Sunday, January 30, 2005
Issues Still On the Table
Posting of Players: We decided that perhaps this was a good idea, but haven’t come up with any parameters. I would suggest the following:
- The posting of players should only occur AFTER the All Star Break
- The posting of players should ONLY apply to UNSIGNED PLAYERS
- The ONLY unsigned players that need be posted are: Hitters with a RC over 6, Starting pitchers with an ERA under 4.00, and relievers with an ERA under 3.00.
This way, not every player would need to be posted.
Prize Money: Should we have other types of incentives to keep teams in the race? Maybe we could have weekly winners in August and September? I don’t know, but Cooney suggested, so we should discuss.
Disagree with Ramrods.
On Doorights in previous years I remember sending cheap $1 guys like Derrick Lee, Bobby Abreu, Lance Berkman away during the pennant race for a couple of unsigned studs,
It does happen.
Maybe I am missing the spirit of the rule. I thought that we enacted this rule so that teams who were selling off their teams, would have to let everyone know. This was done to give everyone a shot at players to help their teams. I would bet that the Lee's and Berkman's of the world were traded down the standings and the great unsigned guys were traded up. That is what I thought all of the fuss was about.
This rule was borne squarely as a result of the Low Life/Islander trade last year, in that many teams complained they didn't think those guys were available due to lack of communication. It is a way to get teams to advertise. Why should I have to advertise Johnny Estrada? If I were in the lower part of the standings, I can't see trading him unless I got something of significant value in return. The idea on posting players, is for guys like a Jim Thome or Barry Bonds, who is paid a lot and gets moved to build for next year. Why do you suppose the LL traded all of those guys for Benitez? It was because his players were going to be lost at the end of the year, and Benitez was signed. Period. Maybe he could have gotten more, but the point is he was looking for something, rather than nothing...
Again, maybe I have completely missed the point of the rule. If I have, I would probably be against it.
Links to this post: