Swab Chef Keeper League - Private for now

[artie4121]

[quote:92df683811]Original Proposal for Keeper League

Here is a framework [ . . . ]

1. Let's shoot for ongoing Keeper for 2010, with
new members replacing Founding Member in the event
we drop out. New Members need to be recommended by
existing members, with Founders recommendations
getting preference. Founders can also veto any
recommended member with cause. [i:92df683811]No decision on
carryover for NEXT season's cards[/i:92df683811]. We can decide if this
turns out to be a popular league.

2. I like, and have gotten some support for, a
"balancing" method (as MLB has with its draft) to
keep it interesting and keep the whales among us
from running away with every championship. Only
instead of a draft, I had proposed an "incentive
and handicap" method.

The three clusters and winning percentages in
order are below:

Playoff teams - A
WJS6768 (2339) 0.556
Frank M (7646) 0.556
RedOrko (513) 0.543
bigmahon (6875) 0.519

Middle of Pack - B
dharmabums (2022) 0.519
he's meat (2162) 0.512
ehlekev (5047) 0.500
nymets99 (1538) 0.481
Artie412 (550) 0.463

Last in Division - C
SteadyEddie33 (547) 0.475
Cubit (1311) 0.469
socalchiro (3301) 0.407

My proposal is relatively simple: on this:

a. Playoff teams (Group A) except for the champion
from the current season get to retain up to 8 of
their current players. They can keep as many as 8
or as few as Ze-ro. The Champ gets to keep only 6
of his players.

b. Middle of the Packers (Group B) get to keep up
to 10

c. Last in Division (Group C) get to keep up to 12.

But here is the BIG giveback to the Champ: The
Champ gets to select the salary cap (ANY salary
cap from $60 - $200, but I like the $80-100 range
personally), waiver/frenzy, DH/noDH and Salary
Drop policy for the upcoming season. (What do you
think about the Champ also getting to pick a
unique stadium that is then off-the-table to the
rest of us?) I think this creates an interesting
strategy when it comes to which players you keep
and planning ahead.[/quote:92df683811]

So Far:

OPTING IN
WJS6768 (2339) !
Frank M (7646) !
he's meat (2162) !
SteadyEddie33 (547) !
Artie412 (550) !
Cubit (1311)
ehlekev (5047)
bigmahon (6875)
socalchiro (3301)

NO DECISION YET
RedOrko (513)


Stuff (continued from my latest message "in league":

[quote:92df683811]3. Until a "champ" is crowned, we won't know
structure of league (otherwise, I would list my 10
"Keeper players," as we would all have to do
before the league is created.)

4. Does anyone know any suspects/prospects among
other managers who might be interested in joining
us privately if we have 2 or 3 open spots? AND . .
. Do we give them the choice of
cherry-picking/inheriting the list from one of the
non-continuing teams? OR just toss those back in
the FA bin?[/quote:92df683811]


Issues to decide:

1. Is everyone okay with the "balancing" keeper concept of Group A, B and C keeping, respectively 8, 10 and 12 with the Champ only keeping 6? (see above). We can widen it if you think that would be fun with bottom dwellers getting to keep up to 14? OR, be given 12 and a "cherry picked" draft choice they can reserve from the available free agents before we do the Auto-Draft.

Here is a "ballot"

a. Champ 6; Group A 8; Group B 6; Group C 10
b. Champ 6; Group A 8; Group B 6; Group C 12
c. Champ 6; Group A 8; Group B 6; Group C 12 plus a "cherry pick"
d. Other suggestion


2. The biggest issue seems to be the idea of the Champ getting to select salary cap (no objections to the idea of waiver/frenzy, DH/noDH and Salary
Drop policy for the upcoming season. One option would be to simply limit it to $80mm or $100mm caps. Or, if there is a consensus of objection to altering it at all, we can drop that salary cap aspect, and keep the other choices in the Champ's corner.

Ballot:

a. Champ gets to pick ANY Salary Cap
b. Champ gets to pick between $80mm and $100mm
c. One steady, consensus salary cap (either 80 or 100)
d. Other suggestion


3. The other perk was the Champ getting to pick a unique stadium that is then off-the-table to the rest of us?)

a. Let's go with that
b. Let's drop that idea
c. Other idea


So, while the Champ is decided in-season, let's discuss these options.


Artie

[FRANKMANSUETO]

Its a Keeper League, why penalize the Champ in letting keep ONLY 6 first off.
Making a TRUE Keeper everyone protects 8-10. We Live Draft on Diamond Dope 20-22 rounds getting us to 30 players that can be part of OUR Keeper roster. This can be season #1. We have a 3-5 Round Prospect Draft after our 1st season non-serpentine(The Bryce Harper Sweepstakes). The Ultimate goal is a 40 man active roster and 10 non-roster/prospect list. We use a $200MM Salary Cap. To make it more interesting we can use unique stadiums. Thus trying ti build your team around your park. These are my thoughts for now. Let me mull some others over.

[Cubit]

I agree with Frank that if we really want to call this a "Keeper" League we've got to do a lot better than keeping a handful of our players. Since we are building off a 25 man total roster this year, but plan to build toward a number like 40 in future (I thought), we certainly should not keep less than 10 of these players.

On the Stadium Issue, unique stadia are certainly in order; I thought we already had unique stadia and I propose we keep the ones we have to build around. I have no objection to a team dropping their stadium at the end of a SOMO card year and then having a draft round for any and all who want new ones, but I have never bought into a free exchange based on standings.

Let's not forget that the Champ already has a pretty big perk-- two free teams! Balance can be achieved over time through the draft order if the managers do their work in scouting and preparing, hence the keeper concept.

[artie4121]

I'm not in [i:c8d5be0d43]disagreement[/i:c8d5be0d43] with any of the ideas put forward. I was simply giving a framework to shoot at. . . literally.

I've not had the experience being in such an extensive keeper league that carries over to the next season, etc., but I am game.

The simpler current "Keeper League" I am in is closer to what I had laid out in my proposal: Limited holdovers from "season to season," (I know a few of these leagues) to which I added the concept of "leveling/balancing/norming."

In short, the concept of "Keeper Leagues" can be mean a lot of things, BUT -- again -- I am open to ANYthing that the group wants, so if anyone wants to expand on the larger concept, have at it. I'm here to vote and listen and sign onto the finished product.

Artie

[Cubit]

Thanks for getting the discussion going and for the open door. Good to hear from Frank and I've just put out a few of my ideas. "Keepers are Fun!" is my message.

[KEVINEHLE]

Just getting back from a long trip. I'll read through everything and give my two-cents worth. *That's all the money I got left from my long trip!



Kev

[MEAT]

current keeper im in started with 01 set and is now up to 06. obviously we'll be using the same set for at least the next two seasons. I think that's the idea behind only keeping a limited amount of players, so that there'd be more turnover, and the lower teams had a chance to get better or be more competitive. the top teams are still never gonna lose the pujols, halladays, riveras or tulowitskis of the world, etc, unless they trade them.
what we could do is expand the number of keepers for seasons in which we're going into a new set of cards for the following season, say 2o or 25 on a 35 or 40 man roster.
stadiums should stay unique, and replaced in a seperate draft also based on reverse order of finish.
as for cap, allowing changes could force more talent back into the pull, while keeping it high, allows for us to have minor leagues and bring players up and down.
a static cap causes a lot less confusion and rule making.

[MEAT]

frank's suggestions seem to be in line with what im used to in keeper leagues, but again, we might want to be more restrictive on the number of kept players when we're playing the same card set in a season. 200m works best for having 40 man rosters and major and minor leagues, but we need a workable system that allows the lower rung and middle teams to get better.