Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum

by **cummings2** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:55 am

Got it. Thnx Mo, good to be in 8)

by **Mr Groundhog** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:34 am

1. MoCrash - MO - frenzy
2. Bunbury - TX - frenzy
3. Novie - PA - waivers
4. genevajack- IL - frenzy
5. Fillies 2 - CA - waivers
6. Vince0501- MI -waivers
7. mhpine- NJ - waivers
8. cummings2- WA - waivers
9. AF Dickie-NY - I like the 5:00 pm controlled waivers equals frenzy
10. Mr Groundhog - DE - waivers
11.
12.

by **hendrix08** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:24 pm

1. MoCrash - MO - frenzy
2. Bunbury - TX - frenzy
3. Novie - PA - waivers
4. genevajack- IL - frenzy
5. Fillies 2 - CA - waivers
6. Vince0501- MI -waivers
7. mhpine- NJ - waivers
8. cummings2- WA - waivers
9. AF Dickie-NY - I like the 5:00 pm controlled waivers equals frenzy
10. Mr Groundhog - DE - waivers
11. Hendrix08 - FL - waivers
12.

by **mhpine** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:41 pm

The objection is that the team that is entered first arbitrarily will get a better waiver preference.

Maybe we should have a 2 round draft of free agents pre-waivers (continuing to wrap around), which should take care of all of the difference-makers from the lousy teams.

by **mhpine** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:45 pm

I think that allowing trades is fine so long as you don't totally dilute the franchise theme.

One option is a cap on non-franchise players of 6 or so.

Another way to do it would be to limit franchise trading to after the start of the regular season, when there will be somewhat of a cost to replacing a traded player from your franchise's "minors" which would limit the trades to a reasonable amount.

by **elmrogers** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:57 pm

[quote="hendrix08"]1. MoCrash - MO - frenzy
2. Bunbury - TX - frenzy
3. Novie - PA - waivers
4. genevajack- IL - frenzy
5. Fillies 2 - CA - waivers
6. Vince0501- MI -waivers
7. mhpine- NJ - waivers
8. cummings2- WA - waivers
9. AF Dickie-NY - I like the 5:00 pm controlled waivers equals frenzy
10. Mr Groundhog - DE - waivers
11. Hendrix08 - FL - waivers
12. elmrogers - GA - waivers

by **hendrix08** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:13 pm

If we all get our AD picks and Waiver order is determined by entry into the league, how about if we all agree to select the same $0.50 scrub player (e.g. Larson) with the 25th pick. Then the waiver will be determined randomly by Hal. Whatever $0.50 scrub you get can be dropped after waivers.

by **cummings2** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:22 pm

I like the idea of making do with whatever the teams you got give you therefore sticking to the purty of the theme.

The main problem I see with the trade stuff is that whenever rules start getting complicated it all gets messy so in order to simplify I say no fanchise player trading. only trades and FA pickups allowed are of players from non-selected franchises.

What about increasing the overall cap of the league to 100 MM so as to allow us to dip into our "minor league system" as the season goes along?.

by **vince0501** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:17 pm

I agree with Cummings, we should just keep it simple. If we make all free agents on the remaining 6 teams not eligible to play, waiver order does not matter. I have done one of these type leagues before, and that was how we set it up. Trades were allowed, and I think we could still keep trades allowed for this league. The natural difficulty of trading in TSN strat, will keep the theme intact.

by **cummings2** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:52 pm

I think vince has it right on (this is starting to sound like the mutual admiration society) non-selected fanchises are ineligble to play. Trading is allowed and waivers become irrelevant, league can be setup as frenzy to allow for the extra trading days. Quite simple :)

Any thoughts on the 100 MM cap to allow for "demotions" and "promotions"?

Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum

2005 AL-NL Theme: Draft Completed, Ready to Start

Alternative to waivers

Franchise trading

A newbie would like to try my luck if still open

Who is online