24 TKL chat

[Page2]

Hi,

I would be against this. It allows an owner to have more control during the draft say I was in need of a 5th starter and had a prospect someone like Nova I could be drafting other spots and if no one was left when I got around to picking the pitching spot I could just bring up Nova. If I had to call him up at the start there would be another pitcher to be had for everyone else.

I feel that it would keep more players out of the player pool. We need to have more players available if you want to use a prospect you should have to call him up at the start and cut somebody.

Btw aren't we using a 30 man roster?

[qksilver69]

Yes it's 30-man roster. I think the 35 above is a typo. All of these rules are online in the same Google doc as the rosters.

here are my arguments from a prior post: [quote:9e28be9d0a]1) the draft would be shorter & easier to manage
2) more player cards would be in circulation vs. sitting on the sidelines
3) fewer prospects would be "stockpiled" every year [/quote:9e28be9d0a]

and...

[quote:9e28be9d0a]And yes, while the draft pool quality would decrease at the low end, it would be mostly unchanged at the upper end. So teams relying on high draft picks to get new high-value cards would not be affected much, it would affect bubble guys on existing 30-man rosters.

To give a "for instance", Andres Torres will be on my bubble list next year. His actual card is useful only as a D-sub and might be worth $1M or so, but he's useless as a hitter. He would easily last until Rnd 7 or so of our current draft, and I'd be betting on a comeback year for him in 2012 by keeping him on roster. That's the type of player this change would allow us to keep on roster vs. returning to the draft pool.[/quote:9e28be9d0a]

And to your point Page2, actually that extra P would still be around & available for anyone else picking at the end of the draft. It expands the player pool, it does not shrink it, because owners would choose to promote marginal prospects more often vs. taking a worse player in the draft.

[Page2]

Hi Dave,

I see it the other way if an owner is able to keep a propespect is reserve and use him or not later in the draft they might still be able to get a player that they want and still keep the prospect.

The way it is now you have to promote the prospect and cut a player thus adding to the player pool right away not at some random time later during the and a player is moved off the protected list.

Page2

[qksilver69]

But we've already seen that prospects don't get promoted if they're marginal. I agree with you that it gives the owner more control in the draft, just disagree (with evidence from last year) that the current system results in a larger draft pool - it clearly doesn't. I can name at least 8 prospects who had cards last year & who were not promo'd, resulting in a decreased pool:

Santos
Cashner
Tillman
Arrieta
Storen
Heisey
Alvarez
S Sizemore

A few of those were quite valuable in this format.

[The Turtle]

What if we did it where you announce it before the draft? And the just dont have as many picks? I think Dave is aiming to have a shorter draft process

[qksilver69]

And yes, that would work fine as well.

[JOSEPHKENDALL]

[quote:d2c52bfd67="The Turtle"]What if we did it where you announce it before the draft? And the just dont have as many picks? I think Dave is aiming to have a shorter draft process[/quote:d2c52bfd67]

I like that idea better.

[Page2]

Hi,

I don't like that idea either. Example I have 30 players that we keep and want to add 5 prospects I just have to cut 5 guys and I get to make my picks in the first 5 rounds of the FA draft that puts me way ahead of everyone else.

If I want to promote 5 prospects I should have to cut 15 making more players available. That makes it more equal for everyone.

If we were to switch that it would cut down on trades because you wouldn't want to trade a prospect pick.

Page2

[qksilver69]

There's no question this approach rewards those who have promotable prospects. But I think what others are saying Page2 is that a) that's not necessarily a bad thing, and b) as Turtle said, would help us shorten the draft.

Also, having been in other leagues where prospects have more value, I can tell you it doesn't inhibit trading them - just the opposite in fact. What I see as one impact of this change is that rebuilding teams have a better chance to shorten the "comeback" cycle because they can trade for prospects and still maintain their 20-man rosters pre-draft. So if my team is bad, I can ID 20 carded keepers for next season and deal all my excess useful cards for prospects, and then have my 25-team roster nearly set going into the draft. Without that option, it's a much bigger stretch to change a cellar-dweller into a contender.

[Rant]

I wouldn't have any major problems with that proposal. It'd make the agony of dropping players less pronounced.

But, I do think that it will limit the pool of players since the last two players I cut last year were Carlos Lee :roll: and Lance Berkman :oops: who would look mighty nice on my "up and coming" roster right about now. Oh and my last two picks were Joaquin Arias and Josh Bell, who are likely not making this year's roster.