The Original USKL -- TSN Version 2011 (Chat Room)

[qksilver69]

Aye.

[cirills]

All right gang, it's time to nip these trade issues in the bud once and for all.

I assume most of you by now have been following the recent round of posts on this thread pertaining to unbalanced trades and how they affect roster size, and what can be done about building those under-sized rosters up to their 40 man capacity.

The biggest obstacle I see against simply allowing picks at the end of the FA Draft or Supp. Draft is that it potentially allows owners to go around the imposed maximums we currently have on said drafts.

Now, we have previously voted on the amound of rounds in the Supplemental Draft so that will remain unchanged at 3 round maximum. If an owner with less than 40 players going into a Supplemental Draft wishes to add players, he can simply drop less players. [b:bb087c6f64]No one will be allowed to add more players than the maximum amount of rounds (3) [i:bb087c6f64]unless you make a trade for another owner's supplemental draft picks[/i:bb087c6f64].[/b:bb087c6f64]

As far as the annual Free Agent Draft is concerned the current maximum is 15 rounds. We have already voted on the minimum number of drops that must be made (5) so that will remain unchanged as well. HOWEVER, [u:bb087c6f64][b:bb087c6f64]dissolving the maximum [/b:bb087c6f64][/u:bb087c6f64]will allow any teams with less than 40 man rosters heading into a FA Draft to simply add as many players as necessary (in addition to the picks they get for dropped players).

For those who voted against expanding the Supplemental Draft for fears of dillution, I really don't think this might a real concern in the FA Draft for several reasons.

Looking at the various rosters in our league, I really do not see many that will be dropping the current maximum number of players (15). Some of those that might, I believe will actually be simply swapping out players of one side (LH or RH) for park preferences and the like and others might easily fall under the category of "one man's junk is another man's pleasure". In any case, all the players that an owner will drop heading into a FA Draft will be available as FA IN THAT Draft so dillution really should not be an issue. I simply do not see someone dropping over half of their current teams. However, that is NOT to say that I do not understand the fears or concerns of those that may feel otherwise.

However, the dillution of the FA Draft maximum is the only real fool-proof solution I see to those wanting to use it to bring undersized rosters back up to 40 man capacities heading . [b:bb087c6f64]REMEMBER THOUGH, the lowest number of players a roster has at the present is 39, so under the current rules, [i:bb087c6f64]all that owner would have to do is drop one less than the maximum (14) and they could have one additional pick to get back to 40 [/i:bb087c6f64](unless they trade one of their Draft picks and then they would have that many less as well). [/b:bb087c6f64]

There is nothing that says an owner HAS to drop 15 players you know. :wink:

Another con might be that since the USKL does NOT currently have a Prospect Draft (like the HCKL) that an unlimited amount of rounds in the FA Draft could mean a dillution of the rookie talent. A counter to that would be that those players will be available to all (with no maximums) and it would present an interesting dillemma/decision for owners to play for the now or the future, making them drop perhaps a perfectly productive player for the upcoming season.

This is just some of the various Pros and Cons that I can think of, so without further delay or rambling by me it is time to put it to a vote:


[size=15:bb087c6f64][u:bb087c6f64][b:bb087c6f64]THE PROPOSAL:[/b:bb087c6f64][/u:bb087c6f64][/size:bb087c6f64] [i:bb087c6f64]To abolish the current maximum on the number of rounds each owner may participate in (barring trades) during the FA draft. [/i:bb087c6f64] This would mean that an owner could drop as many players as they would like and replace them with Free Agents. It also means that rosters that are undersized heading into a FA Draft will be allowed to draft as many players in addition to their drops as necessary to get their rosters back up to a 40 man capacity. (For what it's worth -- this is/will be the same way the HCKL will be run for those of you that play in that league as well).

[color=red:bb087c6f64][b:bb087c6f64]NOTE:[/b:bb087c6f64][/color:bb087c6f64] Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the [size=15:bb087c6f64][b:bb087c6f64]FOWLDAWG COROLLARY [/b:bb087c6f64][/size:bb087c6f64]will NOW go into effect. [i:bb087c6f64][b:bb087c6f64]This means that if you choose to trade say for example a 9th round pick in an upcoming FA Draft that you are then required to drop that many players so that you will actually HAVE a 9th round pick. This forces both owners in a trade of Draft picks to protect the integrity of the trade.[/b:bb087c6f64][/i:bb087c6f64]



Ayes: Cummings2, Qksilver, sandlotshrink

Nays:


Still to vote: AF Dickie, Bubba Hotep, Cubit, Detroit-Tigers, Fowldawg, Ninersphan, Kaviksdad, Nythawk, Stoney18


(Sorry Chuck, but for those of those that hadn't been following I wanted to keep more of the post intact -- [b:bb087c6f64]don't worry about copy/pasting y'all -- just post your aye or nay and I'll take care of the rest!!!)[/b:bb087c6f64] :D

[Detroit-Tigers]

Aye

[MICHAELJURACEK]

I'll say OK on that, but I still see no need for any corollary. All that matters in the long run is that total players owned in the league comes out to 40 per team and 480 total after the draft. Dropping the minimums(meaning allowing someone to go below 25 players owned pre-draft, or to carry under 40 due to lopsided trades) solves all the problems. If I trade a 6th, a 10th, or a 15th, and only cut 5, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference, other than to put the onus on the owner receiving the picks to make his cuts and picks add up to 40.

[Cubit]

So a mega-drop club could drop half the club and then pick back up to 40, giving them 20 rounds. The order of the draft is reverse order of finish, essentially, and then serpentine?

I have no objection to allowing as many drops as one wants on one hand, since I hate restricting managers, except that it really knocks out the "Keeper" part of the League. 15 max drops is 40% of a club's entire holdings in players; that should be plenty of turn-over in any one season, it seems to me. Who do we think we are, Florida? I think that some longer-term committment to the players will keep this from being a pure GM-fantasy All-Power League. Yet, we get to make the rules in this universe...

[MICHAELJURACEK]

[quote:6e571aebbc="Cubit"]So a mega-drop club could drop half the club and then pick back up to 40, giving them 20 rounds. The order of the draft is reverse order of finish, essentially, and then serpentine?

I have no objection to allowing as many drops as one ones on one hand, since I hate restricting managers, except that it really knocks out the "Keeper" part of the League. 15 max drops is 40% of a club's entire holdings in players; that should be plenty of turn-over in any one season, it seems to me. Who do we think we are, Florida? I think that some longer-term committment to the players will keep this from being a pure GM-fantasy All-Power League. Yet, we get to make the rules in this universe...[/quote:6e571aebbc]

That's where there would need to be a corollary- that being that an owner can only drop below 25 held players by acquiring draft picks. So if owner X wants to go hog-wild, and acquire 25 picks total for a FA draft, he can do it. But the whole league can't, because there's only a max 180 picks total. It would allow for a massive rebuild effort for a limited amount of owners (Not likely many people would try that, since the other owners can hold such a high percentage of their players if they choose). And the key number should be 25, not 15, meaning that if you make an unbalanced trade that leaves you at 36, you can't drop 15 before a FA draft. You can only drop 11, to get you to 25.

[AFDickie]

AYE

[Stoney18]

aye

[fowldawg]

aye

[cirills]

[quote:cd5ab2fa6a]The order of the draft is reverse order of finish, essentially, and then serpentine?
[/quote:cd5ab2fa6a]
There are NO more serpentine drafts anymore.

[quote:cd5ab2fa6a]I'll say OK on that, but I still see no need for any corollary.[/quote:cd5ab2fa6a]
The COROLLARY is in to stay. It's simply the most logical and consistent way of handling trades of draft picks.

[quote:cd5ab2fa6a]If I trade a 6th, a 10th, or a 15th, and only cut 5, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference, other than to put the onus on the owner receiving the picks to make his cuts and picks add up to 40.[/quote:cd5ab2fa6a]
Sorry, but as I see it the onus is on the person trading NOT the receiver to protect the integrity of his trade. YOUR 6th round pick is just that -- a 6th round pick. Ergo you NEED to have a 6th round pick to trade. The responsibility resides on the TRADER to [i:cd5ab2fa6a]ensure[/i:cd5ab2fa6a] that.