Sim Freaks

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:22 am

I'm wondering if I'd have any support in a proposal which removed players who received obviously faulty projections from Diamond Mind that would significantly affect a team (case in point: Bocachica's .360/30 hr to date). My thinking would be to remove these players once the projections come out if and only if they are free agents at the point of release.

Argument against:
The worst waiver position at that point would therefore be able to claim a very good player and either use them or trade them for something worthwhile, improving competitive balance.

Arguments for:
If the guy is a free agent in this league he has very little hope of turning in a good MLB season that year, so the projection is highly flawed.

The #1 waiver position after an offseason will not always be the worst team the previous year. A resetting of the waiver order to the previous year's final standings prior to initial claiming after the projections are released would make sense here.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:12 pm

Hiram Bocachica is a bad case in point as he was with the Athletics when the projections were released and is currently playing semi-regularly with the Padres (albeit poorly). I say leave it alone, if we start doing this what's next, fixing projections that are ludicrously bad (see Snell, Ian)? I also really enjoy the platoon guys and whatever, its one of my favorite parts of the league. I would be in favor of a proposal removing ineligible guys (e.g. Kevin Witt, Brian Sweeney) who are currently playing in Japan or have officially retired, but other than that I say leave it as it is.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:40 pm

Not sure if it was unclear judging by your post Jake, though I think based on your answer it wouldn't change your mind. The free agent I was referring to was if they are not on an IBC roster when projections are released, as was the case with Bocachica.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 3:51 pm

I think that it would be almost impossible to do that in a fair and appropriate manner. There is just no way to draw the line.

I think that the projection is the projection and that more often than not, it has pretty good reason for projections that baffle us.

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:51 pm

Just part of the game. Don't use your waiver priority all Winter and hope for the best. I dunno that theres been anybody with a profound impact like Bocachica before and I doubt theres a scrub 40-40 guy again...if not 50-50

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:42 pm

I think it's an interesting idea but like Brett said, it's tough to draw the line. is it possible to limit a player's playing time? Could we maybe restrict players to 200% of their projected playing time to prevent that type of abuse?

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:45 pm

im kind of against restricting players PT. What about prospects who get a solid project, minimal PA's/IP's?

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 12:27 pm

And like I've said before, there aren't enough good players with full projections to go around. Without some form of free agency (ya I know Bren loves this idea) teams are going to be forced to play guys who suck simply because they have a full season projection.