Additional DL penalties

Astros · Post by **Astros** » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:57 pm

So me and JP were talking, and he is concerned about the worst teams not caring about DL violations and tanking the season for the best draft pick. So here's an idea I've come up with and want to propose.

We stick with extended suspensions for the first 3 DL violations. After that though, you drop one spot in the draft for every additional DL violation you have. A team trying to get the first pick in the draft isn't going to care if they lose a good play another month or however long the person would be out. This is a way to keep teams on their toes that are awful. As someone who is awful and missed a DL violation due to being awful and not paying as much attention as I should, I can say that I think this would be a great motivator to keep everyone in line

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Thu Jun 13, 2013 1:27 am

I usually hate rules that trick things up, but I don't hate that. It's hard to hit a tanking team where it hurts, and this certainly does that.

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Thu Jun 13, 2013 3:23 am

Works for me ...

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Thu Jun 13, 2013 2:46 pm

Yeah, I'm ok with this. A DL penalty right now is almost a reward if you're aiming to draft high, and that needs to be changed. I don't like tinkering with draft picks, but if you're going to give everybody a middle finger with 4 DL penalties, you probably deserve to move down.

Twins · Post by **Twins** » Sat Jun 15, 2013 11:36 am

This works for me.

Astros · Post by **Astros** » Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:52 pm

Will it apply to a pick that has been traded? I say yes, keep it uniform

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:14 pm

it applies to players already, so yeah. We'd have to back track and change that otherwise.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:07 pm

Pirates wrote:it applies to players already, so yeah. We'd have to back track and change that otherwise.

It helps that we don't know what pick we're actually trading for (in a scenario where someone could drop spots) until the end of the season anyway. So, it's not like you're trading for pick #5 and it could become pick #7. You're trading for a fluid pick and hoping that the other team finishes as badly as possible. Would just be something else to weigh when you trade with a team, and further devalues someone's assets if they have a reputation for not managing their roster.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:46 pm

Did we ever vote on this? I've thought about this some and my only thought is that we might want to make it a touch less harsh by moving the pick forfeiture a violation further.

The reason I say that is that our process is extremely manual and easy to make a mistake periodically. I know that I try to keep up with it, but I've probably been dangerously close to this and I certainly haven't been trying to tank or disregard my injuries.

Astros · Post by **Astros** » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:04 pm

I assumed since everyone was on board that was that