don't.

For those who don't take the chance, they may get a second reprieve if nobody else in their league took the chance. They get an equal shot at bidding for him once he is called up to the majors. It might take a lot of FAAB to get him, but everyone gets the same, equal shot at him and everyone knows about him because he's being publicized more than any major-leaguer at the time.

So it's one of the best chances to improve your team after Draft Day. And in a no-trading league, those opportunities come very infrequently.

It happens every year and bidding free-for-all works sometimes and doesn't work other times. It was a game changer in the NFBC in 2007 when Ryan Braun was called up. Last year we saw it as a game changer positively and negatively when Tommy Hanson and Matt LaPorta were called up. We could see it this year with Eric Young and Derek Holland.

Now, I know the game would be played similarly if EVERYONE had a shot at picking up Holland two weeks ago, three weeks ago, this last week. But some owners would be better at picking up top prospects before their callups than others. Maybe that's fine and a game within a game. Maybe that's something we all agree to do next year. Maybe that will reward just the serious owners who live in the minors and the majors equally. Maybe, but maybe not. Maybe it does make it very tough for anyone else to improve their roster after Draft Day. That's the decision I need to make as a game operator so that EVERYONE has a fair chance of winning.

I'm not saying my way is the only way. I'm just saying that a player like Derek Holland being available in almost 70 percent of NFBC leagues this week is a good thing for owners who need to improve their pitching and can only do it via free agency. They get to watch him pitch on Wednesday, evaluate him with everyone else in their league and bid accordingly. It's the FAAB game that is a game within a game in the NFBC. And it carries out each week when new prospects are called up, as we all know.

Again, I'm not saying that's the only way. But it's why I first set it up this way.

Your thoughts on that setup are welcome. Thanks and good luck all.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Mon May 10, 2010 4:58 am

I like the way you have always done it. The issue is that it currently is not working for a variety of reasons (Stats feed on Holland, fanball on EYJ). I think you have a tough decision to make and it lies in whether or not you believe your back end people can actually implement it the way you want. If not I think you have to go to plan B and open it up to anyone drafted in any league. I cannot see opening it up to anyone as feasible- how do you get them all in the data base?

I would hope that your customer base would support a change (if it comes to that) based upon an underlying reason of not positive we can pull of the old way effectively in this environment. My guess is suddenly the old way would be the greatest thing ever and fanball sucks posts would be prevalent. That would suck and IMO be somewhat unfair, but if it takes that to get to a level playing field with no hiccups then so be it.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Mon May 10, 2010 5:08 am

The issue I personally have with things run in this manner concerns the equity in the overall standings. That is, after all the main selling point, the ability to win 100K.

On draft day, someone in a league takes Holland but has to drop him for whatever reason. He is therefore available for pickup in that league.

He goes undrafted in another league.

But someone in the first league, who never heard of Holland before mid-April can take a $1 flier 2 weeks ago because they are okay with injuries and can afford to use up the reserve spot.

But the guy in the second league who also can afford to tie up a reserve spot has to wait because no one in his league took him on draft day.

I see the first guy having an advantage over the second guy with respect to the overall, solely because someone in his league drafted Holland and dropped him. He gets Holland much cheaper, leaving more FAAB for future pickups.

Just my not so humble opinion, but as exciting as FAAB bidding for Holland and Castro is, for as much discussion as it drums up on the forums, the point that trumps everything is as level a playing field as possible for the overall competition. The rules, as is, afford some owners a slight advantage over others.

[ May 10, 2010, 11:11 AM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon May 10, 2010 5:12 am

Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

I like the way you have always done it. The issue is that it currently is not working for a variety of reasons (Stats feed on Holland, fanball on EYJ). I think you have a tough decision to make and it lies in whether or not you believe your back end people can actually implement it the way you want. This is a very good point and one KOQ made to me this morning. Yes, I believe we can handle the player pool this way. In fact, I think we can handle it this way better than letting everyone on a 40-man roster in the pool or EVERY minor-leaguer. That could be a mess.

Remember, during the first two years of the NFBC we were still licensed by the MLBPA and they wouldn't let us use players who weren't part of the union. Heck, some games even had to take Barry Bonds out of their player pool or call him SF25. Remember those days? We struggled badly with the 40-man roster and ended that after a year or two. It was a mess to keep up with that. So some options aren't better just because we've had hiccups with this option this year.

Defining the player pool better RIGHT NOW is key. I think I need to do that.

Scott Boras · Post by **Scott Boras** » Mon May 10, 2010 5:34 am

Changing it to include every player in the minors would create more problems than we have now. Consider:

1) The free agent pool would be HUGE. How long would load times be when we multiply the pool we have now?

2) How long would it take to filter through the list to find who you're looking for? The player search function would have to be upgraded and flawless. Otherwise we would have a lot of problems on Sunday.

3) The incidence of user-error would skyrocket. How many times would we hear owners who lack attention to detail complain that they accidentally picked up the wrong ramirez? If we open up to the entire minor league pool, several players would have the exact same name.

4) Fanball would have to hire a team to manage the free agent pool and ensure it's accuracy. Considering how long it's taken the IT team to perform basic functions this season and the fact that we have weekly issues with a much smaller pool, how can we realistically even begin to discuss adding every minor league player? This seems highly unrealistic at this time.

5) Free agents have sortable stats. If we include the entire minor league base, would it make sense NOT to have sortable minor league stats? Again, a lot more work for both fanball and NFBC owners. If done properly, this could be a one stop shop for player stats and analysis. That said, we don't even have MLB YTD stats on our team stats page. Is fanball willing to hire more quality employees? We know what history tells us. We're living it now.

6) The NFBC requires a lot of time to follow, analyze, and plan both pre, post, and in-season. Opening up the entire minor league pool would require that much more knowledge, prep, and time. You could lose a large part of your customer base who simply don't have time to compete with those who don't have and/or neglect their work, families, pets, etc. What percentage of the NFBC focus the majority of their season on draft day? I'm not saying those owners should be rewarded if they are less skilled than others, but from a business standpoint you are really stretching your target audience to extreme fans and followers.

On the TBD view:

1) It would completely change the dynamic of the NFBC. This could be good or bad, and would likely cause a lot more minor leaguers to be drafted and stashed. It could also have the opposite effect.

2) It could be suggested that the more avid owners and followers of the minors would have a huge advantage, but that's not necessarily true. For every Ryan Braun there are ten Brandon Woods. Only the best and/or luckiest would find an edge. It could cripple a lot of avid fans who over-zealously scan the minors.

3) It could increase the competetiveness of in-season management but it could also sap the excitement and reduce bidding wars on Sunday. Justin Smoak MIGHT go for $500 but it's a moot point if he's only available in less than 10% of the leagues. Again, is this good or bad? What would Gekko post about?

I'm sure there's more, but that's what immediately comes to mind.

colorado · Post by **colorado** » Mon May 10, 2010 5:37 am

Defining the player pool better RIGHT NOW is key. I think I need to do that. [/QB][/quote]

Bravo, Greg! I wish our governemnt leaders would take the same stance. Politics aside, I prefer the current system and selected Holland during most drafts because speculating on players is part of my philosophy. We all have different styles of playing this game. This is what drew me in and keeps me coming back . . . Okay, Vegas is a draw as well.

Scott

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Mon May 10, 2010 5:53 am

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion.

Heels · Post by **Heels** » Mon May 10, 2010 6:03 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion. I agree with Todd. Keep the current system as is but when a minor leaguer who was drafted is dropped while in the minors, he is out of the player pool. I dont see a compelling reason for keeping drafted minor leaguers in the league pool.

Scott Boras · Post by **Scott Boras** » Mon May 10, 2010 6:12 am

Originally posted by Heels:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion. I agree with Todd. Keep the current system as is but when a minor leaguer who was drafted is dropped while in the minors, he is out of the player pool. I dont see a compelling reason for keeping drafted minor leaguers in the league pool. [/QUOTE]I'm ok with that suggestion. It does place extra emphasis on fanball to hire someone to track this and be accountable weekly. That's a lot of removals.

Heels · Post by **Heels** » Mon May 10, 2010 6:19 am

Originally posted by Scott Boras:

quote:Originally posted by Heels:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion. I agree with Todd. Keep the current system as is but when a minor leaguer who was drafted is dropped while in the minors, he is out of the player pool. I dont see a compelling reason for keeping drafted minor leaguers in the league pool. [/QUOTE]I'm ok with that suggestion. It does place extra emphasis on fanball to hire someone to track this and be accountable weekly. That's a lot of removals. [/QUOTE]It may actually be easier. I know other contests and leagues are like this. I dont know anything about programming but it could be set up so that after draft day no minor leaguers are in the player pool. Once the minor leaguers are dropped from a team they should not show up in the player pool b/c the feed which establishes the player pool should not include minor leaguers. If any tracking is necessary it shouldn't be any more difficult than the tracking that would presumably be necessary under the current system which must track players drafted that must stay in the pool despite minor league status.

Scott Boras · Post by **Scott Boras** » Mon May 10, 2010 6:27 am

Originally posted by Heels:

quote:Originally posted by Scott Boras:

quote:Originally posted by Heels:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion. I agree with Todd. Keep the current system as is but when a minor leaguer who was drafted is dropped while in the minors, he is out of the player pool. I dont see a compelling reason for keeping drafted minor leaguers in the league pool. [/QUOTE]I'm ok with that suggestion. It does place extra emphasis on fanball to hire someone to track this and be accountable weekly. That's a lot of removals. [/QUOTE]It may actually be easier. I know other contests and leagues are like this. I dont know anything about programming but it could be set up so that after draft day no minor leaguers are in the player pool. Once the minor leaguers are dropped from a team they should not show up in the player pool b/c the feed which establishes the player pool should not include minor leaguers. If any tracking is necessary it shouldn't be any more difficult than the tracking that would presumably be necessary under the current system which must track players drafted that must stay in the pool despite minor league status. [/QUOTE]IF this is correct, Todd's suggestion is a no-brainer. This eliminates any lucky advantages owners get by luck of the draw being placed in certain leagues and rewards ONLY those who risk drafting a minor leaguer AND sacrifice a bench spot by keeping him. It also clears up any confusion about players being eligible to be bid on from league to league. If the details can be easily streamlined, it's a win-win for all sides.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon May 10, 2010 6:28 am

The problem is not isolated to players called up in the current week. As I detailed in the John Ely thread, currently there are MANY minor leaguers in the free agent pool. Fanball's software treats any player who has spent any time in the majors this season as an available free agent.

Right or wrong, it's different from how we have handled these players in the past.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Mon May 10, 2010 10:42 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

The problem is not isolated to players called up in the current week. As I detailed in the John Ely thread, currently there are MANY minor leaguers in the free agent pool. Fanball's software treats any player who has spent any time in the majors this season as an available free agent.

Right or wrong, it's different from how we have handled these players in the past. Oh well. :rolleyes:

Sebadiah23 · Post by **Sebadiah23** » Mon May 10, 2010 11:31 am

Originally posted by Heels:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion. I agree with Todd. Keep the current system as is but when a minor leaguer who was drafted is dropped while in the minors, he is out of the player pool. I dont see a compelling reason for keeping drafted minor leaguers in the league pool. [/QUOTE]I believe its my fault that Quahogs got Derek Holland for a dollar last week in AC2. That sly dog has C.J. Wilson too.

Scott Boras · Post by **Scott Boras** » Mon May 10, 2010 12:26 pm

Originally posted by Sebadiah23:

quote:Originally posted by Heels:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

1. There are intermediate solutions between what is being done now and having everyone eligible

EXAMPLES

Anyone drafted on draft day is eligible in every league that has an overall prize

If a minor leaguer is dropped by his owner while still in the minors, he is removed from the pool for that league (MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE).

2. My opinion, but the overwhelming reason for doing something should be the good of the competition. Over time, improvements to the back end will be made to accommodate any changes. The suggestions here are already options on other commissioner services. They can be incorporated here.

Again, all this is one man's opinion. I agree with Todd. Keep the current system as is but when a minor leaguer who was drafted is dropped while in the minors, he is out of the player pool. I dont see a compelling reason for keeping drafted minor leaguers in the league pool. [/QUOTE]I believe its my fault that Quahogs got Derek Holland for a dollar last week in AC2. That sly dog has C.J. Wilson too. [/QUOTE]Come on, Craig! Don't give that sly dog any more leash!

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Mon May 10, 2010 1:34 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Your thoughts on that setup are welcome. open up player pool to everyone for every league

anpyanks · Post by **anpyanks** » Mon May 10, 2010 4:13 pm

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Your thoughts on that setup are welcome. open up player pool to everyone for every league [/QUOTE]Ding...Ding...Ding...Ding... we have a winner.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 11, 2010 2:49 am

Originally posted by Chico Lind's Hermanos:

quote:Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Your thoughts on that setup are welcome. open up player pool to everyone for every league [/QUOTE]Ding...Ding...Ding...Ding... we have a winner. [/QUOTE]I don't believe this is the solution if you are asking for all minor-leaguers to be bid on all the time. You are talking about hundreds and hundreds of minor-leaguers who would be added to the free agent pool all year long who likely have no chance of being added to any NFBC rosters. But you'd need them in FAAB in case someone wanted one of them. And as we saw before Week 1, just adding 40-man rosters bogs down the free agent lists.

Now if you are saying that anyone who was drafted in any league for that contest is available to all leagues after Draft Day, that's a different discussion. Then we're changing the emphasis from from what we currently have, which is that each league is run separately. You can add the top prospects if they were drafted, or you can subtract them when they are dropped from each individual league like Todd said or you can keep it as it is.

But again, the current system allows those leagues who didn't take a chance on Derek Holland on Draft Day to have a fair free agent bidding war this week for this top pitching prospect. Everyone knows about him now. Everyone has the same chance to get him. Everyone knows this might be their best chance to improve their pitching staff this year in a no-trading league. Nobody stored him on reserve last week or the week before for a bargain. He's there and let the most aggressive bidder win. Is that the wrong way to do it?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 11, 2010 2:54 am

One more point to consider: If we add every top prospect to every league if he's drafted once, does that then punish the owner who originally drafted this top prospect? For instance, if Scott Martin drafted Derek Holland in the 29th round of Las Vegas 1, taking a chance that this prospect would be called up by mid-May and help his team and he used a roster spot for six weeks to keep him, is he punished because another owner in Las Vegas 2 picked up Holland in Week 2 or Week 3 for $2? And again, he was able to get him on the cheap later in the season because Scott took the gamble for him on Draft Day?

It doesn't seem fair. Those who drafted Holland and reserved him for this whole time played the game aggressively. Those who want an early shot at him thanks to Scott want an easy "get." But because they didn't take the gamble -- nor did anyone else in their league -- they have to pay the price via FAAB for him. Scott is now ahead -- at least in FAAB dollars -- because he took the gamble and few other teams in the overall contest are with him. Why punish those owners who gambled on Holland seven weeks ago? Just so other owners can get him on the cheap before his actual value is known to everyone in every league? Doesn't seem right.

I'm not lobbying my case, just pointing out the intricacies of what we have now. Everyone wants to change this because it looks like it will better the game for THEM. But I'm not sure it makes the contest better for EVERYONE. This should be a fun week of FAAB and in a no-trading league that's part of the fun of the contest. Let the bidding begin.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Tue May 11, 2010 3:00 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Chico Lind's Hermanos:

quote:Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Your thoughts on that setup are welcome. open up player pool to everyone for every league [/QUOTE]Ding...Ding...Ding...Ding... we have a winner. [/QUOTE]I don't believe this is the solution if you are asking for all minor-leaguers to be bid on all the time. You are talking about hundreds and hundreds of minor-leaguers who would be added to the free agent pool all year long who likely have no chance of being added to any NFBC rosters. But you'd need them in FAAB in case someone wanted one of them. And as we saw before Week 1, just adding 40-man rosters bogs down the free agent lists.

Now if you are saying that anyone who was drafted in any league for that contest is available to all leagues after Draft Day, that's a different discussion. Then we're changing the emphasis from from what we currently have, which is that each league is run separately. You can add the top prospects if they were drafted, or you can subtract them when they are dropped from each individual league like Todd said or you can keep it as it is.

But again, the current system allows those leagues who didn't take a chance on Derek Holland on Draft Day to have a fair free agent bidding war this week for this top pitching prospect. Everyone knows about him now. Everyone has the same chance to get him. Everyone knows this might be their best chance to improve their pitching staff this year in a no-trading league. Nobody stored him on reserve last week or the week before for a bargain. He's there and let the most aggressive bidder win. Is that the wrong way to do it? [/QUOTE]No. You have it the right way Greg.

I would also like to see Todd’s idea implemented, this allows the owner that drafted ‘Mr. Rookie Stud’ to then later drop him without worry that he is giving the player away. Then when Mr. Stud returns everyone gets an equal shot at him across all leagues.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 11, 2010 3:23 am

Originally posted by Navel Lint:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

[qb] [QUOTE]No. You have it the right way Greg.

I would also like to see Todd’s idea implemented, this allows the owner that drafted ‘Mr. Rookie Stud’ to then later drop him without worry that he is giving the player away. Then when Mr. Stud returns everyone gets an equal shot at him across all leagues. [/QUOTE]Just playing devil's advocate on Todd's idea: In the league where an owner picked Holland on Draft Day in let's say Round 27, he prevented 14 other guys from speculating on him as well. There may have been 2-3 other guys who really wanted to gamble on him in that league and keep him on their roster for six weeks because of his upside. So then the owner who took him has injuries in Week 1 and cuts him. He prevented all of the owners in his league from getting him and now those owners who know everything about Holland don't get a chance at him until he's called up.

This year we improved the Player Pool for veterans to allow a more fluid free agent pool. Once you're in the majors you stay in the player pool. So changing this back to a more restrictive free agent pool seems counterproductive. And again, I think it hurts the owners in that league who didn't get the chance to draft him and really wanted him. They may get him cheaper in Week 2 FAAB than others, but everyone in that league has the same shot at him for any price, the game within the game in that individual league.

I'm not saying I'm right, just playing devil's advocate to Todd's idea.

Heels · Post by **Heels** » Tue May 11, 2010 3:36 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Navel Lint:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

[qb] [QUOTE]No. You have it the right way Greg.

I would also like to see Todd’s idea implemented, this allows the owner that drafted ‘Mr. Rookie Stud’ to then later drop him without worry that he is giving the player away. Then when Mr. Stud returns everyone gets an equal shot at him across all leagues. [/QUOTE]Just playing devil's advocate on Todd's idea: In the league where an owner picked Holland on Draft Day in let's say Round 27, he prevented 14 other guys from speculating on him as well. There may have been 2-3 other guys who really wanted to gamble on him in that league and keep him on their roster for six weeks because of his upside. So then the owner who took him has injuries in Week 1 and cuts him. He prevented all of the owners in his league from getting him and now those owners who know everything about Holland don't get a chance at him until he's called up.

This year we improved the Player Pool for veterans to allow a more fluid free agent pool. Once you're in the majors you stay in the player pool. So changing this back to a more restrictive free agent pool seems counterproductive. And again, I think it hurts the owners in that league who didn't get the chance to draft him and really wanted him. They may get him cheaper in Week 2 FAAB than others, but everyone in that league has the same shot at him for any price, the game within the game in that individual league.

I'm not saying I'm right, just playing devil's advocate to Todd's idea. [/QUOTE]Greg,

I respectfully disagree with this analysis. Those owners did have a fair shot at him for 26 rounds. They shouldnt get an additional shot that other leagues do not get just because he was drafted. I don't think this should create a problem either where people draft and drop minor leaguers to keep them away from others. Roster spots are too valuable for that nonsense. If someone is dropped and they have not been called up they should be unavailable until they are called up.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Tue May 11, 2010 3:41 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Navel Lint:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

[qb] [QUOTE]No. You have it the right way Greg.

I would also like to see Todd’s idea implemented, this allows the owner that drafted ‘Mr. Rookie Stud’ to then later drop him without worry that he is giving the player away. Then when Mr. Stud returns everyone gets an equal shot at him across all leagues. [/QUOTE]Just playing devil's advocate on Todd's idea: In the league where an owner picked Holland on Draft Day in let's say Round 27, he prevented 14 other guys from speculating on him as well. There may have been 2-3 other guys who really wanted to gamble on him in that league and keep him on their roster for six weeks because of his upside. So then the owner who took him has injuries in Week 1 and cuts him. He prevented all of the owners in his league from getting him and now those owners who know everything about Holland don't get a chance at him until he's called up.

This year we improved the Player Pool for veterans to allow a more fluid free agent pool. Once you're in the majors you stay in the player pool. So changing this back to a more restrictive free agent pool seems counterproductive. And again, I think it hurts the owners in that league who didn't get the chance to draft him and really wanted him. They may get him cheaper in Week 2 FAAB than others, but everyone in that league has the same shot at him for any price, the game within the game in that individual league.

I'm not saying I'm right, just playing devil's advocate to Todd's idea. [/QUOTE]I guess my response would be, I wanted Albert Pujols but didn’t have a chance at him because I was picking 11th. And if the team that drafted Albert dropped him this week, my guess is that he would be removed the player pool to maintain the integrity of the overall contest. So I never had, nor will I ever get a chance at Albert this year. At least with the rookie I can buy him later if he gets called up.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue May 11, 2010 4:12 am

Obviously, there is no perfect answer which is part and parcel to having an overall contest comprised of multiple individual contests.

My contention with Just playing devil's advocate on Todd's idea: In the league where an owner picked Holland on Draft Day in let's say Round 27, he prevented 14 other guys from speculating on him as well. There may have been 2-3 other guys who really wanted to gamble on him in that league and keep him on their roster for six weeks because of his upside. So then the owner who took him has injuries in Week 1 and cuts him. He prevented all of the owners in his league from getting him and now those owners who know everything about Holland don't get a chance at him until he's called up. is the rule is designed to MAYBE benefit a small number of people. Practically speaking, how many leagues will there be in which 3 or 4 guys were hot after a minor leaguer that was not universally drafted in all the leagues? Not saying the answer is none, just saying the number is small, in a realistic sense. And as has been stated, they all had a shot at the player and decided to wait.

Now consider the other 10 or so owners in that league that also have a shot at the player and never heard of him until they saw a thread about him on he forum

. It is not just the 2 or 3 that waited. It is all 15. My contention is that it is unfair to the other 400+ owners that these owners have an early shot at a minor leaguer, because someone in their league had the foresight to draft him in March but the misfortune of having to drop him.

Again, no right or wrong.

[ May 11, 2010, 10:16 AM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

colorado · Post by **colorado** » Tue May 11, 2010 6:49 am

I drafted Holland and have stashed him as a personal playing philosophy. I have chosen to "hang 'em out there" by speculating. The current system allows us to also speculate on minors that were drafted and dropped. My view: Placing ALL players on waivers is like playing checkers, removing minor players that were drafted then dropped from the pool is like chess and the current system is like playing multi-level chess. The later separates the NFBC from other games. Please keep the level of challenge high!

Scott