Dear League Members:
Ryan and I wanted to make a proposal for the future of the Yahoo! League:
We both enjoyed the auction portion of the league, but feel that it is a letdown to introduce monetary values during the draft and then ignore these for the remainder of the year. Ultimately, it makes draft strategy rather frustrating. You had a good draft, but reverting to traditional fantasy rules regarding waiver pickups and trades throughout the year defeats the purpose of valuing players independently. Given that it is a keeper league, we think it makes sense to create longer term budgets.
Exact details of our proposal are as follows:
--All current valuation of keeper rules would remain the same or similar (we don’t have Internet as we write this, and neither of us can recall the rules immediately). Also there would be an unlimited number of keepers, with decisions being made solely on financial constraints.
--Teams will receive $250 at the beginning of the season and will be able to carry over whatever is left over at the end of the season. So if I finish the season with $22 in my account, I would come into the auction with $272, etc.
--Trades can involve either cash or players. If Owner A wants to make a player-for-player trade and is acquiring a player with a higher value, Owner A must be able to cover the extra salary. If Owner A wants to sell a player for cash, both must agree on the valuation. All transactions will be subject to league protest.
--All free agent pickups would all cost $1. This makes wise pick-ups a really good investment because you can either keep the player for next year, or spin a $1 pick-up into a larger chunk of cash for next year. Attaching cost to free agent pick-ups also encourages team owners to budget for pick-ups for the year.
--All player values and total team cash would be kept on a Google spread sheet.
We would like for this to be posted on the blog so that you lawyers can go over the fine details.
Thanks
Mike and Ryan
6 comments:
In general, I support the concept of Free Agents costing money so that budgeting plays a bigger role. However, I am a little weary of the idea of unlimited keepers. That has the potential to create dynasties if one or more teams wind up with multiple very cheap players who become stars.
justin has a point, but i think some of his concerns would alleviated if the unlimited keeper idea was combined with the tier-system i proposed. do you think?
one preliminary thought - can we do better than the flat $1 fee for a FA pickup? I know other leagues have a more complicated system whereby there is bidding on FAs, but not sure how that works.
I think bidding for FAs would be unwieldy.
When Ryan and I were talking this over, I suggested using the ProTrade price for every free agent. I don't know if that's really workable because the independent valuation would screw with our own internal player market. I like combining our system with the tier system, and I think the increase in inflation addresses that.
I tend to support aspects of this proposal more than the whole thing. As a whole, it seems like a little too radical of a change of things to suit my tastes. I like the idea of being able to trade money as well as players and I also like the idea of somehow having picking up free agents have a cost associated with it. I don't particularly like the idea of carrying money from the draft over into the season or from one season to the next however as I think the keeper idea already allows enough carryover from one season to the next and I think that each season, other than that, should generally be its own entity. Therefore, I would instead propose that maybe we should have a seperate free agent budget that each team is assigned and out of which we bid (somehow) for available free agents that more than one person wants (with all uncontested free agents costing $1). I would also suggest that people be allowed to add money from their next year's draft budget to trades this year. So, for example, a contender could trade a lesser player and $10 from next year's draft to a noncontender for a better player. I'm just spitballing here and we can flesh this all out if people are interested in this and if Mike and Ryan's idea as originally proposed does not get adopted.
i see my brother was interested in the bidding idea for FA. there must be a way out there already to do this. i think one (possibly inelegant) solution would be for the person who wants a FA to initiate a bidding process on the player by making his interest known. then, the player who has bid the most on that guy by the end of a 24 hour period would get him.
so far, everyone is for this idea in general, although there is some controversy over specific details. any other thoughts? if ryan and mike want to argue vehemently for any specific details, they can do that. but, i think we should be able to put the general idea to vote and then have a committee work out the details if passed.
Post a Comment