|
|
Post by Seth Keichline on Jan 19, 2004 16:53:46 GMT -5
Looking for CONSTRUCTIVE criticism here. Keep in mind, not all suggestions/ideas are possible, but I'm looking for what you liked/disliked, and any suggestions on how you think we can make it better. Several changes are already being thought out to better it for next offseason, but for now, let me know what you thought.
|
|
Bret
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by Bret on Jan 19, 2004 17:09:44 GMT -5
I think it ran as smoothly and efficiently as possible, given this is the first year and we were all learning together. Good job by everyone involved, especially Shane for stealing all the top talent!
|
|
|
|
Post by senorian on Jan 22, 2004 2:12:36 GMT -5
For the most part i agree that it's run pretty smoothly with an occasional bump. My main problem is lack of a lot of talent. I know that we had a trading period before FA began which in turn limited our pool of talent. I hope next season we'll have a bigger pool and maybe can make trades happen after the FA period or during it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seth Keichline on Jan 22, 2004 10:26:48 GMT -5
Next year the talent should be 100 percent better. Trading will end July 31, and not resume again until the first day of free agency.
|
|
|
|
Post by poonsickle33 on Jan 22, 2004 15:47:20 GMT -5
If anyone cares what I think regarding free agency...players who sign as free agents should not be eligible to be traded until June 1 (or even later). No "Sign and trade" stuff like I see in the Narcs' post ("Jeff Weaver available in trade" - wasn't he just signed by San Francisco?). Otherwise free agency becomes a farce. Weak teams with money to spend can sign players at stupid salaries (i.e. Bernie Williams @ $35 mil or Arthur Rhodes @ $10+ mil) and then trade them to other teams and "eat the salary" thus adding potentially millions of dollars to that team's payroll. I was reading an ESPN article about Pudge Rodriquez and it said that teams that sign a free agent are not allowed to trade him until some date which I can't remember (may 25?) and I can't find the article but the principle makes sense to me. If we're gonna do free agency, let's do it right.
|
|
Bret
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by Bret on Jan 22, 2004 17:45:22 GMT -5
To make it even worse, I traded Mariano Rivera(who I signed to an absurd contract) to get Weaver!
But honestly, I can live with this rule going into affect next year, which Seth told me about yesterday. However, I didn't quite follow all your logic Rod regarding the negative impacts of sign & trades. Shane cant possibly benefit from signing Bernie Williams for that much money, he or someone else has to eat all of that money, and how much value can he really get in return while still having to pay that lofty sum? If anything, I think Shane's signings, or mine, or Baltimore's simply helped everyone else. I've been out of money since the first week!
|
|
|
|
Post by Seth Keichline on Jan 22, 2004 18:18:45 GMT -5
This is definitely one rule that will take affect next offseason. If a player is signed as a Free Agent, he cannot be traded until June (not sure yet exact date, whatever's closest to half way through season).
This is a MLB rule.
|
|
Abner
New Member
Sup Foo
Posts: 8
|
Post by Abner on Jan 23, 2004 16:03:29 GMT -5
;)My thoughts on free agency...
I think that it has gone pretty smoothly so far. One complaint that I have on it is that it takes so long in between rounds.
Another thing that I think that I would like to change is how we due the bidding. Why don't we nominate a list of players like we want (like we have been), then everyone makes a top five list (from the list of all that was nominated) of who they want to bid on and they send that in. Then everyone that has the same players get into a bidding match. Each owner involved makes a bid then they can raise their bid up to three times to lock a player. Then after the 3rd raise the highest bid wins. And if a owner has a player on his list that no one else has he can make an offer on him for whatever he wants. So that would make people choose their top 5 carefully. And people would only have to spend what they are willing for each player.
Or atleast it's an idea.
If you don't like it... Oh well it was just a suggestion.
The only other thing that I have to say is ...
Spankees Suck ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by JamesPhire on Jan 25, 2004 17:13:33 GMT -5
I came in right in the middle of it, but it was easy enough to adapt to and the process is nice, especially considering it's the first year for the league to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seth Keichline on Jun 14, 2004 2:13:50 GMT -5
Anymore thoughts on this? Just want to revisit now that we're in mid-June, and we've added some new owners.
|
|
