Bobs ATG4 Lg 7 FA DRAFT OVER- PLEASE SEE "BOB's OBSERVATIONS

[rschwartz51]

Even though I've not discussed it at all with Fluffyman I find myself 100% ok with the concept of the next season having a reverse order of finish draft and would add that we should wait 3 weeks so a good sample can be used.

Though I normally would vote to keep the 12 franchises because that is the only way a 12 by 12 Theme itself provides for a competitive goal. However, the benefits of allowing us to use and to see more new players seems to outweigh the competitive drive. I would like to suggest a limit of no more than 2 Franchises be allowed to be replaced and that will also be done in the reverse ordered draft.

For PLAN B I would like to put out on the table the following based on my belief that due to the modern era being treated differently than the prior era's that we not try to compete using Deadball ERA, Pre-WWII or players prior to 1954.

My suggestion is as follows:

1) Limit to 12 Franchises who were existing prior to 1971 and who had a minimum of 20 years of existence during the period of 1955 and 1994.

2) Priority given to Franchises not in Plan A that meet item #1.

3) Vote on whether or not any of the top Plan A teams should be excluded.
I think I'm just concerned about the Yankees here. I'm not sure if this would be to much but having a Plan C and then using 12 AL & 12 NL could be of interest if we want to use a high percentage. This may be to much and if so we should go with a B only.

4) I would like to propose an $80M cap to promote competitive balance and also make the use of players we grew up with but whom there cards aren't good enough to play against the greats.

5) Decide on DH or no DH. I think I would like no DH for this concept.

6) Qualifying Franchises

1) Braves A
2) Cubs A
3) Reds B
4) Pirates B
5) Cards A
6) Phillies B
7) Giants A
8) Dodgers A
9) Orioles A
10) Red Sox A
11) White Sox B
12) Indians A
13) Tigers A
14) Twins / Senators B
15) Yankees A
16) A's A
17) Angels B
18) Rangers and Post 1960 Wash B
19) Astros B
20) Mets B
21) Royals B
22) Brewers B(A)
23) Padres B
24) Expos B

I would also like to have a protected roster of say 12 players. Then a reverse order draft of ranked Franchises such as in League 7 Set A of eligible players who may have multiple eligibility. This should help with balance.

Let me know if this has wings.

[centerfielder17]

I would keep the 12 teams we are using now and rotate through alphabetically.

I would have a 2 free agent player draft (like we just completed) order being reverse of the last season [i:90d7fb36dc]completed[/i:90d7fb36dc]. For season 2, we'd have top go with wherever we stand to date in season 1.

I would start a "b" league with the franchises not being used in the league just started.

Either $80 or $100 million cap.

No DH.

If we use a protected list, then I would have the 2 player FA draft and go with a $100 million cap.

[GREGDALY]

My preference is to keep it as simple as possible (for us non rocket scientists)

12 teams were picked - let's rotate thru them for 12 seasons and keep all of the rules from the 1st season in tact throughout.

I only play theme leagues at this point and it's hard enough to manage 15+ active teams without rule changes, etc between leagues and their various A/B splits.

[rosenthm]

I think we should stay with the same teams we start with. I like the idea of a 2 round FA draft based on rank in the league. Unless we have a committee that wants to put together a protcted roster for each team to try to balance the competition.

Alphabetical is OK but I like the idea of having divisions determined by team record.

Re: B League - Prefer 100, no DH

[modmark46]

To echo the above, I also agree that we should keep it simple, with as little changes as possible. Rotating through the franchises chosen, with the FA pair draft in reverse order of STANDINGS (per Rosenthm) sounds like a good plan to me. Keep this at $100m cap. Seems unfair to make it a lower cap for subsequent owners, IMO.

[ado_jake]

Ditto on the above comments. My preference is to keep it as simple as possible. 12 teams were picked - let's rotate thru them for 12 seasons and keep all of the rules from the 1st season in tact throughout.

[nymets99]

i agree to keep it as simple as possible. i like the rotating of the fa selections based on standings.

[CHRISTIANSTOUGH]

I'm fine with keeping these franchises ( I just thought the Reds would have been a great choice).

I like the idea of a 100m/No dh for league B. I think it would add some variety to the format and new challenges for managers.

My major thoughts on the 'B' League are that they're not 12 franchises left that would make competitive teams.

I think there are at least 5 (Cin, ChiW, Wa/Min, PhiP and Pitt) with possibly 2 or 3 more (NYMets, Cal, Hou, Wa/Tex).
It's possible that some of the remaining franchises might be good enough, but I'm not optimistic. My guess is that we could come up with 7.

The solution , I think, is for a comittee to cull through the remaining rosters and try to put together protected rosters for the best 7 or 8 teams (or more if they look good enough).

Once these are firgured out, these teams should be combined with the 4-5 worst teams of the A league to form a competitive 12 team league.

(NOte: When the comittee compiles the league, they should feel free to use FA's from the strongest 4-6 teams of the A league)

Their are three reasons I like this idea
A. It strives for ballanced competition
B. It removes the need to use hybrid franchises (an idea I hate)
C. It allows the pucnhing bags from league A a chance to shine

[rschwartz51]

I'm pretty much sold but my only issues and I'm not sure how strong but just my gut at this point are as follows:

After we have compiled protected rosters from the PLAN B Set using eligibile FA's from all remaining teams I feel as if we should then calculate the salaries of those players on those teams who are prior to the PRE WWII and DB ERA's and then the OLD PLAN A Teams can use the same proportion to balance teams out.

I don't wish this to be to complicated but I'm really bothered by having a lot of Franchises with no players from those 2 ERA's competing against powerhouses who play the majority of their players from those periods.

The bottom line is the modern teams were basically given player cards with average career years while older periods got many more career years.

THE OTHER ISSUE IS THE NO DH. I NO THE ARGUEMENTS AND PLAY MANY LEAGUES EITHER WAY AND NO WHY PEOPLE WANT NO DH.

MY ISSUE PROBABLY IS HOW IN THE WORLD DO I CHOOSE TO BENCH A STARGELL OR KINER IF I CHOOSE PITTSBURGH.

[errormagnate]

Just TELL me when, where and what because Iam way too confused to follow this thread. I agree to anything.