IBC

O.K., obviously there has been a ton of 'talk' about changing things.

For GM's that have based their teams long term plans on our rules, they of course are not going to like change that "Changes the Rules on them, mid stream".

But, other GM's are bored and want more action. Well, if you want "Real Change", you have to think of ways to make everyone happy instead of a few.

If you look at the teams that are opposed to any kind of "Rule 69" (or better yet, what number represents getting it up the a**? ), many of those teams have asked for a "little change" and are laughed at (example- expanding rosters).

To me, if you want to make change, get something in there for everyone.

I don't want change, but if I had to "do something", I would go for this.

1. 40 man rosters stay the same.

2. We go to a 15 man "draft/non sim" roster, that includes, (for example) '05s, '06s, and '00s.

3. After the World Series ends, all teams would only be allowed to carry '06 players on their draft roster, leaving several open spots for upcoming '07 draft.

4. Now, all those '05 and '00 players will have to be transfered to the 40 man roster and push a SIM player to the "Rule 69 draft", or simply expose that '05 or '00 player to the "Rule 69 draft".

5. Once the World Series is over, all '00-players must be on the '40 man' roster (as is currently the case), so any signed or traded for during the winter, must be on the '40 man', and are only allowed on the "Draft" roster, AFTER the 2008 projection disk comes out, when we learn who the 'new' '00s are.

This would be a TRUE RULE 5, just like Real Baseball, it's players that have been "around awhile" (ex- '05s & '00s) and either make the '40 man', or get exposed to the "Rule 5"

-This would still help the Gabes of the world, because he would have access to many good roster fillers after the season, but the Brett and JB's of the league would be happy, because they get to sign a couple more spects, hence exposing even more young talent for those non talent watchers.

I like this idea more than the other Rule V's, not that I'm sold on this one but it's work-able I think.

Let me give an example of how 'everyone' benefits from this.

As it is, I'm very active in looking for good prospects, and because of that I release many good prospects. Right now, people like JP, Jim, etc., are going to benefit from that the most, because I'm always talking to those guy's. They know who I'm 'thinking' about releasing.

Take 2007 Breakout pitcher James McDonald, if I had a few more spots, I could hold onto him until at least the "Rule 5", hence giving 'everyone' a chance at that player instead of JUST JP. McDonald would be 'exposed' to the "Rule 5", when EVERYONE IS PAYING ATTENTION!

Of course I still don't like that, it is still helping teams that are not paying attention to the "Waiver Wire" everyday of their life, like some of us

But, at least if guy's want a TRUE Rule 5, this at least gives me (for example) a little fun too, and gives everyone a shot at those players.

Afterall, I do understand that many of us just don't have time to watch the Waiver Wire everyday. And the teams that do, get an advantage.

in that case F this if it means i wouldnt get next years J-Mac

but no, I do like this idea better than the previous ones. Again I need to think it over further before I'm sold on it, but it's a little more out of the box and easier to digest.

Let me also give an example how this could play out for me in 2008, in which I feel would only benefit others (which may be acceptable).

I have about 7 '06 players that don't figure to make the 2008 projection disk, and maybe a couple more '00s (which were once '05s).

So that is about 9 players that I will have to get on my '40-man' after the 2008 World Series. As it is, most everyone I have on my '40 man' for the 2008 season, is some kind of sought after young player, not the 1 year vet types.

So, after the 2008 Series, I could see myself putting in 9 good players, and not drafting a single player back out of the "Rule 5" draft, unless I wanted to release yet another player, to get down to 39 in order to not "pass" on my pick in the "Rule 5".

If I did make a pick, by first releasing a player, that is a double kudo for the "worse" teams, who not only would have high "Rule 5" picks, but also high Waiver priority for that "40th player" I just had to release, in order to pick.

Having OOPSS (Thanks Shawn/ for the 100th time!) makes this process SO EASY!

Serious question: What's so wrong with the league that we need to make big changes?

Athletics wrote:Serious question: What's so wrong with the league that we need to make big changes?

Just in my opinion, not a darn thing!

This was just my opinion to do a "Real Change" as opposed to the things that were being discussed that I felt were meaningless "Big Changes".

I could see their were two camps, the GM's that are happy with the way it is, YOU, ME, Aaron, JB, JP, Brett, etc. and those who are bored, Nate, Z, Levine, etc.

So, if people really wanted to be like Real Baseball, here was a much closer way to do it.

I'm one who is opposed to a "Rule 5", but with this, it's so close to what we do already, that I figure, "no loss", if it makes others happy.

It's so close to our current rules, that it can be implemented organically, as our current events dictate.

The only difference we would feel this year, is not releaseing 2006 players for the 2007 Winter Draft. You would still have to keep your '40-man' occupied by only SIMMABLE, '05-PLAYERS, '00-PLAYERS combined, which is the case now.

This would intergrate the people who wanted to keep drafting more than 5 rounds last year. And those who don't want to draft that many players, don't have to waste their time on those guys, because once the season comes around, you can sign all those new '00-players, and put them on your "Draft Roster". I.E. that 30 year old vet that came out of the woodwork and just grabbed a setup job after the projection disk comes out, but you can't use until 2009. That new '00 player only hangs on your "Draft roster" until after the World Series (Rule 5 time).

I think this is an idea that has some merit, moreso then the original Rule 5 - nice thoughts...like JP, I wouldn't mind seeing it hashed out some more, but im with you so far...

Just for the record, this is more like the Minor League portion of the "Rule 5" draft. No one is talking about "Rule 5" drafted players having to stick on the new teams active 25 man roster, or be offered back to their old team, hahahahaha!

One concern I do have, is in Real Baseball, this happens in 1 day, which makes the Waiver Process and Trade issues surrounding the Rule 5 draft a very fluid thing.

With our drafting ways, the whole process will be longer. With that diffence from Real Baseball, what problems do you think could arise from that?

I'd just like to go on record as saying I'm not for any kind of dispersal draft or rule V draft. I'm happy with letting the dynamics of this league play out as is... I dont really believe there is a competitive balance. But, as a GM who's been considered to have a "top team" - and I use that in quotes for a reason, its subjective - I try to be objective and listen to what other GM's have to say, and there has always been an echo of imbalance.

That said, I think I misunderstood the situation. My proposal for a rule V was really off the top of my head - and I really only threw it out there because I was under the impression that competitive balance - again, rearing its ugly head - was/is a serious issue to everyone in the league. I seem to perhaps have gotten the wrong impression.

I want to apologize to guys like Perryman, JP, Jagger, Jim, etc. I in no way meant to insult you, the state of your team, direction you're building, your efforts, etc. I always tried to call you "lesser" teams utilizing quotes, because I don't believe you're really a lesser franchise. In fact, I admire your dedication, efforts, and strategy. I understand what you're doing and trying to achieve. And I raise this beer to salute you. You are "lesser" teams in record only, they are green. You are rebuilding to become a dominant, mainstay of a franchise in your division. I certainly appreciate that, more than I think I've given the impression lately. In time, your rosters will mature, and you will contend.

As I've pointed out, its happened in the ALC with Andrew finally emerging, and this year, with Nils falling and Shawn and John stepping up. Martin looks good out there two. There is something to be said for patience in baseball, and the same could be said about our sim league. The Dynamics will change, you just wont see it over a small sample size. In any case, to those "lesser" teams - in record only - I firmly understand where you're coming from and your stance on my proposal. I just wanted to apologize if I offended anyone as well, it was not my intent.

As for my proposal, again - I threw it out there because I was under the impression this was something that was certainly going to go ahead as far as trying to come to a solution. I thought doing something like I suggested was a lesser of two evils - as I certainly want to make it clear I'd prefer to not have any rule V or dispersal. I just thought it would add a fun element or twist, activity in the offseason, and enough of a dynamic to make things interesting.. silver linings in what I believed was a certain oncoming change. Never did I pretend to know how this would work exactly, how results would turn out or affect squads. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that it was something I wanted to institute to serve my own agenda. I simply was trying to think of a way to get a variety of talent in a pool that everyone could draft from, and if there were a roster in truely bad shape, a way it oculd be overhauled fairly quickly.

That said, after talking with some of those "lesser" franchises and GM's I hold very high respect for, I have gained some clarity to their opposition - and as such, I feel the pursuit of my proposal was just to satisfy my own curiosity and intrigue, despite the public opposition. I'd still like to know how this would have played out - its something that consumes my brain - a fucked up effect of A.D.D. - yeah, I'm the guy that would only get 2 to 4 hours sleep because I'd be racking my brain at night with various trade scenarios, how to shape my roster, etc. But as of now, I think its best to pull back the reigns on my hybrid rule V idea, as it may be too much of a reach - and might actually do the opposite of what its intended to do, as quite a few of the "lesser" teams have filled out all 50 spots nicely.

I still say though, if you have a problem giving up your 50th best player(JP.. COUGH.. JP), then you really have issues.

Athletics wrote:Serious question: What's so wrong with the league that we need to make big changes?

Those who stop moving toward improve only fall further behind.
Or some shit like that. And there's certainly no harm in discussing new ideas or new ways of going about old things.

I like Jagger's suggestion, I think that like the other Rule V suggestions (for lack of a better description) it adds an extra little element to the league and will spice up the offseason a little bit more.