|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 8, 2010 22:20:50 GMT -5
Yes I am thinking about instituting a rule, so people with huge contracts can't just be non-tendered. They could, but the owner would have to pay at least 50% of the contract, otherwise a 200MM payroll isn't much use if we are going to play like the mlb rules then you cant non tender a player under contract like helton, you could release him but then would have to pay their salary. non tendering occurs when the team has the option to renew the players contract because they cant make less money than the year before
|
|
|
Post by Mariners GM on Dec 8, 2010 23:29:33 GMT -5
if i could make a few suggestions...looks like we have the rosters after the season which is good but can we change the payroll? I did a mock once where we tried to make it realistic so a team like the padres had a smaller payroll that a team like the yankees. for example my cap in this league should be about 45 or 50M. lets make it close to what the teams payrolls will actually be. to me thats more fun I think the payroll to high and should be lowered but having such a huge gap in cap going to cause issues in the fact that yankes,redsox, etc would have double and triple the cap of pretty much every team. It would be better if we just lowered overall cap to like 100-120 m.
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 8:02:54 GMT -5
i see your point but id still like to make it realistic. even if you made it 120 some teams would already be over the cap, that isnt fair to them.
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 11:31:56 GMT -5
something like this:
Angels- 121M Astros- 92M A’s- 58M Blue Jays- 79M Braves- 84M Brewers- 90M Cardinals- 94M Cubs- 144M D-Backs- 75M Dodgers- 102M Giants- 96M Indians- 61M Mariners- 91M Marlins- 47M Mets- 126M Nationals- 66M Padres- 38M Phillies- 138M Pirates- 39M Rangers- 65M Rays- 73M Reds- 76M Red Sox- 168M Rockies- 84M Royals- 75M Tigers- 134M Twins- 98M White Sox- 103M Yankees- 213M
give or take 5 or 10 million depending on if the team is adding payroll or not. rays and astros are dropping some padres and red sox are adding some. etc
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM on Dec 9, 2010 15:53:40 GMT -5
I really don't think it makes sense to start everybody off with different payrolls caps. I don't think I would be interested in being in a league where half the owners have an unfair advantage over the other half at the start of the league.
I understand the 'keeping it as real as possible' argument. But at the same time this is fantasy baseball.
|
|
Mets GM
T-Baller
Ya Gotta Believe!
Posts: 10
|
Post by Mets GM on Dec 9, 2010 18:06:31 GMT -5
The problem is there really is no right way to do it. It's not fair to let some teams have huge payrolls and others have little ones. But the problem is when it comes to free agency you end up seeing marginal players get $30MM a year because some teams have $150MM to spend.
Also Padres, those payroll numbers you suggested are way too low. Those are basically last years payrolls but you're forgetting that those don't include minor leaguers, which we have to include in our payroll. Most teams are going to have $15-$20MM just on minors.
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 18:54:03 GMT -5
ok so have that as a MLB cap and then have a hard minor league cap for everyone at 20M or something like that. rockies if you wanted this to be true fantasy then we shouldnt have a cap at all now should we?
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 19:08:54 GMT -5
The problem is there really is no right way to do it. It's not fair to let some teams have huge payrolls and others have little ones. But the problem is when it comes to free agency you end up seeing marginal players get $30MM a year because some teams have $150MM to spend. Also Padres, those payroll numbers you suggested are way too low. Those are basically last years payrolls but you're forgetting that those don't include minor leaguers, which we have to include in our payroll. Most teams are going to have $15-$20MM just on minors. actually not they wouldnt, a team with a 150M payroll has high paid players and wont have the flexability to sign free agents unless they rid of those contracts. how would they do that if other teams have smaller payrolls?
|
|
|
Post by Athletics GM on Dec 9, 2010 19:24:41 GMT -5
I played in a league like you are talking about Padres. The problem was that the bottom third owners became inactive when they could do nothing but wait for 3 to 4 years for thier team to get better. We had a turnover rate of about 30% each year due to this problem. After 3 years the league fell apart. Just like with real baseball fans, fantasy owners will move on to something else if thier team sucks and they can't fix it.
|
|
Mets GM
T-Baller
Ya Gotta Believe!
Posts: 10
|
Post by Mets GM on Dec 9, 2010 19:44:09 GMT -5
Sorry Padres, that was a poorly written thought on my part. I was trying to contrast having a set salary cap of $200MM or a salary cap based on real life payroll. What I was trying to say was:
With real life payroll based salary caps teams with small payrolls are at a disadvantage when it comes to free agency.
With a $200MM payroll, the small market teams will drive up the price of free agents to an unreasonable level because they currently have $150MM in free space due to their teams real like payroll being so low.
Hope that clears it up.
Also I completely agree with your point on not trading draft picks. It can't be done in real life so it shouldn't be done here.
I also agree on compensation picks....very good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 20:21:21 GMT -5
i know they are disadvantaged in FA but thats kinda the point. i mean im a padre fan, i chose the padres in this league, ill have the second lowest payroll. we arent playing for money to me all the fun is trying to put together a team with all those challenges just like jed hoyer has to do in real life. does that make sense?
|
|
Mets GM
T-Baller
Ya Gotta Believe!
Posts: 10
|
Post by Mets GM on Dec 9, 2010 20:36:21 GMT -5
I hear ya. Besides it would avoid the disaster we saw in our other league where Brian Bannister got signed for $19.5MM per year.
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 21:15:01 GMT -5
correct. there would only be a select number of teams to sign someone to a big contract and you could only afford to give a handful of players 20 mil before you couldnt fill out your team
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM on Dec 9, 2010 21:30:12 GMT -5
im just trying for this because as the padres i dont have a ton of peices, i have a ton of salary space, and i mean A TON. i dont have the great system to aquire top players so im going to be handing out a ton of money to free agents
|
|
Mets GM
T-Baller
Ya Gotta Believe!
Posts: 10
|
Post by Mets GM on Dec 9, 2010 22:00:58 GMT -5
The only problem is some teams that usually spend more have spent less the last few years. The Mets were usually in the top 3 in payroll and around $130-140MM. Last year they were around $120MM. Maybe we could take the average over the past few years and give every team X amount of padding on top to make it more fair for those who have a small payroll. And also allot each team a $20MM for MiLB players.
|
|